SynthesisObesity surgery2026
Efficacy of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Compared with GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Treatment in Preventing Mortality and Major Adverse Cardiac Events Among Individuals with Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Obesity surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond initial weight loss: procedure-specific predictors of weight recurrence after metabolic and bariatric surgery.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionObesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) significantly increase cardiovascular morbidity and mortality worldwide. Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are effective interventions for T2DM and obesity, but comparative evidence on their long-term impact on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and all-cause mortality is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of MBS versus GLP-1 RAs therapy in reducing these outcomes.
methodsThe review was registered in PROSPERO beforehand and carried out following the PRISMA framework. A comprehensive literature search identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing MBS with GLP-1 RAs regimens in adults with obesity and T2DM. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and MACE. We used the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 (ROB 2) tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) to assess the quality of the study. Meta-analytic techniques were used to synthesize effect estimates.
resultsPooled analysis of eligible studies suggested that MBS offered greater reductions in both MACE and all-cause mortality than GLP-1 RAs therapy. The relative risk reduction for MACE was approximately 52% in favor of MBS. Despite notable heterogeneity, sensitivity analyses confirmed result robustness. The overall certainty of evidence was moderate, reflecting variations in populations, interventions, and study designs.
conclusionMBS offers significantly greater cardiovascular protection than GLP-1 RAs therapy in individual with obesity and T2DM, reducing MACE and all-cause mortality. GLP-1 RAs remains an important option, particularly for patients contraindicated for surgery or preferring pharmacotherapy. Further long-term comparative and cost effectiveness studies are needed to inform the clinical decisions.
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.