Article

Bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis 55455, USA.
JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association (Impact Factor: 30.39). 11/2004; 292(14):1724-37. DOI: 10.1001/jama.292.14.1724
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT About 5% of the US population is morbidly obese. This disease remains largely refractory to diet and drug therapy, but generally responds well to bariatric surgery.
To determine the impact of bariatric surgery on weight loss, operative mortality outcome, and 4 obesity comorbidities (diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and obstructive sleep apnea).
Electronic literature search of MEDLINE, Current Contents, and the Cochrane Library databases plus manual reference checks of all articles on bariatric surgery published in the English language between 1990 and 2003. Two levels of screening were used on 2738 citations.
A total of 136 fully extracted studies, which included 91 overlapping patient populations (kin studies), were included for a total of 22,094 patients. Nineteen percent of the patients were men and 72.6% were women, with a mean age of 39 years (range, 16-64 years). Sex was not reported for 1537 patients (8%). The baseline mean body mass index for 16 944 patients was 46.9 (range, 32.3-68.8).
A random effects model was used in the meta-analysis. The mean (95% confidence interval) percentage of excess weight loss was 61.2% (58.1%-64.4%) for all patients; 47.5% (40.7%-54.2%) for patients who underwent gastric banding; 61.6% (56.7%-66.5%), gastric bypass; 68.2% (61.5%-74.8%), gastroplasty; and 70.1% (66.3%-73.9%), biliopancreatic diversion or duodenal switch. Operative mortality (< or =30 days) in the extracted studies was 0.1% for the purely restrictive procedures, 0.5% for gastric bypass, and 1.1% for biliopancreatic diversion or duodenal switch. Diabetes was completely resolved in 76.8% of patients and resolved or improved in 86.0%. Hyperlipidemia improved in 70% or more of patients. Hypertension was resolved in 61.7% of patients and resolved or improved in 78.5%. Obstructive sleep apnea was resolved in 85.7% of patients and was resolved or improved in 83.6% of patients.
Effective weight loss was achieved in morbidly obese patients after undergoing bariatric surgery. A substantial majority of patients with diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, and obstructive sleep apnea experienced complete resolution or improvement.

3 Followers
 · 
291 Views
  • Source
    Turkish Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism 03/2015; 19(1):14-18. DOI:10.4274/tjem.2717
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Whether overweight or obese end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients are suitable for renal transplantation (RT) is often debated. The objective of this review and meta-analysis was to systematically investigate the outcome of low versus high BMI recipients after RT. Comprehensive searches were conducted in MEDLINE OvidSP, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Embase, and CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library 2014, issue 8). We reviewed four major guidelines that are available regarding (potential) RT recipients. The methodology was in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and written based on the PRISMA statement. The quality assessment of studies was performed by using the GRADE tool. A meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.3. Random-effects models were used. After identifying 5,526 studies addressing this topic, 56 studies were included. We extracted data for 37 outcome measures (including data of more than 209,000 RT recipients), of which 26 could be meta-analysed. The following outcome measures demonstrated significant differences in favour of low BMI (<30) recipients: mortality (RR = 1.52), delayed graft function (RR = 1.52), acute rejection (RR = 1.17), 1-, 2-, and 3-year graft survival (RR = 0.97, 0.95, and 0.97), 1-, 2-, and 3-year patient survival (RR = 0.99, 0.99, and 0.99), wound infection and dehiscence (RR = 3.13 and 4.85), NODAT (RR = 2.24), length of hospital stay (2.31 days), operation duration (0.77 hours), hypertension (RR = 1.35), and incisional hernia (RR = 2.72). However, patient survival expressed in hazard ratios was in significant favour of high BMI recipients. Differences in other outcome parameters were not significant. Several of the pooled outcome measurements show significant benefits for 'low' BMI (<30) recipients. Therefore, we postulate that ESRD patients with a BMI >30 preferably should lose weight prior to RT. If this cannot be achieved with common measures, in morbidly obese RT candidates, bariatric surgery could be considered.
    BMC Medicine 05/2015; 13(1-1):111. DOI:10.1186/s12916-015-0340-5 · 7.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Obesity and its associated morbidities pose a major health hazard to the public. Despite a multiplex of available diet and exercise programs for losing and maintaining weight, over the past years, interest in the use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for obesity treatment has greatly increased. We searched PubMed, Google scholar and the Cochrane databases for systemic reviews, review articles, meta-analysis and randomized clinical trials up to December 2013. In this review, the efficacy and safety of the more commonly used CAM methods for the treatment of obesity, namely herbal supplements, acupuncture, and non-invasive body-contouring, are briefly discussed. The evidence supporting the effectiveness and safety of these methods is either lacking or point to a negligible clinical benefit, barely surpassing that of the placebo. Furthermore, several limitations are observed in the available scientific literature. These shortcomings include, without being limited to, uncontrolled trial designs, non-random allocation of subjects to treatment arms, small number of patients enrolled, short durations of follow-up, and ambiguous clinical and laboratory endpoints. Further investigations are necessary to accurately determine the efficacy, safety, standard dosage/procedure, and potential side effects of the various CAM methods currently in use.
    04/2015; 13(2):e19678. DOI:10.5812/ijem.19678

Preview

Download
10 Downloads
Available from