Cohort studyindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key study I-BAR-106 in-depth review

40-year Utah study: deaths after weight-loss surgery

Long-term all-cause and cause-specific mortality for four bariatric surgery procedures.

Overview

Adams et al.. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2023 · PMID 36695060 · DOI 10.1002/oby.23646

Overall deaths were 16% lower after surgery, but suicide was about 2.4 times more frequent, mostly in young patients.

Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Long-term mortality by procedure and age

How was the study done?

Matched cohort

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

21,837 pairs

What was actually found?

Lower all-cause, CVD, cancer, diabetes deaths; more suicide

How large was the observed effect?

HR 0.84; suicide HR 2.4

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Benefit overall, specific mental-health risk

What are the study's limitations?

Self-reported control BMI

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Confirms suicide risk; contradicts general life-shortening

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Transferable

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Causation

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Adams et al.
Journal
Obesity (Silver Spring)
Year
2023
Identifier
PMID 36695060 DOI 10.1002/oby.23646
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26 + Crossref API
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
full text
Conflicts of interest and funding

Funding: Ethicon Endo-Surgery (Johnson & Johnson), NIH/NIDDK, NCRR, Intermountain foundation (full text).

2. Research question

What are long-term all-cause and cause-specific mortality after four bariatric procedures by age at surgery?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Cohort study – Retrospective matched cohort (Utah Population Database), surgery vs driver-licence controls, up to 40 y
Population

Utah bariatric patients 1982-2021 and matched non-surgical persons

Country

USA

Period

1982-2021

Sample size

21,837 matched pairs (RYGB 69.2%, sleeve 14.0%, band 12.0%, duodenal switch 4.8%)

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

1:1 matching on age, sex, BMI and date

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Bariatric surgery (4 procedures)

Comparator

Non-surgical persons from driver licence records

Endpoints

All-cause and cause-specific mortality

Statistical methods

Cox regression stratified by sex, procedure and age at surgery

5. Actual results

Results

All-cause mortality 16% lower (HR 0.84, 0.79-0.90); CVD -29%, cancer -43%, diabetes -72%. Suicide HR 2.4 (1.57-3.68), mainly in those aged 18-34 at surgery. Deaths in first year 111 (0.5%) vs 89 (0.4%), P=0.14 (full text).

Absolute risks

Over a median 10.8 y: deaths 13.5% (surgery) vs 14.6% (non-surgery) (full text).

Authors' conclusion

Reduced all-cause mortality was durable for decades and multiple procedures; suicide death rate higher after surgery, mainly in the youngest age group.

6. Strengths

  • Up to 40 y follow-up
  • Includes sleeve
  • Cause-specific deaths

7. Weaknesses

  • Controls from driver licences with self-reported BMI
  • No clinical data or weight follow-up
  • Industry co-funding
  • Shorter follow-up for sleeve

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
ROBINS-E
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns
Rationale

Control BMI self-reported; residual confounding.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

HR 0.84 is a modest relative reduction; suicide HR 2.4 with low absolute numbers.

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Balanced long-term evidence: overall survival benefit and a real suicide excess in young patients.

11. Independent contrary findings

Mostly RYGB.

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

US data; transferable.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Supports lower overall mortality and confirms excess suicide.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultshigh
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilityreplicated
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilitymoderate
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

Sleeve-specific suicide risk.

15. Linked fact checks