Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39560892›Full record

SynthesisObesity surgery2024

Laparoscopic Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass Versus One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as Revisional Procedures after Sleeve Gastrectomy: Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.

Yusuf Ahmed, Karim Ataya, Isa Almubarak, Manar Ali, Abdulla Almubarak, Walaa Yusuf, Stefan Simeonovski, Mostafa Mohammed Saad Mahran, Almoutuz Aljaafreh, Hussein El Bourji and 1 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Obesity surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

11 authors.

Yusuf AhmedDammam Medical Complex, Dammam, Saudi Arabia. yusufaliahmed619@gmail.com.
Karim AtayaHomerton University Hospital, London, UK. Karimataya@outlook.com.
Isa AlmubarakAl Kindi Hospital, Manama, Bahrain.
Manar AliMansoura University, Al Mansurah, Egypt.
Abdulla AlmubarakMansoura University, Al Mansurah, Egypt.
Walaa YusufDammam Medical Complex, Dammam, Saudi Arabia. walla2000mulla@gmail.com.
Stefan SimeonovskiMilitary Medical Academy, Sofia, Bulgaria.
Mostafa Mohammed Saad MahranHomerton University Hospital, London, UK.
Almoutuz AljaafrehSt George's University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Hussein El BourjiUniversity of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, USA.
Wah YangFirst Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China. yangwah@qq.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt has been observed that 5-8% of primary bariatric procedures result in inadequate treatment response, necessitating the need for revisional surgery. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to compare the effectiveness of single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI) and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) in addressing weight recurrence following sleeve gastrectomy.

methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Studies were considered eligible if they compared SADI with OAGB as revisional surgeries following sleeve gastrectomy.

resultsOur search strategy yielded four articles with a total of 309 patients. Regarding weight loss at 1 year of follow-up, SADI was favorable based on excess weight loss percentage (EWL%) and total weight loss percentage (TWL%). At 2 years of follow-up, EWL% did not show a statistically significant difference between the two operations although TWL% was higher in SADI group. Regarding postoperative bile reflux, the OAGB group had a significantly higher incidence of biliary reflux (OR 0.15; 95% CI 0.04 to 0.53; P = 0.003). Patients enrolled in SADI did not develop anastomotic ulcers according to the four studies included in the analysis. In contrast, seven patients in the OAGB group did develop anastomotic ulcers, but the difference was not statistically significant (OR 0.23; 95% CI 0.05 to 1.10; P = 0.07).

conclusionADI is a feasible procedure with a favorable outcome compared to OAGB as a revisional surgery following sleeve gastrectomy regarding weight loss at 1 year with a lower incidence of postoperative biliary reflux.

Indexed as

GastrectomyGastric BypassLaparoscopyObesity, MorbidReoperationWeight LossAnastomosis, SurgicalDuodenumHumansPostoperative ComplicationsTreatment OutcomeOAGBRevisional surgerySADIWeight loss

Identifiers

PMID39560892

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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.