ArticleObesity surgery2022
Experience of the First 100 OAGB in China: OAGB In Situ Technique.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Primary and Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass: A Systematic Review and GRADE-Based IFSO Position Statement.Obesity surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Mapping the Landscape of Marginal Ulcers After One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass: Incidence, Regional Trends, and Treatment Insights from a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Obesity surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Laparoscopic Reversal of One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass After Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Case Report.The American journal of case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOne anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is gradually accepted worldwide but still new in China. MATERIALS AND
methodsRetrospective review of the patients who received OAGB in a new bariatric/metabolic surgical center in China and compared the data with a center of excellence in Taiwan. All in-patient and outpatient follow-up data were analyzed. The main outcome measures were (1) operation risk (2) weight loss (3) diabetes remission.
resultsBetween August 2019 and October 2021, 100 consecutive patients who received OAGB in situ in China and 225 patients who received OAGB with the same technique were recruited from Taiwan. Taiwan patients were older (39.2 ± 10.6 vs. 33.3 ± 8.8 years old, p < 0.001), and to have more diabetes (32.4% vs. 20.0%, p = 0.022) comparing to the patients of China. Operation time was significantly longer for Taiwan patients (172.4 ± 36.9 vs. 128.5 ± 29.8, p < 0.001). Taiwan patients lost more blood during the operation (35.5 ± 25.2 vs. 22.4 ± 15.6, p < 0.001) but patients in China need more time to postoperative flatus passage (1.3 ± 0.5 vs. 2.0 ± 0.5, p < 0.001). There was no major surgical complication in this study, minor complication rates were similar low for both groups (1.0% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.891). At 1 year after surgery, %TWL and %EWL of both centers were similar (33.9 ± 7.43% vs. 32.6 ± 11.2%, p = 0.91; 81.9 vs. 19.8 vs. 85.4 ± 13.2, p = 0.798). T2DM remission (HbA1c < 6.5%) was 100% for patients of China and 95.9% for patients of Taiwan (p = 0.836).
conclusionsOAGB in situ is a safe and effective bariatric/metabolic surgery. With proper training and proctorship, these results are reproduceable in a new bariatric/metabolic surgical center in China.
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.