Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36098907›Full record

Trial reportObesity surgery2022

Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Versus Revisional One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass After Failed Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Mohamed Hany, Ahmed Zidan, Ehab Elmongui, Bart Torensma

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Obesity surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
10.5field-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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Guideline
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Conversion to Roux en Y gastric bypass after sleeve gastrectomy: outcomes from a Middle Eastern cohort.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Mohamed HanyDepartment of Surgery, Medical Research Institute, Alexandria University, 165 Horreya Avenue, Hadara, Alexandria, 21561, Egypt. mohamed.ashour@alexu.edu.eg.
Ahmed ZidanDepartment of Surgery, Medical Research Institute, Alexandria University, 165 Horreya Avenue, Hadara, Alexandria, 21561, Egypt.
Ehab ElmonguiHealth Insurance Organization, Alexandria, Egypt.
Bart TorensmaLeiden University Medical Center (LUMC), Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-0274-9608
Alexandria University · EGLeiden University Medical Center · NLWorld Health Organization - Egypt · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHigh rates of revision surgery have been reported for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), with weight regain (WR) as the most frequently reported cause. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the most commonly performed revision procedure, whereas one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a less popular approach.

methodsA single-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted. One hundred seventy-six patients were enrolled and randomized. After loss to follow-up, 80 patients for RYGB and 80 patients for OAGB were analyzed, with a 2-year follow-up. Patients with grade B or higher gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) were excluded. Early and late postoperative complications were recorded. Body mass index (BMI), percentage of excess BMI loss (%EBMIL), nutritional laboratory test results, and the resolution of associated medical problems were assessed after revision surgery.

resultsAfter 2 years, both groups achieved significantly lower BMI than their post-LSG nadir BMI (p < 0.001). The %EBMIL changes showed significantly faster weight loss in the OAGB group than in the RYGB at the 6-month follow-up (mean difference: 8.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.2 to 16.9%). However, at 1-year and 2-year follow-ups, the differences were statistically insignificant (p > 0.05). Early and late complications were similar between two groups. Both groups showed improvement or resolution of associated medical problems, with no statistically significant differences after 2 years (p = 1.00).

conclusionBoth revisional RYGB and OAGB have comparable significant weight loss effects when performed for WR after LSG. After a 2-year follow-up, both procedures were safe, with no significant differences in the occurrence of complications and nutritional deficits.

Indexed as

Gastric BypassLaparoscopyObesity, MorbidGastrectomyHumansReoperationRetrospective StudiesWeight LossLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomyOne-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB)Revisional bariatric surgeryRoux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB)Weight regain

Identifiers

PMID36098907
PMCPMC9469810
OpenAlexW4295359219

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.