Pre-Operative Gastroesophageal Reflux Does Not Affect 30-Day Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Revisional Bariatric Surgery to Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass (SADI): An Analysis of 933 Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The use of a single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI) as a revisional procedure in patients with pre-operative GERD is not well understood. Thirty-day outcomes in patients with pre-existing GERD undergoing revision with an SADI have not been previously reported. Methods: The Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program registry was consulted to identify patients undergoing revisional bariatric surgery with an SADI between 2020 and 2021. Our analysis sought to determine if preoperative GERD had significant impact on thirty-day outcomes. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify independent predictors of 30-day morbidity. Results: Preoperative GERD was seen in 342 patients (36.7%). Preoperative GERD was not associated with anastomotic leak (2.5% non-GERD cohort vs. 1.2% GERD cohort; p = 0.2) nor bleeding (1% non-GERD cohort vs. 1.8% GERD cohort; p = 0.33). There was no difference in thirty-day readmission (5.6% vs. 5.9%, p = 0.9), reintervention (2.4% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.2), or reoperation (3.6% vs. 2.05%; p = 0.19) rates. The multivariable regression analysis revealed that a history of myocardial infarction was associated with a significantly elevated risk of serious complication (OR 12.2; 95% CI 2.79–53.23; p = 0.001), as was dyslipidemia (OR 2.2; 95% CI 1.04–4.56; p = 0.04). Conclusions: Pre-operative GERD does not have any association with anastomotic leak, bleeding, thirty-day readmission, reintervention, or reoperation in patients undergoing revisional bariatric surgery to SADI. A history of myocardial infarction and dyslipidemia are independent predictors of post-operative thirty-day morbidity, irrespective of the presence of preoperative GERD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".