ArticleBMC surgery2025
Pregnancy and neonatal outcomes following sleeve gastrectomy vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBariatric metabolic surgery (BMS) is increasingly preferred for women of reproductive age with morbid obesity due to its impact on weight and comorbidities. However, the physiological and nutritional changes after surgery may influence pregnancy outcomes. Among common procedures, sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) differ in anatomical and metabolic aspects, potentially leading to distinct perinatal risks. This study compared pregnancy and neonatal outcomes between these two procedures.
methodsA total of 53 women who became pregnant after undergoing SG (n = 38) or RYGB (n = 15) between January 2018 and January 2022 were included in this study. Data were retrieved from institutional medical records and the national e-health system. Demographic characteristics, obstetric parameters, and neonatal outcomes were compared between the two groups. Exclusion criteria included twin pregnancies, irregular follow-up, and incomplete data. Statistical analyses were conducted using appropriate parametric or non-parametric tests based on data distribution. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
resultsThe mean age of the study population was 28.3 ± 5.2 years. The mean interval from surgery to conception was 33 months. Miscarriage risk was higher in the RYGB group compared to the SG group (OR: 41.35, 95% CI: 3.92–436.61, p < 0.001). The two groups demonstrated comparable rates of preterm delivery, gestational diabetes mellitus, hypertensive disorders, anemia, as well as similar neonatal birth weight, head circumference, and NICU admission frequencies. However, the SG group exhibited greater gestational weight gain (p = 0.001) and higher postpartum BMI (p = 0.042).
conclusionsBoth SG and RYGB appear to be safe options for women of childbearing age. SG was linked to higher gestational weight gain, while RYGB showed a higher risk of miscarriage. These findings highlight the need for individualized counseling and close follow-up. Further prospective studies are needed to clarify long-term reproductive effects.
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.