ArticleInternational journal of obesity (2005)2026
Ten-year comparative outcomes of one-anastomosis gastric bypass versus single-anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass as revisional procedures after sleeve gastrectomy.
Article in International journal of obesity (2005), 2026. 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
backgroundA substantial proportion of patients have insufficient weight loss or clinically significant weight regain after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and require revisional surgery. One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and single-anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI-S) are commonly used conversion procedures, but long-term comparative data are limited.
objectivesTo compare 10-year weight, metabolic, nutritional and safety outcomes of OAGB versus SADI-S performed as conversion procedures for weight recurrence after SG.
settingTertiary referral bariatric center.
methodsIn this retrospective comparative cohort study, adults undergoing conversion of SG to OAGB or SADI-S for weight recurrence between January 2014 and January 2016 were identified. Demographic, anthropometric, metabolic and micronutrient data, comorbidity status and complications were collected at baseline (time of conversion) and at 1, 5 and 10 years. Analyses were primarily descriptive. Between-group comparisons used appropriate parametric/non-parametric tests for continuous variables and Fisher's exact/chi-square tests for categorical variables; no multivariable longitudinal adjustment was performed, and findings should therefore be interpreted cautiously in view of the retrospective, non-randomized design.
resultsNinety patients underwent revisional surgery (OAGB n = 47; SADI-S n = 43). At 1 year, weight outcomes were similar between groups. SADI-S achieved higher %EWL and %TWL at 5 years; however, 10-year weight and BMI outcomes were comparable. Lipid profiles were more favorable after SADI-S (lower total cholesterol at 1, 5 and 10 years; lower triglycerides at 5 and 10 years), whereas several micronutrient levels were higher after OAGB (including calcium, zinc, vitamin D and folate at multiple time points), with higher vitamin B12 after SADI-S. Comorbidity outcomes and overall complication rates were similar, and no mortality was observed during follow-up.
conclusionsIn this retrospective cohort with 10-year follow-up, OAGB and SADI-S were associated with comparable long-term weight outcomes when used as conversion procedures after SG. SADI-S was associated with more favorable lipid parameters, whereas OAGB showed higher levels of several micronutrients over follow-up. These findings should be interpreted as observational associations and may help inform, rather than determine, individualized procedure selection alongside structured long-term surveillance.
Identifiers
42486876What 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.