ArticleObesity surgery2018
Conversion Surgery for Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding: Outcomes with Sleeve Gastrectomy vs Roux-en-Y 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 4 papers, 3 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-Analysis of Gastric Band Revision to Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.Obesity surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Relationship Between Bariatric Surgery and Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Obesity surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Clinical Outcomes of Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass After Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding.Obesity surgery · 2019Pooled it
- Conversion Bariatric Surgery, Ketogenic Diet, and Intermittent Fasting in Bariatric Surgery Patients with Recurrent Weight Gain: a Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.Obesity surgery · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesLaparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) was once a preferred method of obesity treatment featuring a straightforward technique, removability, and good early results. In a significant proportion of patients, however, it was not a durable weight-loss procedure and has been associated with a high longer-term complication rate. The purpose of this study was to directly compare the results of conversion to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) after failed LAGB.
methodsPost-LAGB complications and weight outcomes of conversion (absolute weight, excess weight loss [%EWL], total weight loss [%TWL]) to LSG vs LRYGB were retrospectively reviewed and statistically compared using Fisher's exact test and the independent samples t test.
resultsOver a 6-year period, 74/272 (27.2%) morbidly obese LAGB patients experienced marked complications requiring band removal. Forty-nine of these patients underwent conversion by LRYGB (n = 29) or LSG (n = 20). There was no statistically significant difference in complication rates between converted procedures and no significant difference in respective EWL and TWL (6-month EWL: LRYGB, 53.6% vs LSG, 51.3% and respective TWL, 22.8 vs 21.3%; 12-month EWL, 70.1 vs 56.1%; and TWL, 30.7 vs 23.2%; p > 0.05). All conversion patients were present at each time point.
conclusionsOutcomes for LSG vs LRYGB following failed LAGB were equally safe and effective.
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.