SynthesisObesity surgery2019
Clinical Outcomes of Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass After Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding.
Synthesis in Obesity surgery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Revisional One-Step Bariatric Surgical Techniques After Unsuccessful Laparoscopic Gastric Band: A Retrospective Cohort Study with 2-Year Follow-up.Obesity surgery · 2024Article
- Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy as a Revisional Procedure Following Adjustable Gastric Banding: Variations in Outcomes Based on Indication.Obesity surgery · 2023Article
- Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass as Conversion Procedure of Failed Gastric Banding: Short-Term Outcomes of 1295 Patients in One Single Center.Obesity surgery · 2023Article
- One-stage versus two-stage Roux-Y gastric bypass as redo surgery of failed adjustable gastric banding.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2023Article
- Revisional bariatric surgery after adjustable gastric band: a multicenter Polish Revision Obesity Surgery Study (PROSS).BMC surgery · 2023Article
- The durability of revisional sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass after previous adjustable gastric band.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Revisional Surgery After Adjustable Gastric Banding: Sleeve Gastrectomy or Gastric Bypass?Journal of metabolic and bariatric surgery · 2022Review
- Long-Term Outcomes after Adolescent Bariatric Surgery.Journal of the American College of Surgeons · 2022Article
- Comparison of sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass after failure of gastric banding: a two-center study with a propensity score-matched analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2021Article
- How Far Can Our Expectations Go on Revisional Bariatric Surgery After Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding?Obesity surgery · 2021Article
- Feasibility and Short-Term Outcomes of One-Step and Two-Step Sleeve Gastrectomy as Revision Procedures for Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding Compared With Those After Primary Sleeve Gastrectomy.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Article
- Letter to the Editor Concerning: Clinical Outcomes of Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass After Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding.Obesity surgery · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOver recent decades, laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has been among the most common bariatric surgeries. Nowadays, many patients require revision surgery due to insufficient weight loss and band-related complications. Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) are the two most common revision surgeries for failed LAGB, but the conclusions about their efficacy and safety have been inconsistent. This meta-analysis aimed to review the clinical outcomes of SG and RYGB after failed LAGB.
methodsIn accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were systematically searched for articles that had studied the efficacy and safety of SG and RYGB. The most appropriate effects model was chosen based on the heterogeneity of the articles included in this meta-analysis. Statistical analysis was conducted using Stata 14.0.
resultsOf 586 articles that were retrieved, 16 articles which examined 2141 SG and 2990 RYGB patients met the inclusion criteria. The patients in RYGB groups showed increased percent excess weight loss (%EWL) at 12 and 24 months after revision surgery but no statistically significant change was found about %EWL after 3, 6, or 36 months. In addition, RYGB was associated with a higher rate of complications, interventions, and readmission in addition to being of more operative time.
conclusionsThis review suggested that RYGB was more effective at demonstrating weight loss after 12 and 24 months, but comparisons of the long-term efficacy of RYGB with that of SG remain inconclusive. In addition, RYGB was accompanied by a greater number of post-operative complications, interventions, and readmissions. Thus, surgeons should consider the overall status of the patients and their comorbidities as crucial factors when selecting a form of revision surgery. Additional high-quality randomized controlled studies are required to further compare the efficacy and safety of these treatments with longer follow-up times.
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.