Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29080042›Full record

ArticleObesity surgery2018

A Retrospective 2-Year Follow-up of Late Complications Treated Surgically and Endoscopically After Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (LRYGB) and Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG) for Morbid Obesity.

Mervi Javanainen, Anne Penttilä, Harri Mustonen, Anne Juuti, Tom Scheinin, Marja Leivonen

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Mervi JavanainenMeilahti University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4, 00290, Helsinki, Finland. mervi.javanainen@hus.fi.
Anne PenttiläMeilahti University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Harri MustonenBiomedicum Helsinki, Department of Surgery, Helsinki University Central Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 8, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Anne JuutiMeilahti University Hospital, Haartmaninkatu 4, 00290, Helsinki, Finland.
Tom ScheininJorvi Hospital, Turuntie 150, 02740, Espoo, Finland.
Marja LeivonenSeinäjoki Central Hospital, Hanneksenrinne 7, 60220, Seinäjoki, Finland.
Herttoniemi Hospital · FIHelsinki University Hospital · FIJorvi Hospital · FISeinäjoki University of Applied Sciences · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) has been the gold standard for bariatric surgery, but recently, the laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has gained popularity. At present, limited data is available on the long-term complications of these two types of surgery. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the 2-year data about late (more than 30 days after surgery) complications that were treated surgically or endoscopically after LRYGB and LSG operations in a large hospital area with a single patient database. MATERIALS: This was a retrospective, non-randomized, single-center study of 760 (545 LRYGB and 215 LSG) bariatric patients surgically treated between 2008 and 2013 in the Bariatric Surgery Unit of Helsinki University Central Hospital.

methodsThe patients were followed for 2 years, and late complications (more than 30 days after surgery) that were surgically and/or endoscopically treated were registered. Weight loss and the risk factors for complications were also monitored.

resultsThe study found a difference between the LRYGB and LSG patients in a number of late complications treated by both intervention types: surgical intervention were required in 9.4% of LRYGB patients vs. 0.9 of LSG patients, and endoscopic intervention were required by 4.6% of LRYGB patients vs. 1.4% of LSG patients (both p < 0.05). The risk of surgical complications was increased by better weight loss results in 12 months.

conclusionsLRYGB was found to be associated with a greater risk of late complications. If larger databases confirm these results, the trend toward LSG is justified.

Indexed as

AdultAgedDatabases, FactualFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGastrectomyGastric BypassHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedObesity, MorbidPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeBariatric surgeryLate complicationsLRYGBLSG

Identifiers

PMID29080042
OpenAlexW2766090711

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.