Cited by 34Bariatric Surgery and OutcomesMinimally Invasive Surgical TechniquesBody Contouring and Surgery

Tailoring Bariatric Surgery: Sleeve Gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Biliopancreatic Diversion with Duodenal Switch

Sudan, Ranjan, Jain-Spangler, Kunoor·2018·Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A need exists to select the most appropriate bariatric operation for a particular patient. One-year data comparing sleeve gastrectomy (SG) to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD/DS) are sparse. METHODS: The Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database was queried from June 2007 to September 2011 for 30-day and 1-year adverse events, and 1-year weight loss and comorbidity resolution. Propensity scores with inverse probability weighting were used to match for age, gender, body mass index (BMI), ethnicity, and select comorbidities. Multivariate linear and logistic regressions estimated differences and odds ratios (ORs), respectively, for each pairwise bariatric operation comparison. RESULTS: Among 73,702 subjects, 5942 patients underwent SG, 66,324 patients underwent RYGB, and 1436 patients underwent BPD/DS. Compared with SG, decrease in BMI units was greater by 5.3 for BPD/DS and by 2.2 U for RYGB at 1 year. Resolution of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) was best for RYGB (OR = 1.88, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.73-2.03) and still good for BPD/DS (OR = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.29-1.90). Hypertension and diabetes mellitus (DM) resolution were better after BPD/DS (OR = 2.12, 95% CI: 1.83-1.64, and OR = 2.53, 95% CI: 2.13-3.00, respectively) and for RYGB were (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 44-1.64 and OR = 1.63, 95% CI: 1.51-1.75, respectively). Odds of serious adverse events at 1 year were: RYGB, OR = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.45-2.00; BPD/DS, OR = 4.31, 95% CI: 3.06-6.07. CONCLUSIONS: Using SG as reference, RYGB was associated with highest resolution of GERD, whereas BPD/DS was associated with highest resolution of DM and hypertension. These findings can guide decision making regarding choice of bariatric operation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/lap.2018.0397

Cites

12 of 12 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
Sudan, R., & Jain-Spangler, K.
Affiliations
Duke Medical Center (US)
Corresponding author
Sudan, Ranjan
Venue
Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques
Published
2018-08
Volume
28
Issue
8
Pages
956-961
ISSN
  • 1092-6429 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-9034
OpenAlex
W2886551616
Cited by
34
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 1
FWCI
4.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Laparoendoscopic & Advanced Surgical Techniques (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Body Contouring and Surgery
Keywords
bariatric surgery, sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch, obesity, weight loss, comorbidity resolution, gastroesophageal reflux disease, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, postoperative complications, surgical site infection, revisional surgery, patient selection, long-term outcomes
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Gastrectomy, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Morbid, Postoperative Complications, Gastric Bypass, Weight Loss, Comorbidity, Biliopancreatic Diversion, Logistic Models, Databases, Factual, Treatment Outcome, Propensity Score

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