Observational studyInternational journal of obesity (2005)2026
Investigating the trend of revisional bariatric surgery, the complications, and associated risk factors in France.
Observational study in International journal of obesity (2005), 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMetabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is a highly effective treatment for patients with obesity, with increasing prevalence in France. However, some patients require revisional MBS (RMBS) due to suboptimal initial response, recurrent weight gain, and correction of technique-related complications. Understanding the prevalence and risks associated with RMBS is essential for optimizing patient care.
objectiveThis study aims to assess the rate of RMBS in France and to delineate the associated complications and risk factors.
settingFrance.
methodsUsing national discharge data from 2016 to 2022, this observational study compared morbidity and mortality rates between primary and RMBS. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and procedural details were analyzed. Major complications within 90 days post-surgery were assessed using logistic regression models adjusted for potential confounders.
resultsAmong 284,271 bariatric procedures analyzed, the revision rate was 12.8%. Patients undergoing RMBS were older, predominantly female, and had more comorbidities compared to those undergoing primary procedures. RMBS were associated with significantly higher rates of severe complications (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.49-1.68, p < 0.001), particularly after gastric bypass (GB) (OR 2.70, 95% CI 2.27-3.20). Subgroup analyses showed increased morbidity following revisional sleeve gastrectomy compared to primary procedures.
conclusionsThis study highlights a notable rate of RMBS in France, with evolving trends towards more complex revisions. RMBS are associated with increased morbidity, emphasizing the need for careful patient selection and enhanced postoperative management. Further research into surgical techniques, long-term pharmacological interventions, and surgeon expertise is warranted to optimize outcomes in this population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41629476What 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.