Cohort studyindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key study I-BAR-127 in-depth review

Swedish 25-year study: alcohol problems after obesity surgery

Alcohol use disorder and alcohol-related mortality after metabolic bariatric surgery: prospective controlled cohort study.

Overview

Sjöholm et al.. Br J Surg 2025 · PMID 41066138 · DOI 10.1093/bjs/znaf211

Alcohol use disorder and alcohol-related deaths were several times more frequent after surgery, especially after gastric bypass.

Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: high

Original publication

Plain-language summary

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

AUD and alcohol deaths after MBS

How was the study done?

Prospective controlled study

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

4,047

What was actually found?

GBP AUD aHR 5.07; alcohol death sub-HR 6.18

How large was the observed effect?

Absolute 1.5 vs 0.3/1000 PY

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Alcohol risk needs monitoring

What are the study's limitations?

No sleeve patients

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Supports the claim

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Directly European

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Sleeve-specific risk

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Sjöholm et al.
Journal
Br J Surg
Year
2025
Identifier
PMID 41066138 DOI 10.1093/bjs/znaf211
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26 + Crossref API
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
full text
Conflicts of interest and funding

Swedish Research Council and other public foundations; funders had no role. Some authors report industry honoraria/consultancy (full text).

2. Research question

Is metabolic bariatric surgery associated with alcohol use disorder and alcohol-related mortality?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Cohort study – Prospective controlled intervention study (Swedish Obese Subjects), up to 35 y follow-up
Population

SOS participants with severe obesity (surgery vs matched usual care)

Country

Sweden

Period

1987-2001 inclusion; median follow-up 25.2 y

Sample size

2,007 surgery (266 GBP, 376 banding, 1,365 VBG), 2,040 controls

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

SOS cohort; prior AUD excluded in main analysis

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

GBP, VBG, gastric banding

Comparator

Usual obesity care

Endpoints

AUD diagnoses (patient register), alcohol-related mortality (cause of death register)

Statistical methods

Cox and Fine-Gray competing-risk models

5. Actual results

Results

AUD: GBP aHR 5.07 (3.11-8.25); VBG 2.28 (1.56-3.34); banding 2.34 (1.37-4.01) vs usual care. Alcohol-related mortality: GBP sub-HR 6.18 (2.48-15.40); VBG 3.56 (1.79-7.08); banding 2.52 (0.89-7.15). 45 vs 13 alcohol-related deaths; rates 1.5 (GBP) vs 0.3 (controls) per 1000 person-years.

Absolute risks

Alcohol-related deaths 1.5 vs 0.3 per 1000 person-years (GBP vs usual care).

Authors' conclusion

Managing alcohol-related complications requires preoperative risk assessment, postoperative monitoring and access to AUD treatment.

6. Strengths

  • Prospective controlled design
  • Median 25 y follow-up
  • Register outcomes

7. Weaknesses

  • No sleeve gastrectomy patients
  • Non-randomised allocation
  • Primary care AUD diagnoses missed

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

Patient-chosen allocation; matched design.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

CI log-symmetric (stats/I-BAR-127_sos_alcohol_2025.py); absolute excess ~1.2 deaths/1000 PY after GBP.

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Strong long-term evidence that alcohol problems and alcohol deaths increase after bariatric surgery (not sleeve-specific).

11. Independent contrary findings

Sleeve not studied.

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

Swedish.

13. Overall methodological judgement

High-quality evidence supporting C-BAR-07.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualityhigh
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultsmoderate
Directnessindirect
Reproducibilityreplicated
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilityhigh
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

Sleeve-specific AUD risk.

15. Linked fact checks