The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effectiveness of bariatric surgical procedures: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery has proved to be an effective strategy in treating obesity. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of 3 most common bariatric surgery procedures, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), sleeve gastrectomy (SG), and laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB), reported inconsistent results. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to synthesize evidence of effectiveness of the 3 common bariatric procedures from relevant RCTs. METHODS: The present study was a systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCTs. All RCTs must meet the following criteria to be included in the analysis: patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m, reported at least 1 outcome of interest, compared at least 2 of the 3 bariatric procedures, and had follow-ups of at least 1 year. Primary outcome was weight loss, expressed as differences in mean BMI reduction and percentage excess weight loss (%EWL) following 1 year after the surgery. Network meta-analysis was based on Bayesian framework with Markov Chain Monte Carlo simulation approach. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs that met the criteria were included in the review. Of 9 trials (n = 765), the differences in mean BMI reduction were -0.76 (95% CI: -3.1 to 1.6) for RYGB versus SG, -5.8 (95% CI: -9.2 to -2.4) for RYGB versus LAGB, and -5.0 (95% CI: -9.0 to -1.0) for SG versus LAGB. Eight RCTs (n = 656) reported percentage excess weight-loss (%EWL), the mean differences between RYGB and SG, RYGB and LAGB, and SG and LAGB were 3.8% (95% CI: -8.5% to 13.8%), -22.2% (95% CI: -34.7% to -6.5%), and -26.0% (95% CI: -40.6% to -6.4%), respectively. The meta-analysis indicated low heterogeneity between studies, and the node splitting analysis showed that the studies were consistent between direct and indirect comparisons (P > .05). CONCLUSION: The RYGB and SG yielded similar in weight-loss effect and both were superior to LAGB. Other factors such as complications and patient preference should be considered during surgical consultations.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Figures
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.
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?
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“There was marginal difference in major operative morbidity (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 4.16), no differences in minor perioperative complications (OR 1.43, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.23), and long-term minor (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.47) or major complications (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.96), although the latter outcomes were associated with low or very low certainty of evidence.”
From Clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) on bariatric surgery: update 2020 endorsed by IFSO-EC, EASO and ESPCOP (2020) · cites this paper as [90]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“There was no difference in diabetes remission (RR 1.96, 95% CI 0.47 to 8.33), although certainty of the evidence was low (Supplementary Table S17).”
In the citing paper
“There was no significant difference in EWL (WMD − 4%, 95% CI − 14% to 8%) or diabetes remission (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.06), findings supported by moderate certainty of evidence.”
In the citing paper
“There was no significant difference in EWL (WMD − 4%, 95% CI − 14% to 8%) or diabetes remission (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.06), findings supported by moderate certainty of evidence.”
In the citing paper
“Sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a weighted mean difference of 25% EWL (95% CI 6.4% to 41%) and 57% higher odds of diabetes remission (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.98).”
In the citing paper
“Sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a weighted mean difference of 25% EWL (95% CI 6.4% to 41%) and 57% higher odds of diabetes remission (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.98).”
In the citing paper
“There was marginal difference in major operative morbidity (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 4.16), no differences in minor perioperative complications (OR 1.43, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.23), and long-term minor (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.47) or major complications (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.96), although the latter outcomes were associated with low or very low certainty of evidence.”
In the citing paper
“The WMD of EWL was 22% (95% CI 6.5% to 34%) in favor of RYGB, which was associated with high certainty evidence.”
In the citing paper
“Remission of dyslipidemia and hypertension were in favor of sleeve gastrectomy, but certainty of the evidence was very low due to observational study design, risk of bias, inconsistency and indirectness (Supplementary Table S19).”
In the citing paper
“There was marginal difference in major operative morbidity (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 4.16), no differences in minor perioperative complications (OR 1.43, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.23), and long-term minor (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.47) or major complications (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.96), although the latter outcomes were associated with low or very low certainty of evidence.”
In the citing paper
“There was marginal difference in major operative morbidity (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 4.16), no differences in minor perioperative complications (OR 1.43, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.23), and long-term minor (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.47) or major complications (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.96), although the latter outcomes were associated with low or very low certainty of evidence.”
In the citing paper
“Despite the advances in the field, we have identified several gaps, particularly in the long-term reporting of outcomes [90, 91].”
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
Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses
Higgins, J. P. T., Thompson, S. G., Deeks, J. J., & Altman, D. G. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 · Cited by 63,139
Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P. J., Kleijnen, J., & Moher, D. (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 · Cited by 28,164
Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?
