ArticleObesity surgery2024
Venous Thromboembolic Events Following Revisional Gastric Bypass: An Analysis of the MBSAQIP Database from 2015 to 2019 Using Propensity Matching.
Article in Obesity surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrimary bariatric surgery is associated with moderate-to-high risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTE); however, the risk for revisional surgery lacks granularity. Our primary objective was to define the risk of VTE following revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) compared to primary RYGB.
methodsAdults who underwent primary or revision/conversion RYGB between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019, with a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m
resultsPrimary RYGB was performed in 197,186 (92.4%) patients compared to 16,144 (7.6%) in the revisional group. Patients in the revisional group had fewer comorbidities than those undergoing primary RYGB. In the matched cohort of 64,258 procedures, there were 48,116 (74.9%) primary RYGB cases compared to 16,142 (25.1%) RYGB revisions. The rate of VTE was similar in the revisional surgery group compared to the propensity matched primary RYGB group (0.4% vs. 0.3%, p > 0.580); however, transfusion was more common in the revisional group (1.4% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.005). Revisional group had higher rates of readmission, reoperation, increased length of stay, and operation length ≥ 180 min compared to matched primary RYGB group (p < 0.001).
conclusionsVTE rates for both primary and revisional RYGB are similar. Revisional RYGB cases impose increased risk of bleeding among other outcomes. Thus, identifying those at higher risk of complications is critical.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39349920What 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.