Case series / case reportcited by the Tayebat archiveabstract only checked A-BAR-10 standard review
Bowel obstruction after gastric bypass
Causes of small bowel obstruction after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a review of 2,395 cases at a single institution.
Overview
Elms L et al.. Surg Endosc 2014 · PMID 24380988 · DOI 10.1007/s00464-013-3361-1
About 4 in 100 patients needed another operation for possible bowel obstruction.
Does the study support the specific claim? Unclear · Methodological quality: low
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Complication causes
- How was the study done?
Retrospective review
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
2395
- What was actually found?
3.9% reoperation
- How large was the observed effect?
3.9%
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Late complications occur
- What are the study's limitations?
Single centre
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
General harm, not sleeve-specific
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Applicable
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Comparison with non-surgery
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- Elms L, Moon RC, Varnadore S, Teixeira AF, Jawad MA
- Journal
- Surg Endosc
- Year
- 2014
- Identifier
- PMID 24380988 DOI 10.1007/s00464-013-3361-1
- Verification
- verified – PubMed E-utilities efetch, 2026-10-25
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- abstract only
- Conflicts of interest and funding
COI: not stated in record | Grants: none listed
2. Research question
Causes of small bowel obstruction after laparoscopic RYGB
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Case series / case report – Retrospective single-institution review
- Population
LRYGB patients
- Country
USA
- Period
2004-2012
- Sample size
2395
4. Methods and endpoints
- Exposure / intervention
LRYGB
- Comparator
None
- Endpoints
Reoperation for SBO
5. Actual results
- Results
Reoperation rate for possible SBO 3.9%; adhesions 47.6% of reoperations; internal hernia 27.6%; overall internal hernia 1.1%.
- Absolute risks
3.9% reoperation for SBO
- Authors' conclusion
3.9% reoperation for abdominal pain/SBO; internal herniation 1.1% after closure of defects.
6. Strengths
- Large single-centre
7. Weaknesses
- Single centre
- Retrospective
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- none applicable
- Type of assessment
- simplified assessment (abstract only)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- some concerns
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Documents a real late complication of bypass.
11. Independent contrary findings
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
Applicable.
13. Overall methodological judgement
Valid descriptive data.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | low |
| Risk of bias | some concerns |
| Precision of results | moderate |
| Directness | indirect |
| Reproducibility | replicated |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | consistent |
| Regional transferability | moderate |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |
14. Open questions
15. Linked fact checks
Use by the Tayebat archive
Note: according to the archive, the studies were compiled by the archive operators. Whether Dr. Elawady himself cited this study is not established.
- What the archive says about the study
Listed in the archive bibliography only; the archive gives no specific interpretation.
- A. What was actually studied?
SBO after RYGB
- B. What did the authors find?
3.9% reoperation
- C. What conclusions do the authors themselves draw?
Adhesions frequent cause
- D. What does the archive derive from it?
General complication list.
- E. Is this derivation scientifically justified?
Not specifically used; relevant to bypass, not sleeve.
- Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)
- not applicable