Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 189

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A comparison study of laparoscopic versus open gastric bypass for morbid obesity1

Nguyen, Ninh T, Ho, Hung S, Palmer, Levi S, Wolfe, Bruce M·2000·Journal of the American College of Surgeons

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (GBP) has been previously described, but a comparative study between laparoscopic and open GBP has not been reported. The purpose of this study was to compare surgical outcomes oflaparoscopic GBP with those of open GBP for treatment of morbid obesity. STUDY DESIGN: From August 1998 to September 1999, we prospectively collected outcome data on 35 patients with body-mass indices between 40 kg/m2 and 60 kg/m2 who underwent laparoscopic GBP. Demographics, operative data, perioperative complications, and weight losses were collected and compared with those obtained from a retrospective chart review of 35 patients with body-mass indices between 40 kg/m2 and 60 kg/m2 who underwent open GBP before August 1998. RESULTS: Age, gender, preoperative body-mass index, preoperative comorbidity, and earlier abdominal surgery were similar in both groups. All laparoscopic operations were completed without conversion to laparotomy. Mean operative time, operative blood loss, length of intensive care stay, and length of hospital stay were significantly less after laparoscopic GBP than after open GBP (p<0.05). There was no 30-day mortality in either group. At 1-year followup, analysis of the percentage of excess body weight loss showed no significant difference between the two groups (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is technically feasible and safe. Laparoscopic GBP confers the clinical benefits of laparoscopy and an initial weight loss similar to that of open GBP.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1072-7515(00)00276-3

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 189

Metadata

Authors
Nguyen, N. T., Ho, H. S., Palmer, L. S., & Wolfe, B. M.
Venue
Journal of the American College of Surgeons
Published
2000-08
Volume
191
Issue
2
Pages
149-155
ISSN
1072-7515 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1966070604
Cited by
189
References
3
FWCI
15.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A comparison study of laparoscopic versus open gastric bypass for morbid obesity1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1072-7515(00)00276-3
The paper
Nguyen, N. T., Ho, H. S., Palmer, L. S., & Wolfe, B. M. (2000). A comparison study of laparoscopic versus open gastric bypass for morbid obesity1. Journal of the American College of Surgeons. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1072-7515(00)00276-3

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.