Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32880049›Full record

ArticleObesity surgery2020

Conversion of Adjustable Gastric Banding to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass in One or Two Steps: What Is the Best Approach? Analysis of a Multicenter Database Concerning 832 Patients.

J Pujol-Rafols, A I Al Abbas, S Devriendt, A Guerra, M F Herrera, J Himpens, E Pardina, S Pouwels, A Ramos, R J Ribeiro and 4 more

Open access · greenAbstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Obesity surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Adjustable Gastric Banding Conversion to One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass: Data Analysis of a Multicenter Database.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2022
    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

14 authors at 8 institutions in 7 countries.

J Pujol-RafolsClínica Mi Tres Torres, Barcelona, Spain. juan.pujol.rafols@gmail.com.
A I Al AbbasAmerican University of Beirut Medical Center (AUBMC), Beirut, Lebanon.
S DevriendtAZ Sint Blasius, Dendermonde, Belgium and CHIREC Hospitals Brussels, Auderghem, Belgium.
A GuerraCentro Hospitalar de Lisboa Central, Lisbon, Portugal.
M F HerreraInstituto Nacional de Nutrición, Centro Médico ABC, México City, México.
J HimpensAZ Sint Blasius, Dendermonde, Belgium and CHIREC Hospitals Brussels, Auderghem, Belgium.
E PardinaDepartament de Bioquímica i Biomedicina Molecular, Facultat de Biologia, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
S PouwelsDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Elisabeth-Tweesteden Hospital, Tilburg, The Netherlands.
A RamosGastro-Obeso-Center - Advanced Institute In Bariatric And Metabolic Surgery, Sao Paulo, Brazil.
R J RibeiroDepartamento de Cirugia Geral e do Centro Multidisciplinar da Doença Metabólica, CLISA-Lusiadas, Amadora, Portugal.
B SafadiAmerican University of Beirut Medical Center (AUBMC), Beirut, Lebanon.
H Sanchez-AguilarInstituto Nacional de Nutrición, Centro Médico ABC, México City, México.
C de VriesOLVG-West, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
B Van WagensveldQuro Obesity Center, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.
American University of Beirut Medical Center · LBCentro Médico ABC · MXAZ Sint-Blasius · BECentre Hospitalier Interrégional Edith Cavell · BECentro Hospitalar de Lisboa Central · PTElisabeth-TweeSteden Ziekenhuis · NLGastro Obeso Center · BRUniversitat de Barcelona · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRoux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is often the preferred conversion procedure for laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) poor responders. However, there is controversy whether it is better to convert in one or two stages. This study aims to compare the outcomes of one and two-stage conversions of LAGB to RYGB.

methodsRetrospective review of a multicenter prospectively collected database. Data on conversion in one and two stages was compared.

resultsEight hundred thirty-two patients underwent LAGB conversion to RYGB in seven specialized bariatric centers. Six hundred seventy-three (81%) were converted in one-stage. Patients in the two-stage group were more likely to have experienced technical complications, such as slippage or erosions (86% vs. 37%, p = 0.0001) and to have had a higher body mass index (BMI) (41.6 vs. 39.9 Kg/m

conclusionsOne-stage conversion of LAGB to RYGB is safe and effective. Two-stage conversion carries low morbidity and mortality in the case of band slippage, erosion, or higher BMI patients. These findings suggest the importance of patient selection when choosing the appropriate conversion approach.

Indexed as

Gastric BypassGastroplastyLaparoscopyObesity, MorbidHumansPostoperative ComplicationsReoperationRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeConversionGastric bandingGastric bypassLAGBRevisionRevisional surgeryRYGB

Identifiers

PMID32880049
OpenAlexW3083527814

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.