SynthesisUpdates in surgery2026
Efficacy and safety of single-anastomosis gastric bypass variants versus sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Updates in surgery, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Single-anastomosis gastric bypass variants, collectively termed sleeve gastrectomy with transit bipartition (SG-TB), have emerged as simplified metabolic procedures. This meta-analysis compares the efficacy and safety of SG-TB against sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). We systematically searched multiple databases through September 2025 for comparative studies. Random-effects models were used for meta-analysis, calculating mean differences (MD) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Twenty studies were included. Compared to SG, SG-TB resulted in significantly greater 1-year total weight loss (TWL MD = 3.5%, CI 1.5–5.5%) and excess weight loss (EWL MD = 10.8%, CI 8.6–13.0%). For type 2 diabetes remission, SG-TB showed a positive trend but with substantial uncertainty (OR = 2.74, CI 0.61–12.32). SG-TB demonstrated significantly higher GERD remission rates versus SG (OR = 6.90, CI 1.98–24.09). Weight loss and diabetes remission were comparable between SG-TB and RYGB. Nutritional assessment revealed generally comparable profiles, with SG-TB showing better iron/vitamin B12 preservation versus RYGB but lower vitamin D levels versus SG. SG-TB had a comparable short-term safety profile to both SG and RYGB, with no significant differences in perioperative complications, despite a longer operative time versus SG. SG-TB procedures offer superior weight loss compared to SG and achieve metabolic outcomes equivalent to RYGB, with a comparable short-term safety profile. The substantial uncertainty in diabetes remission estimates against SG warrants cautious interpretation. These findings position SG-TB as a compelling and effective surgical option for severe obesity and related metabolic disease.
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.