ArticleObesity surgery2025
Laparoscopic Single Anastomosis Sleeve Ileal Bypass Versus Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass as Single Stage Procedure for Management of Patients with Class V Obesity (BMI ≥ 60 kg/m
Article in Obesity surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Efficacy and safety of single-anastomosis gastric bypass variants versus sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Updates in surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Medium-Term Comparative Results of Transit Bipartition and Biliopancreatic Diversion with Duodenal Switch in Patients with a BMI ≥ 50.Obesity surgery · 2026Article
- Incidence of de novo gastroesophageal reflux disease following sleeve gastrectomy versus sleeve gastrectomy with transit bipartition: a retrospective cohort study.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Editorial Opinion: Methodological Rigor in Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Research-Learning from History.Obesity surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndividuals with clinically severe obesity and a BMI ≥ 60 kg/m
methodsFrom January 2019 to December 2022, the data of 73 consecutive patients with class V obesity was collected, who underwent either standard RYGB (n = 40) or SASI (n = 33) at the General Surgery Department of Alexandria University Hospital and some non-governmental hospitals.
resultsThere was no statistically significant difference between both groups as regards mean age (p = 0.012), sex (p = 0.250), preoperative BMI (p = 0.754), or preoperative incidence of obesity-related co-morbidities. The SASI procedure showed a statistically shorter operative time (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups as regards the incidence of postoperative surgical complications, either early cmplications (21.1% and 20% in both SASI and RYGB, respectively, p = 0.770) or late (beyond 30 days) complications (15.2% and 15% in SASI and RYGB, respectively, p = 1.000), with neither conversion nor intra-operative mortality in both groups. However, the SASI group showed a significant shorter postoperative hospital stay (p < 0.001). During the follow-up period, both operations demonstrated a significant overall resolution of pre-operative obesity-related comorbidities, a significant increase in postprandial 6 weeks postoperative GLP-1 with statistically more rise in the SASI group in the postprandial GLP-1 compared to the RYGB group (p < 0.001). There was no mortalities in both group during the follow up duration.
conclusionIn patients with class V obesity, the SASI procedure had a statistically shorter operative time (skin-to-skin) and a shorter hospital stay compared to RYGB. Both procedures resulted in satisfactory weight loss, as well as comparable improvements in obesity-related comorbidities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.