Jadad, A. R., Moore, R. A., Carroll, D., Jenkinson, C., Reynolds, D. J. M., Gavaghan, D. J., & McQuay, H. J. (1996) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4 · Cited by 17,582
Ng, M., Fleming, T., Robinson, M., Thomson, B., Graetz, N., Margono, C., Mullany, E. C., Biryukov, S., Abbafati, C., Abera, S. F., et al. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(14)60460-8 · Cited by 11,952
Zhang, Q., Wang, C., Zheng, M., Li, Y., Li, J., Zhang, L., Shang, X., & Yan, C. (2014) · Cerebrovascular Diseases · doi:10.1159/000369778 · Cited by 11,609
Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample
Hozo, S. P., Djulbegovic, B., & Hozo, I. (2005) · BMC Medical Research Methodology · doi:10.1186/1471-2288-5-13 · Cited by 9,062
Child abuse: Adolescent records vs. adult recall
Femina, D. D., Yeager, C. A., & Lewis, D. O. (1990) · Child Abuse & Neglect · doi:10.1016/0145-2134(90)90033-p · Cited by 8,820
Hutton, B., Salanti, G., Caldwell, D. M., Chaimani, A., Schmid, C. H., Cameron, C., Ioannidis, J. P. A., Straus, S., Thorlund, K., Jansen, J. P., et al. (2015) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/m14-2385 · Cited by 8,269
Bariatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Buchwald, H., Avidor, Y., Braunwald, E., Jensen, M. D., Pories, W., Fahrbach, K., & Schoelles, K. (2004) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.292.14.1724 · Cited by 6,800
The Disease Burden Associated With Overweight and Obesity
Must, A. (1999) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.282.16.1523 · Cited by 4,827
Dong, Y., Hao, L., Shi, Z., Wang, G., Zhang, Z., & Han, C. (2013) · Urologia Internationalis · doi:10.1159/000351405 · Cited by 4,557
Annual Medical Spending Attributable To Obesity: Payer-And Service-Specific Estimates
Finkelstein, E. A., Trogdon, J. G., Cohen, J. W., & Dietz, W. H. (2009) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.28.5.w822 · Cited by 2,956
Chang, S.-H., Stoll, C. R. T., Song, J., Varela, J. E., Eagon, C. J., & Colditz, G. A. (2014) · JAMA Surgery · doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.3654 · Cited by 1,688
Simultaneous comparison of multiple treatments: Combining direct and indirect evidence.
Caldwell, D. M., Ades, A. E., & Higgins, J. P. T. (2005) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.331.7521.897 · Cited by 1,600 · cited 1×
“This approach has advantages over the conventional pairwise meta-analysis such that it is able to assess the results of indirect as well as direct evidence and makes inferences on comparative effectiveness of interventions that have no head-tohead trials available.([16]) With increasing popularity of bariatric surgery…”
BackgroundMeta-Analysis: Surgical Treatment of Obesity
Maggard, M. A., Shugarman, L. R., Suttorp, M. J., Maglione, M., Sugerman, H. J., Livingston, E. H., Nguyen, N. T., Li, Z., Mojica, W., Hilton, L. G., et al. (2005) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-142-7-200504050-00013 · Cited by 1,567
Bariatric Surgery Worldwide 2013
Angrisani, L., Santonicola, A., Iovino, P., Formisano, G., Buchwald, H., & Scopinaro, N. (2015) · Obesity Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11695-015-1657-z · Cited by 1,492
Network meta‐analysis for indirect treatment comparisons
Lumley, T. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1201 · Cited by 1,206
Jansen, J. P., Fleurence, R., Devine, B., Itzler, R. F., Barrett, A., Hawkins, N., Lee, K., Boersma, C., Annemans, L., & Cappelleri, J. C. (2011) · Value in Health · doi:10.1016/j.jval.2011.04.002 · Cited by 1,029
Karlsson, J., Taft, C., Rydén, A., Sjöström, L., & Sullivan, M. (2007) · International Journal of Obesity · doi:10.1038/sj.ijo.0803573 · Cited by 887
Karamanakos, S. N., Vagenas, K., Kalfarentzos, F. E., & Alexandrides, T. K. (2008) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e318156f012 · Cited by 831
Metabolic/bariatric surgery worldwide 2008
Buchwald, H., & Oien, D. M. (2009) · Obesity Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11695-009-0014-5 · Cited by 826
Automating network meta‐analysis
van Valkenhoef, G., Lu, G., de Brock, B., Hillege, H. L., Ades, A. E., & Welton, N. J. (2012) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1054 · Cited by 796
HIMPENS, J. M., Dapri, G., & Cadière, G. (2006) · Obesity Surgery · doi:10.1381/096089206778869933 · Cited by 715
van Valkenhoef, G., Dias, S., Ades, A. E., & Welton, N. J. (2015) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.1167 · Cited by 699
Yanovski, S. Z., & Yanovski, J. A. (2002) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra012586 · Cited by 555
Network Meta-Analysis Using R: A Review of Currently Available Automated Packages
Neupane, B., Richer, D., Bonner, A., Kibret, T. C., & Beyene, J. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0115065 · Cited by 366
