ArticleObesity surgery2018
Conversion of Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding to Gastric Bypass: a Comparison to Primary Gastric Bypass.
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 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preoperative risk factors for early postoperative bleeding after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Revisional Gastric Bypass Is Inferior to Primary Gastric Bypass in Terms of Short- and Long-term Outcomes-Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Obesity surgery · 2018Pooled it
- Laparoscopic management of a left hepatic vein injury during one -step laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass after adjustable gastric banding removal: A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2022Article
- Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass with a 150-cm Biliopancreatic Limb After Failure of Adjustable Gastric Banding: Mid-Term Outcomes and Comparison Between One- and Two-Stage Approaches.Obesity surgery · 2021Article
- Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Following Failed Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding-a Comparison Between One- and two-Stage Procedures, an Israeli National Database Study.Obesity surgery · 2021Article
- Role of Robotic Surgery in Complex Revisional Bariatric Procedures.Obesity surgery · 2021Article
- One anastomosis gastric bypass vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, remedy for insufficient weight loss and weight regain after failed restrictive bariatric surgery.Obesity surgery · 2020Article
- A comparison between one- and two-stage revisional gastric bypass.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Article
- Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Safe Surgical Opportunity? Results of a Case-Matched Study.Obesity surgery · 2019Article
- Combined laparoscopic pouch and loop resizing as a revisional procedure for weight regain after primary laparoscopic one-anastomosis gastric bypass.Journal of minimal access surgeryArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLaparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has a considerable failure rate. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is one of the rescue options. This study aims to compare the complication rates and outcomes between LAGB converted to LRYGB and primary LRYGB. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective analysis was performed in all patients converted from LAGB to LRYGB between January 2007 and March 2017. This group was compared to a matched cohort of primary LRYGB patients operated during the same period. Early and late complications, weight loss, and improvement of comorbidities were analyzed.
resultsOne hundred sixty-one revisional LRYGB patients were compared to a similar number of primary LRYGB patients. Preoperative age, gender distribution, weight, and BMI were comparable. Mean operative time was longer in the revisional group (137.7 vs. 112.7 min, respectively, P < 0.001). The overall early complication rates were comparable between the groups (7.5 vs. 11.8%, P = 0.16), including postoperative leak rate (0.62%). Follow-up of at least 6 months was attained in 78% of the patients. Revisional cases demonstrated less weight loss (61.5 vs. 73.5%EWL, respectively, P = 0.004) and slightly less improvement of comorbidities (75.0 vs. 85.7%, respectively, P = 0.09). The late complication rate was comparable (8.1 vs. 8.1%, P = 1.0).
conclusionAlbeit longer operating time, revision of LAGB to LRYGB is a safe procedure, with similar complication rates when compared to primary LRYGB. Although revisional LRYGB does result in less weight loss than primary LRYGB, the procedure's safety makes it a very plausible option as a rescue operation for failed LAGB.
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.