ArticleSurgical endoscopy2025
Bias against biologics in bariatric surgery: is it justified?
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundObesity is a known risk factor for autoimmune disorders. Chronic steroid treatment among these patients poses greater surgical risk, but biological/immunomodulating agents (BIA) have allowed for safer alternatives. The effects of BIA monotherapy on postoperative complications following metabolic/bariatric surgery (MBS) have not been studied. We aimed to evaluate the effects of preoperative BIA use on post-metabolic/bariatric surgery outcomes.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective matched-pair cohort study of patients who underwent bariatric surgery between 2012 and 2024. Patients were stratified into two groups: those with autoimmune disorders on BIA monotherapy vs matched controls. Patients were matched by age, BMI, and surgery type (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass [RYGB] vs vertical sleeve gastrectomy [VSG]). Paired T-tests were used to compare continuous variables. McNemar's test was used to compare dichotomous variables.
resultsThirty patients (15 per group) were included in the study. Sixty percent of patients underwent VSG. Among biologic monotherapy patients, 46.7% had rheumatoid arthritis, and 66.7% of BIA were TNF inhibitors. BIAs were used within 12 months of surgery, stopped 6 weeks prior to surgery, and resumed 6 weeks after surgery. Although there was no difference in preoperative comorbidities, BIA group had a significantly higher ASA status (100% with ASA 3) compared to controls (60.0% with ASA 3, p = 0.03). Postoperatively, there were no differences in wound complications (6.7% BIA vs. 0% control, p = 1.00) or readmissions (0% BIA vs 6.7% control, p = 1.00). There were no anastomotic leaks, VTE, or death in either group. Six-month postoperative weight loss was equal between groups: (50.7 ± 15.4%EWL BIA vs 53.4
conclusionDespite higher ASA status, patients on BIA did not have increased postoperative complications, and had similar weight loss to control patients after MBS. Our data suggests that when managed appropriately, patients on BIA have similar benefits from MBS without added risk.
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.