Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29748735›Full record

SynthesisObesity surgery2018

Revisional Gastric Bypass Is Inferior to Primary Gastric Bypass in Terms of Short- and Long-term Outcomes-Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Michał Pędziwiatr, Piotr Małczak, Mateusz Wierdak, Mateusz Rubinkiewicz, Magdalena Pisarska, Piotr Major, Michał Wysocki, W Konrad Karcz, Andrzej Budzyński

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Obesity surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 77 citations in OpenAlex.

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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Michał Pędziwiatr2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland. michal.pedziwiatr@uj.edu.pl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9073-2667
Piotr Małczak2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Mateusz Wierdak2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Mateusz Rubinkiewicz2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Magdalena Pisarska2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Piotr Major2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Michał Wysocki2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
W Konrad KarczDepartment of General-, Abdominal-, Vascular-, Thoracic- and Transplantation Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
Andrzej Budzyński2nd Department of General Surgery, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Jagiellonian University · PLLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAlthough Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the main primary bariatric procedure, it has also been utilized as revisional bariatric surgery. Our aim is to compare revisionary gastric bypass with primary gastric bypass through systematic review with meta-analysis.

methodsAvailable literature was searched for eligible studies up to December 2017. Inclusion criteria were reports on morbidity, %EWL, or diabetes remission. Secondary outcomes involved mortality, anastomotic leakage, operative time, and length of hospital stay. Random effect meta-analyses were undertaken.

resultsInitial search yielded 1164 references. Final meta-analysis involved 21 studies and revealed significant differences in terms of morbidity (RR1.54, p < 0.001) and EWL (WMD-19.9, p < 0.001). There were no differences in diabetes remission.

conclusionRevisionary RYGB has worse weight loss effect with greater morbidity rate than primary RYGB.

Indexed as

Gastric BypassReoperationAdultAnastomotic LeakBariatric SurgeryFemaleHumansLaparoscopyMaleMiddle AgedObesity, MorbidOperative TimeTreatment OutcomeWeight LossBariatric surgeryGastric bypassObesityRevisional surgeryRYGB

Identifiers

PMID29748735
PMCPMC6018598
OpenAlexW2799880139

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.