ArticleObesity surgery2023
One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass for Revisional Bariatric Surgery: Assessment of Short-Term Safety.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Safety and Efficacy of Laparoscopic One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as a Revision for Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding and Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy.Obesity surgery · 2025Article
- One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OABG) vs. Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass (SADI) as revisional procedure following Sleeve Gastrectomy: results of a multicenter study.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWith the continued increase in bariatric procedures being performed in the USA, a growing percentage are revisions for weight regain after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and gastric banding (LAGB). Standard practice in the USA involves conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Internationally, one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) has become a popular and effective alternative. Without the jejuno-jejunal anastomosis, OAGB has reduced potential related long-term complications. The purpose of this study is to compare the short-term safety of revision to OAGB versus RYGB. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients who underwent conversion to OAGB from LAGB or SG for weight regain from January 2019 to October 2021 were compared to BMI, sex, and age-matched patients who underwent conversion to RYGB.
resultsIn our study, 82 patients were included, 41 in each cohort (41 OAGB vs. 41 RYGB). The majority in both groups underwent conversion from SG (71% vs. 78%). Operative time, estimated blood loss, and length of stay were comparable. There was no difference in 30-day complications (9.8% vs. 12.2%, p = .99) or reoperation (4.9% vs. 4.9%, p = .99). Mean weight loss at 1 month was also comparable (7.91 lbs vs 6.36 lbs).
conclusionsPatients undergoing conversion to OAGB for weight regain had similar operative times, post-operative complication rates, and 1-month weight loss compared to those who underwent RYGB. While more research is needed, this early data suggests that OAGB and RYGB provide comparable outcomes when used as conversion procedures for to failed weight loss. Therefore, OAGB may present a safe alternative to RYGB.
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.