Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29145284›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2017

Effectiveness of bariatric surgical procedures: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Jenny H Kang, Quang A Le

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 72 papers, 12 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
72citing papers in PubMed, 12 pooled it
17.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

72 citing papers in PubMed, 12 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 172 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

12 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jenny H KangaWestern University of Health Sciences, Pomona, CA bVeterans Affairs Loma Linda Healthcare Systems, Loma Linda, CA.
Quang A Le
Western University of Health Sciences · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBariatric surgery has proved to be an effective strategy in treating obesity. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of 3 most common bariatric surgery procedures, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), sleeve gastrectomy (SG), and laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB), reported inconsistent results. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to synthesize evidence of effectiveness of the 3 common bariatric procedures from relevant RCTs.

methodsThe present study was a systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCTs. All RCTs must meet the following criteria to be included in the analysis: patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m, reported at least 1 outcome of interest, compared at least 2 of the 3 bariatric procedures, and had follow-ups of at least 1 year. Primary outcome was weight loss, expressed as differences in mean BMI reduction and percentage excess weight loss (%EWL) following 1 year after the surgery. Network meta-analysis was based on Bayesian framework with Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation approach.

resultsEleven RCTs that met the criteria were included in the review. Of 9 trials (n = 765), the differences in mean BMI reduction were -0.76 (95% CI: -3.1 to 1.6) for RYGB versus SG, -5.8 (95% CI: -9.2 to -2.4) for RYGB versus LAGB, and -5.0 (95% CI: -9.0 to -1.0) for SG versus LAGB. Eight RCTs (n = 656) reported percentage excess weight-loss (%EWL), the mean differences between RYGB and SG, RYGB and LAGB, and SG and LAGB were 3.8% (95% CI: -8.5% to 13.8%), -22.2% (95% CI: -34.7% to -6.5%), and -26.0% (95% CI: -40.6% to -6.4%), respectively. The meta-analysis indicated low heterogeneity between studies, and the node splitting analysis showed that the studies were consistent between direct and indirect comparisons (P > .05).

conclusionThe RYGB and SG yielded similar in weight-loss effect and both were superior to LAGB. Other factors such as complications and patient preference should be considered during surgical consultations.

Indexed as

Bariatric SurgeryOutcome and Process Assessment, Health CareHumansObesity, MorbidRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID29145284
PMCPMC5704829
OpenAlexW2769146779

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.