MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379980827 · doi:10.1093/bjs/znad178.040

The Impact of the Gastric Pouch and Gastro-Jejunostomy Size after Laparoscopic Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass - A Prospective, CT-Volumetry Based Study

2023· article· en· W4379980827 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ioannis Lazaridis, Marko Kraljević, Thomas Köstler, Diana Mattiello, Andreas Y. Andreou, Urs Zingg, Tarik Delko

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish journal of surgery · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineJejunostomyRoux-en-Y anastomosisPouchWeight lossGastric bypassBody mass indexQuality of life (healthcare)SurgeryGastroenterologyProspective cohort studyInternal medicineObesityParenteral nutrition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Some patients who undergo laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) may present with insufficient weight loss or weight regain. Anatomical factors that may lead to failure of LRYGB include the size of the gastric pouch and the diameter of the gastro-jejunostomy. Aims This study explores the gastric pouch size and the size of the gastro-jejunostomy after LRYGB and investigates their impact on weight loss, appetite and quality of life (QoL). Methods Patients undergoing LRYGB in a single centre underwent computed tomography (CT) with oral contrast one day and one year after LRYGB. Volumetry of the gastric pouch and calculation of the size of the gastro-jejunostomy was performed. Appetite was assessed pre-operatively and one year after LRYGB using the Edmonton Appetite Assessment questionnaire. QoL was assessed pre-operatively one year after surgery using the GIQLI and BAROS questionnaires. Results 61 patients were included. Of those, 55 patients (90.2%) underwent CT one year after LRYGB. The mean preoperative Body Mass Index was 40.7±3.97kg/m2. The mean Excess weight loss (%EWL) one year after surgery was 82.1±21.5%. There was no significant change in mean gastric pouch size one day and one year after LYRGB (15.73±11.8cm3 and 14.4±11.5cm3, respectively, p=0.55). The mean size of the gastrojejunostomy increased significantly from 2.63cm2 to 3.60cm2 (p<0.0001). Mean GIQLI and BAROS values improved significantly one year after LRYGB, but no significant changes in the mean Edmonton Appetite Assessment values were found. %EWL and improvement in GIQLI and BAROS values one year after surgery did not correlate with the initial size of the gastric pouch and the increase of the size of the gastro-jejunostomy. Conclusions One year after LRYGB, the size of the gastro-jejunostomy increased significantly, but no difference in the gastric pouch volume was found. Both gastric pouch volume and dilatation of the gastro-jejunostomy did not correlate with weight loss and QoL outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish journal of surgerySame topicBariatric Surgery and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207