Cited by 220Bariatric Surgery and OutcomesBody Contouring and SurgeryCardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes

Predicting Risk for Serious Complications With Bariatric Surgery: Results from the Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative

Finks, Jonathan F., Kole, Kerry L., Yenumula, Panduranga R., English, Wayne J., Krause, Kevin R., Carlin, Arthur M., Genaw, Jeffrey A., Banerjee, Mousumi +2 more·2011·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To develop a risk prediction model for serious complications after bariatric surgery. BACKGROUND: Despite evidence for improved safety with bariatric surgery, serious complications remain a concern for patients, providers and payers. There is little population-level data on which risk factors can be used to identify patients at high risk for major morbidity. METHODS: The Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative is a statewide consortium of hospitals and surgeons, which maintains an externally-audited prospective clinical registry. We analyzed data from 25,469 patients undergoing bariatric surgery between June 2006 and December 2010. Significant risk factors on univariable analysis were entered into a multivariable logistic regression model to identify factors associated with serious complications (life threatening and/or associated with lasting disability) within 30 days of surgery. Bootstrap resampling was performed to obtain bias-corrected confidence intervals and c-statistic. RESULTS: Overall, 644 patients (2.5%) experienced a serious complication. Significant risk factors (P < 0.05) included: prior VTE (odds ratio [OR] 1.90, confidence interval [CI] 1.41-2.54); mobility limitations (OR 1.61, CI 1.23-2.13); coronary artery disease (OR 1.53, CI 1.17-2.02); age over 50 (OR 1.38, CI 1.18-1.61); pulmonary disease (OR 1.37, CI 1.15-1.64); male gender (OR 1.26, CI 1.06-1.50); smoking history (OR 1.20, CI 1.02-1.40); and procedure type (reference lap band): duodenal switch (OR 9.68, CI 6.05-15.49); laparoscopic gastric bypass (OR 3.58, CI 2.79-4.64); open gastric bypass (OR 3.51, CI 2.38-5.22); sleeve gastrectomy (OR 2.46, CI 1.73-3.50). The c-statistic was 0.68 (bias-corrected to 0.66) and the model was well-calibrated across deciles of predicted risk. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed and validated a population-based risk scoring system for serious complications after bariatric surgery. We expect that this scoring system will improve the process of informed consent, facilitate the selection of procedures for high-risk patients, and allow for better risk stratification across studies of bariatric surgery.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/sla.0b013e318230058c

Cites

32 of 32 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?

  • Among bariatric procedures, adjustable gastric banding has the lowest mortality rate (0.04%) and the lowest rate of serious complications (0.9%), while BPD/DS has the highest rate of serious complications (8%).

    “Restrictive procedures such as adjustable gastric banding have the lowest mortality rate (0.04%) and the lowest rate of serious complications (0.9%), while BPD/DS has the highest rate of serious complications (8%), although the weight loss response is quite impressive [113].”
  • The operative mortality rate after bariatric surgery is low relative to other major surgical procedures and ranges from 0.28% to 0.4%.

    “Relative to other major surgical procedures, the operative mortality rate after bariatric surgery is low and it ranges from 0.28% to 0.4% [110-113].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Finks, J. F., Kole, K. L., Yenumula, P. R., English, W. J., Krause, K. R., Carlin, A. M., Genaw, J. A., Banerjee, M., Birkmeyer, J. D., & Birkmeyer, N. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • St. John Macomb Oakland Hospital (US)
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Marquette General Hospital (US)
  • Beaumont Health (US)
Corresponding author
  • Finks, Jonathan F.
  • Carlin, Arthur M.
  • Genaw, Jeffrey A.
  • Birkmeyer, John D.
  • Birkmeyer, Nancy J.
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2011-10
Volume
254
Issue
4
Pages
633-640
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2066677668
Cited by
220
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 11
FWCI
21.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annals of Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (1r01hs018050-01a1)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Body Contouring and Surgery
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Keywords
bariatric surgery, postoperative complications, risk prediction model, risk factors, venous thromboembolism, mobility limitations, coronary artery disease, lung disease, smoking, duodenal switch, laparoscopic gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy, obesity, clinical registries, model validation, concordance index, calibration, 30-day morbidity
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Michigan, Middle Aged, Postoperative Complications, Severity of Illness Index, Risk Assessment, 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