Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36653536›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2023

Comparison of early post-operative complications in primary and revisional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass, and duodenal switch MBSAQIP-reported cases from 2015 to 2019.

William C Bennett, Ian C Garbarine, Murphy Mostellar, Jeffrey Lipman, Manuel Sanchez-Casalongue, Timothy Farrell, Randal Zhou

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 18% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

William C BennettDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, 4001 Burnett-Womack Building, CB #7050, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. bennetw2@ccf.org.ORCID 0000-0001-8666-5414
Ian C GarbarineDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, 4001 Burnett-Womack Building, CB #7050, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Murphy MostellarDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, 4001 Burnett-Womack Building, CB #7050, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Jeffrey LipmanDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, 4001 Burnett-Womack Building, CB #7050, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Manuel Sanchez-CasalongueDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, 4001 Burnett-Womack Building, CB #7050, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Timothy FarrellDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, 4001 Burnett-Womack Building, CB #7050, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Randal ZhouDepartment of Surgery, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, 4001 Burnett-Womack Building, CB #7050, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSleeve gastrectomy (SG) is now the most performed bariatric surgery, though gastric bypass (GB) and duodenal switch (DS) remain common, especially as conversion/revision (C/R) procedures. This analysis compared early postoperative outcomes of primary and C/R laparoscopic SG to DS and GB; and primary procedures of each vs C/R counterparts.

methodsThe Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) dataset was queried for SG, GB, and DS cases from 2015 to 2019. Multivariable logistic regression calculated crude and adjusted odds ratios for surgical site infection (SSI), reoperation, and readmission at 30 days in two initial comparisons: (1) primary SG vs DS or GB and (2) C/R SG vs DS or GB. A secondary analysis compared primary GS, GB, or DS with C/R counterparts. Models were adjusted for confounding demographics and comorbidities.

resultsOf 755,968 primary cases, most were SG (72.8%), followed by GB (26.3%), then DS (0.9%). Compared to SG, GB and DS demonstrated higher odds of SSI (aOR 3.02 [2.84, 3.2]), readmission (aOR 1.97 [1.92, 2.03]), and reoperation (aOR 2.74 [2.62, 2.86]), respectively. Of 68,716 C/R cases, SG was most common (43.2%), followed by GB (37.5%), then DS (19.2%). C/R GB and DS demonstrated greater risk of SSI (aOR 2.28 [1.98, 2.62]), readmission (aOR 2.10 [1.94, 2.27]), and reoperation (aOR 2.3 [2.04, 2.59]) vs SG, respectively. C/R SG and DS demonstrated greater risk of SSI (OR 2.09 [1.66, 2.63]; 1.63 [1.24, 2.14), readmission (OR 1.13 [1.02, 1.26]), and reoperation (OR 1.27 [1.06, 1.52]; 1.58 [1.24, 2.0]), vs primary procedures. C/R DS demonstrated greater risk of SSI (OR 1.23 [1.66, 2.63]).

conclusionsEarly complications are comparable between GB and DS, and greater than SG. In C/R procedures, GB and DS demonstrate greater risk than SG. Overall, C/R procedures demonstrate greater risk of most, but not all, early postoperative complications.

Indexed as

Bariatric SurgeryGastric BypassLaparoscopyObesity, MorbidAccreditationGastrectomyHumansPostoperative ComplicationsQuality ImprovementRetrospective StudiesSurgical Wound InfectionTreatment OutcomeBariatric surgeryLaparoscopyMBSAQIPPostoperative complicationsSurgical revisionSurgical Wound Infection

Identifiers

PMID36653536
OpenAlexW4317384290

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.