Evidence mapPaperPMID 41054439Full record

ArticleEClinicalMedicine2025

Evaluation of safety of preoperative GLP-1 receptor agonists in patients undergoing elective surgery: a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression.

Sivesh K Kamarajah, Nadia Gudiozzi, John M Findlay, Matthew J Lee, Thomas Pinkney, Sheraz R Markar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
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

6 authors.

Sivesh K KamarajahDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Nadia GudiozziNuffield Department of Surgery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
John M FindlayAcademic Department of Abdominal Wall Surgery, North Devon District Hospital, Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Barnstaple, UK.
Matthew J LeeDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Thomas PinkneyDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, School of Health Sciences, College of Medicine and Health, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Sheraz R MarkarNuffield Department of Surgery, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Obesity remains a major global public health challenge, particularly among surgical patients, where it can be associated with increased perioperative and longer-term risk. While preoperative weight management strategies are often used to mitigate these risks, scalable interventions remain limited. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) are an emerging pharmacological approach for weight loss, but their perioperative safety remains uncertain. This study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of preoperative GLP-1 therapy in elective surgical systems. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we systematically searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from database inception to March 31, 2025, for studies evaluating preoperative GLP-1 RA use in adults undergoing elective surgery, with no language restriction. The primary outcome was perioperative safety, defined as any complication within 90 days after surgery. The secondary outcome was preoperative weight loss. Both frequentist and Bayesian random-effects meta-analyses were conducted. A Bayesian hierarchical meta-regression was used to explore effect modifiers on the primary outcome. A risk-of-bias and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) assessment were done to determine the certainty of the evidence. Final GRADE judgements were made by two independent reviewers, with consensus reached through discussion. Between-study heterogeneity was quantified using the Findings: A total of 21 studies, comprising 97,059 patients, met inclusion criteria; 31.9% (n = 30,981) received preoperative GLP-1 RA therapy. Most studies were single-centre observational cohorts from high-income countries, with no randomised trials identified. Postoperative complications were reported in 12 studies, with no evidence of increased risk in GLP-1 users (pooled odds ratio: 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.59-1.05). The pooled estimate shows high heterogeneity ( Interpretation: Preoperative GLP-1 RA therapy may support clinically meaningful weight loss without a clear signal of increased perioperative risk, offering a potentially scalable strategy for surgical optimisation. However, the certainty of current evidence is very low, with most studies observational in design and at risk of bias. Amid rising global obesity rates and mounting surgical backlogs, the role of GLP-1RAs in perioperative care remains a critical unanswered question. Robust randomised trials are needed to establish their clinical value, cost-effectiveness, and implementation potential across diverse surgical systems. Prioritisation by funders and policymakers are needed as part of broader health policy agendas to improve population health and health system resilience. Funding: NIHR Doctoral Research Fellowship and NIHR Exeter Biomedical Research Centre Senior Investigator Fellowship.

Indexed as

Evidence synthesisGLP1SafetySurgical systems

Identifiers

PMID41054439
PMCPMC12496209

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.