ArticleHepatobiliary surgery and nutrition2023
Foregut bypass
Article in Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical advantages and efficacy of sleeve gastrectomy in the treatment of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease.Hepatobiliary surgery and nutrition · 2025Article
- Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease in adults.Nature reviews. Disease primers · 2025Review
- Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: A silent pandemic.World journal of hepatology · 2024Article
- Editorial: The heart of NAFLD.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
20 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Bariatric surgery represents an important treatment option for severely obese patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). However, there remains inadequate data regarding the effects of different bariatric procedures on various NAFLD parameters, especially for histological outcomes. Thus, this meta-analysis aimed to compare the effects of restrictive bariatric procedures and foregut bypass on the metabolic, biochemical, and histological parameters for patients with NAFLD. Methods: Medline and Embase were searched for articles relating to bariatric procedures and NAFLD. Pairwise meta-analysis was conducted to compare efficacy of bariatric procedures pre- Results: Thirty-one articles involving 3,355 patients who underwent restrictive bariatric procedures (n=1,460) and foregut bypass (n=1,895) were included. Both foregut bypass (P<0.01) and restrictive procedures (P=0.03) significantly increased odds of fibrosis resolution. Compared to restrictive procedures, foregut bypass resulted in a borderline non-significant decrease in fibrosis score (P=0.06) and significantly lower steatosis score (P<0.001). For metabolic parameters, foregut bypass significantly lowered body mass index (P=0.003) and low-density lipoprotein (P=0.008) compared to restrictive procedures. No significant differences were observed between both procedures for aspartate aminotransferase (P=0.17) and alkaline phosphatase (P=0.61). However, foregut bypass resulted in significantly lower gamma-glutamyl transferase than restrictive procedures (P=0.01) while restrictive procedures resulted in significantly lower alanine transaminase than foregut bypass (P=0.02). Conclusions: The significant histological and metabolic advantages and comparable improvements in biochemical outcomes support the choice of foregut bypass over restrictive bariatric procedures in NAFLD management.
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.