620 Outcomes of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Conversion to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass for Morbid Obesity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introduction One anastomosis or ‘mini’ gastric bypass (OAGB) is a highly effective procedure to treat morbid obesity. However, conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for OAGB-related complications such as bile reflux is increasing. We therefore conducted the first systematic review to determine the weight outcomes, safety and efficacy associated with OAGB-RYGB conversion surgery. Method A systematic search was conducted by three independent reviewers using Medline, Embase and the Cochrane library following PRISMA guidelines. Data extracted included patient demographics, weight, and reflux outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The mean BMI difference was analysed using a random effects model. This study was registered on PROSPERO (Registration ID: CRD42022379759). Results 6 studies were selected which included data from 134 patients undergoing OAGB-RYGB conversion surgery. Follow-up ranged from 6-60 months. Patients' baseline BMI at conversion was 30.2 (S.D. 2.85). Common indications for conversion surgery were reflux (47.8%), malnutrition (31.3%) and inadequate weight loss (8.2%). Biliopancreatic limb length ranged from 50-200cm. Weighted mean of study outcomes demonstrated biliary reflux symptoms resolved in 90.9% cases (95 % CI 78.8-n100%). Studies reporting BMI at >24 months reported overall stable medium-term weight (mean BMI difference -0.71 (-4.03-2.61)) with moderate study heterogeneity (I2 = 82%). The rate of major post-op complications was 14.7% (6.25%-23.1%). Conclusions OAGB to RYGB conversion surgery is associated with a high resolution of reflux symptoms. However, it is associated with weight regain, albeit this may be acceptable to patients to treat biliary reflux as the weight gain is small and stable over the long-term.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.020 | 0.034 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".