Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33987766›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2022

High-risk bariatric candidates: does red-flagging predict the post-operative course?

Rebecca C Dirks, Dimitrios I Athanasiadis, William A Hilgendorf, Kathryn M Ziegler, Caitlyn Waldrop, Marisa Embry, Don J Selzer

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 91% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Rebecca C DirksDepartment of Surgery, University School of Medicine, Indiana, USA. rcdirks@iu.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-0287-6826
Dimitrios I AthanasiadisDepartment of Surgery, University School of Medicine, Indiana, USA.
William A HilgendorfIndiana University Health North Hospital, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Kathryn M ZieglerDepartment of Surgery, Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Rochester, USA.
Caitlyn WaldropDepartment of Surgery, University School of Medicine, Indiana, USA.
Marisa EmbryDepartment of Surgery, University School of Medicine, Indiana, USA.
Don J SelzerDepartment of Surgery, University School of Medicine, Indiana, USA.
Indiana University · USIndiana University Health · USIndiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · USOakland University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStandards for preoperative bariatric patient selection include a thorough psychological evaluation. Using patients "red-flagged" during preoperative evaluations, this study aims to identify trends in long-term follow-up and complications to further optimize bariatric patient selection.

methodsA multidisciplinary team held a case review conference (CRC) to discuss red-flagged patients. A retrospective chart review compared CRC patients to control patients who underwent bariatric surgery in the same interval. Patients under 18 years old, undergoing revisional bariatric surgery, or getting band placement were excluded. High-risk characteristics causing CRC inclusion, preoperative demographics, percent follow-up and other postoperative outcomes were collected up to 5 years postoperatively. If univariate analysis revealed a significant difference between cohorts, multivariable analysis was performed.

resultsTwo hundred and fifty three patients were red-flagged from 2012 to 2013, of which 79 underwent surgery. After excluding 21 revisions, 3 non-adult patients, and 6 band patients, 55 red-flagged patients were analyzed in addition to 273 control patients. Patient age, sex, initial BMI, ASA, and co-morbidities were similar between groups, though flagged patients underwent RYGB more frequently than control patients. Notably, percent excess BMI loss and percent follow-up (6 months-5 years) were similar. In multivariable analysis, minor complications were more common in flagged patients; and marginal ulcers, endoscopy, and dilation for stenosis were more common in flagged versus control patients who underwent RYGB. Perforation, reoperation, revision, incisional hernia, and internal hernia were statistically similar in both groups, though reoperation was significantly more common in patients with multiple reasons to be flagged compared to controls.

conclusionBariatric patients deemed high risk for various psychosocial issues have similar follow-up, BMI loss, and major complications compared to controls. High-risk RYGB patients have greater minor complications, warranting additional counseling of high-risk patients.

Indexed as

Bariatric SurgeryGastric BypassLaparoscopyObesity, MorbidAdolescentHumansPostoperative ComplicationsReoperationRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeBariatric surgeryHigh-risk patientsPatient care teamPostoperative complicationsPreoperative assessment

Identifiers

PMID33987766
OpenAlexW3161044814

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.