Kehagias, I., Karamanakos, S. N., Argentou, M., & Kalfarentzos, F. (2011) · Obesity Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11695-011-0479-x · Cited by 349
Early Results of the Swiss Multicentre Bypass or Sleeve Study (SM-BOSS)
Peterli, R., Borbély, Y., Kern, B. E., Gass, M., Peters, T. T. A., Thurnheer, M., Schultes, B., Laederach, K., Bueter, M., & Schiesser, M. (2013) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e3182a67426 · Cited by 343
Garvey, W. T., Mechanick, J. I., Brett, E. M., Garber, A. J., Hurley, D. L., Jastreboff, A. M., Nadolsky, K. Z., Pessah‐Pollack, R., & Plodkowski, R. A. (2016) · Endocrine Practice · doi:10.4158/ep161356.esgl · Cited by 292
Angrisani, L., Lorenzo, M., & Borrelli, V. (2007) · Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.soard.2006.12.005 · Cited by 287
Bariatric surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials
Padwal, R. S., Klarenbach, S. W., Wiebe, N., Birch, D. W., Karmali, S., Manns, B., Hazel, M., Sharma, A. M., & Tonelli, M. A. (2011) · Obesity Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1467-789x.2011.00866.x · Cited by 262
Nguyen, N. T., Slone, J. A., Nguyen, X.-M. T., Hartman, J. S., & Hoyt, D. B. (2009) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e3181b92480 · Cited by 255
Ponce, J., DeMaria, E. J., Nguyen, N. T., Hutter, M., Sudan, R., & Morton, J. M. (2016) · Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.soard.2016.08.488 · Cited by 202
Zhang, Y., Zhao, H., Cao, Z., Sun, X., Zhang, C., Cai, W., Liu, R., Hu, S., & Qin, M. (2014) · Obesity Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11695-014-1258-2 · Cited by 182
Ramón, J. M., Salvans, S., Crous, X., Puig, S., Goday, A., Benaiges, D., Trillo, L., Pera, M., & Grande, L. (2012) · Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11605-012-1855-0 · Cited by 182
Keidar, A., Hershkop, K. J., Marko, L., Schweiger, C., Hecht, L., Bartov, N., Kedar, A., & Weiss, R. (2013) · Diabetologia · doi:10.1007/s00125-013-2965-2 · Cited by 131
Paluszkiewicz, R., Kalinowski, P., Wróblewski, T., Bartoszewicz, Z., Białobrzeska-Paluszkiewicz, J., Ziarkiewicz‐Wróblewska, B., Remiszewski, P., Grodzicki, M., & Krawczyk, M. (2012) · Videosurgery and Other Miniinvasive Techniques · doi:10.5114/wiitm.2012.32384 · Cited by 98
Upala, S., & Sanguankeo, A. (2014) · Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.soard.2014.09.024 · Cited by 78
Vix, M., Diana, M., Liu, K.-H., D’Urso, A., Mutter, D., Wu, H., & Marescaux, J. (2012) · Obesity Surgery · doi:10.1007/s11695-012-0827-5 · Cited by 69
Lee, J. H., Nguyen, Q.-N., & Le, Q. A. (2016) · Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases · doi:10.1016/j.soard.2016.01.020 · Cited by 58
Self-citation
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Benefits and Risks of Bariatric Surgery in Adults: A Review
Arterburn, D. E., Telem, D. A., Kushner, R. F., & Courcoulas, A. P. (2020) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2020.12567 · Cited by 1,251
Di Lorenzo, N., Antoniou, S. A., Batterham, R. L., Busetto, L., Godoroja, D., Iossa, A., Carrano, F. M., Agresta, F., Alarçon, I., Azran, C., et al. (2020) · Surgical Endoscopy · doi:10.1007/s00464-020-07555-y · Cited by 465
Shariq, O. A., & McKenzie, T. J. (2020) · Gland Surgery · doi:10.21037/gs.2019.12.03 · Cited by 427
Pharmacotherapy of obesity: available medications and drugs under investigation.
Pilitsi, E., Farr, O. M., Polyzos, S. A., Perakakis, N., Nolen-Doerr, E., Papathanasiou, A.-E., & Mantzoros, C. S. (2019) · Metabolism · doi:10.1016/j.metabol.2018.10.010 · Cited by 248
Nuijten, M. A. H., Eijsvogels, T. M. H., Monpellier, V. M., Janssen, I. M. C., Hazebroek, E. J., & Hopman, M. T. E. (2022) · Obesity Reviews · doi:10.1111/obr.13370 · Cited by 236
Metadata
- Authors
- Kang, J. H., & Le, Q. A.
- Affiliations
- VA Loma Linda Healthcare System (US)
- Western University of Health Sciences (US)
- Corresponding author
- Le, Quang A.
- ORCID
- Le, Quang A.
- Venue
- Medicine
- Published
- 2017-11
- Volume
- 96
- Issue
- 46
- Pages
- e8632
- ISSN
- 0025-7974 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5704829
- OpenAlex
- W2769146779
- Cited by
- 183
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2026: 11 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 14
- FWCI
- 4.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-nd
- Locations
- Medicine (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Body Contouring and Surgery
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques
- Keywords
- bariatric surgery, obesity, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy, laparoscopic adjustable gastric band, weight loss, excess weight loss, body mass index reduction, surgical procedure comparison
- MeSH terms
- Humans, Obesity, Morbid, Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, 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
