Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26883929›Full record

ArticleObesity surgery2016

Indications and Operative Outcomes of Gastric Bypass Reversal.

Hinali Zaveri, Ramsey M Dallal, Daniel Cottam, Amit Surve, Susan Kartiko, Fernando Bonnani, Austin Cottam, Samuel Cottam

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. [Therapeutic effect of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in non-obese patients with type 2 diabetes].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2020
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Hinali ZaveriBariatric Medicine Institute, 1046 East 100 South, Salt Lake City, UT, 84102, USA.
Ramsey M DallalEinstein Healthcare Network, 60 Township Line Road, Elkins Park, PA, 19027, USA.
Daniel CottamBariatric Medicine Institute, 1046 East 100 South, Salt Lake City, UT, 84102, USA. drdanielcottam@yahoo.com.
Amit SurveBariatric Medicine Institute, 1046 East 100 South, Salt Lake City, UT, 84102, USA.
Susan KartikoEinstein Healthcare Network, 60 Township Line Road, Elkins Park, PA, 19027, USA.
Fernando BonnaniAbington Memorial Hospital, 225 Newtown Rd, 2nd Flr-Main Bldg, Warminster, PA, 18974, USA.
Austin CottamBariatric Medicine Institute, 1046 East 100 South, Salt Lake City, UT, 84102, USA.
Samuel CottamBariatric Medicine Institute, 1046 East 100 South, Salt Lake City, UT, 84102, USA.
Reproductive Medicine Institute · USEinstein Healthcare Network · USAbington Memorial Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRoux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is one of the best-known and most commonly performed bariatric procedures. However, this procedure carries infrequent but serious long-term complications, which may require revisional procedures. This study reports the indications and outcomes of gastric bypass reversal that have not been described well in the literature.

methodsA multicenter retrospective study of 50 patients who underwent reversal of RYGB conducted between 2006 and 2015 was reviewed to describe the usual indications and outcomes of gastric bypass reversal surgeries.

resultsOf 50 patients, 7 (14 %) were males and 43 (86 %) were females. The mean age of the patient population was 40.4 ± 11.6 years (range 19-66). Reasons for reversal included anastomotic ulcers (n = 27), anastomotic complications (n = 9), malnutrition (n = 2), and functional disorder (n = 12). The mean BMI before the reversal was 29 ± 9.4 kg/m(2) (range 16-60). The mean time between the primary procedure and reversal was 60 ± 65.5 months (range 2-300). Fourteen of the reversals were done via laparotomy. Mean hospital stay was 8.4 ± 7.3 days (range 3-34 days). There was no peri-operative death 30 days after reversal. Following gastric bypass reversal, 92.6 % (n = 25) of the patient population had resolution from ulcers, 77.8 % (n = 7) of the patient population had resolution from anatomic complications, 100 % (n = 2) of the patient population had resolution from malnutrition, and 66.7 % (n = 8) of the patient population had resolution from functional disorders.

conclusionsGastric bypass reversal is a reasonable and safe treatment for complications arising from the GBP surgery. A laparoscopic approach is feasible in select patients.

Indexed as

AdultAgedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGastric BypassHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedObesity, MorbidPostoperative ComplicationsReoperationRetrospective StudiesTreatment FailureYoung AdultBariatric revisionComplicationGastric bypassIndicationsMalnutritionReversalUlcers

Identifiers

PMID26883929
OpenAlexW2282128016

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.