Observational studyBMC gastroenterology2025
Observational study of Reflux-related findings at distal esophagus, gastric pouch, and anastomotic site one and three years after one-anastomosis gastric bypass: exploring the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopy compared to biopsy.
Observational study in BMC gastroenterology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe aimed to compare upper endoscopy (UE) with histopathology (biopsy) for detecting reflux-related findings at 1 and 3 years following one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB).
methodsThis retrospective analysis included 150 OAGB patients. UE (macroscopic) and biopsy (microscopic) findings were collected from the distal esophagus, gastric pouch, and anastomotic site. Five diagnostic indices—sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve—were calculated to assess UE relative to biopsy.
resultsThe mean age was 34.7 ± 11.4 years; 75.3% were female. At the distal esophagus, normal UE findings increased from 75.7% at year 1 to 92.7% at year 3 (odds ratio [OR] = 0.32, p = 0.005). Gastric pouch abnormalities rose from 57.6% to 73.4% (OR = 2.03, p = 0.007). Anastomotic site abnormalities increased from 16.0% to 21.7% (OR = 1.46, p = 0.226). Biopsy findings for the distal esophagus showed a nonsignificant increase in abnormalities (OR = 1.54, p = 0.103), whereas gastric pouch abnormalities rose significantly (OR = 3.45, p < 0.001). Diagnostic accuracy varied by anatomical region and follow-up interval. UE reliably detected but poorly excluded distal esophageal disease. At the gastric pouch, UE could both identify and rule out disease with high accuracy. At the anastomotic site, UE findings closely mirrored biopsy results, making it a potential substitute when biopsy is unavailable.
conclusionsLonger-term follow-up is needed post-OAGB. While UE effectively identifies distal esophageal disease, it may yield false negatives. By contrast, UE at the gastric pouch and anastomotic site reliably detects or excludes disease, offering a viable alternative to biopsy. Research of UE’s diagnostic accuracy at various time points in post-OAGB populations is required.
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.