Cited by 85Bariatric Surgery and OutcomesGastrointestinal Bleeding Diagnosis and TreatmentMinimally Invasive Surgical Techniques

Preoperative Endoscopy Prior to Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature

Parikh, Manish, Liu, Jennifer, Vieira, Dorice, Tzimas, Demetrios, Horwitz, Daniel, Antony, Andrew, Saunders, John K., Ude-Welcome, Akuezunkpa +1 more·2016·Obesity Surgery

Abstract

Background There is debate regarding preoperative endoscopy (EGD) in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Some centers perform EGD routinely in all patients; others perform EGD selectively. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing literature to estimate how frequently preoperative EGD changes management.Methods Our review yielded 28 studies encompassing 6616 patients. Baseline characteristics including age and body mass index (BMI) were included. Patients were grouped based on EGD findings into two groups: Group 1-findings which did not significantly change management (e.g., mild/moderate duodenitis, Grade A/B esophagitis, mild/moderate gastritis, H. pylori infection, hiatal hernia <2 cm); Group 2-findings which delayed, altered, or cancelled surgery (e.g., severe duodenitis, Grade C/D esophagitis, gastric varices, hiatal hernia >2 cm, mass/carcinoma). A general estimating equation (GEE) model accounting for the correlated data within each study was used to calculate confidence intervals around the estimate of how frequently surgery was delayed or altered.Results Mean age was 41.4 ± 2.9 years, the majority was women, and mean preoperative BMI was 47 ± 3.2 kg/m 2. Overall 92.4 % (n = 6112) had a normal EGD or findings that did not change clinical management and 7.6 % (n = 504); 95 % CI [4.6, 12.4 %] had findings that delayed/altered surgery. The revised estimate was 20.6 %; 95%CI [14.5, 28.2 %] if all esophagitis (regardless of grade) were categorized into Group 2. The approximate incidence of Barrett's esophagus and carcinoma were 0.1 and 0.08 %, respectively.Conclusion A selective approach to preoperative EGD may be considered, based on the patients' symptoms, risk factors, and type of procedure planned.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11695-016-2232-y

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Parikh, M., Liu, J., Vieira, D., Tzimas, D., Horwitz, D., Antony, A., Saunders, J. K., Ude-Welcome, A., & Goodman, A.
Affiliations
NYU Langone Health (US)
Corresponding author
Parikh, Manish
Venue
Obesity Surgery
Published
2016-05-20
Volume
26
Issue
12
Pages
2961-2966
ISSN
  • 0960-8923 (ISSN-L)
  • 1708-0428
OpenAlex
W2401653609
Cited by
85
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1
FWCI
0.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Obesity Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Gastroenterology › Gastrointestinal Bleeding Diagnosis and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques
Keywords
preoperative endoscopy, bariatric surgery
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Gastrointestinal Diseases, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Preoperative Care, Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal, Bariatric Surgery

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review