ArticleObesity surgery2016
Bariatric Surgery Among Obese Veterans: a Retrospective Review of Complications and Intermediate Term Results from a Single Institution.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Relationship Between Bariatric Surgery and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Obesity surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Remission of Type 2 Diabetes and Sleeve Gastrectomy in Morbid Obesity: a Comparative Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Obesity surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Travel distance and outcomes after surgical aortic valve among veterans.Health services research · 2024Article
- Eating Disorders and Overweight/Obesity in Veterans: Prevalence, Risk Factors, and Treatment Considerations.Current obesity reports · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe purpose of this study was to compare the results and complications among obese veterans undergoing sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass at a low-volume center. MATERIALS AND
methodsThis is a retrospective review of bariatric procedures performed by a single surgeon from 2009-2013. Outcomes of interest were mortality, complications, and length of stay. Weight loss and comorbidity resolution were compared between sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-y gastric bypass (RYGB). Length of stay and distance traveled to receive services were analyzed. Distributed groups were compared with Student's t test. Welch's correction was used where variances were unequal via ANOVA. Complications were compared using Fisher's exact test.
resultsEighty-five patients (SG = 51, RYGB = 34) were analyzed. Postoperatively, patients were seen in clinic, contacted by phone or email, and their electronic health care records were reviewed. Average length of follow-up was 114.3 weeks. Mortality was 0 %. Complication rates were comparable between groups. The percent total weight loss was 22.6 % for the SG and 27.5 % for the RYGB (p = 0.02). The percent excess weight loss was 49 % for SG and 55 % for RYGB (p = 0.149). Percent excess body mass index (BMI) loss was 54 and 61 % (p = 0.197) for SG and RYGB, respectively. Comorbidity resolution was similar between groups except for diabetes which was superior for RYGB (p = 0.03). Veterans lived an average of 141.3 miles from our VA, and all 85 patients were able to be contacted for follow-up.
conclusionsDespite long travel distances for high-risk veterans, bariatric surgery can be performed safely even at a low-volume VA hospital with acceptable morbidity and mortality and excellent follow-up. There was no difference in morbidity or mortality between patients undergoing SG vs RYGB.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.