MATERIAL AND METHODS: RCTs comparing the weight loss outcomes following LVSG and LRYGB in adult population between January 2000 and November 2015 were selected from PubMed, Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index, Current Contents, and the Cochrane database. The review was prepared in accordance with Preferred Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).
RESULTS: Nine unique RCTs described over 10 publications involving a total of 865 patients (LVSG, n=437; LRYGB, n=428) were analyzed. Postoperative follow-up ranged from 3 months to 5 years. Twelve-month excess weight loss (EWL) for LVSG ranged from 69.7% to 83%, and for LRYGB, ranged from 60.5% to 86.4%. A number of studies reported slow weight gain between the second and third years of postoperative follow-up ranging from 1.4% to 4.2%EWL. This trend was seen to continue to 5 years postoperatively (8% to 10%EWL) for both procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, LRYGB and LVSG are comparable with regards to the weight loss outcomes in the short term, with LRYGB achieving slightly greater weight loss. Slow weight recidivism is observed after the first postoperative year following both procedures. Long-term reporting of outcomes obtained from well-designed studies using intention-to-treat analyses are identified as a major gap in the literature at present.
METHODS: Electronic databases (Pubmed, EMBASE, CINAHL) were searched for RCTs conducted in adults (>18y) that compared the 5-year- outcomes of LVSG to LRYGB and described comorbidity outcomes were included. Where data allowed, effect sizes were calculated using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman estimation method for random effects model. Presence of bias was assessed with Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 and funnel plots, and certainty of evidence evaluated by GRADE. The study prospectively registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018112054).
RESULTS: Three RCTs (LVSG=254, LRYGB=255) met inclusion criteria and reported on chronic disease outcomes. Improvement and/or resolution of hypertension favoured LRYGB (odds ratio 0.49, 95% CI 0.29, 0.84; P =0.03). Trends favoring LRYGB were seen for type 2 diabetes and dysplidemia, and LVSG for sleep apnea and back/joint conditions ( P >0.05). The certainty of evidence associated with each assessed outcome ranged from low to very low, in the setting of 'some' to 'high' bias assessed as being present.
CONCLUSION: Both LRYGB and LVSG are effective in providing long-term improvements in commonly experienced obesity-related comorbidities; however, the limited certainty of the evidence does not allow for strong clinical conclusions to be made at this time regarding benefit of one procedure over the other.
METHODS: RCTs comparing the early complication rates following LVSG and LRYGB between 2000 and 2015 were selected from PubMed, Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index, Current Contents, and the Cochrane database. The outcome variables analyzed included 30-day mortality, major and minor complications and interventions required for their management, length of hospital stay, readmission rates, operating time, and conversions from laparoscopic to open procedures.
RESULTS: Six RCTs involving a total of 695 patients (LVSG n = 347, LRYGB n = 348) reported on early major complications. A statistically significant reduction in relative odds of early major complications favoring the LVSG procedure was noted (p = 0.05). Five RCTs representing 633 patients (LVSG n = 317, LRYGB n = 316) reported early minor complications. A non-statically significant reduction in relative odds of 29 % favoring the LVSG procedure was observed for early minor complications (p = 0.4). However, other outcomes directly related to complications which included reoperation rates, readmission rate, and 30-day mortality rate showed comparable effect size for both surgical procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis and systematic review of RCTs suggests that fewer early major and minor complications are associated with LVSG compared with LRYGB procedure. However, this does not translate into higher readmission rate, reoperation rate, or 30-day mortality for either procedure.
DESIGN: A systematic review was conducted using electronic databases of CINAHL, PubMed, PsychINFO, Psychology and Behavioural Sciences Collection, SocINDEX and Web of Science for articles published until the 11th of January 2018.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: All observational studies investigating the association between social support and depression among community-dwelling older adults in Asia were included.
PARTICIPANTS: Older adults aged 60 years and more who are living in the community.
EXPOSURE MEASURES: Social support.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Depression.
RESULTS: We retrieved16 356 records and screened 66 full-text articles. Twenty-four observational studies were included in the review. They consisted of five cohort studies and 19 cross-sectional studies. Social support was found to be measured by multiple components, most commonly through a combination of structural and functional constructs. Perceived social support is more commonly measured compared with received social support. Good overall social support, having a spouse or partner, living with family, having a large social network, having more contact with family and friends, having emotional and instrumental support, good support from family and satisfaction with social support are associated with less depressive symptoms among community-dwelling older adults in Asia.
CONCLUSIONS: There were 20 different social support measures and we applied a framework to allow for better comparability. Our findings emphasised the association between good social support and decrease depression among older adults. Compared with western populations, family support has a greater influence on depression among community-dwelling older adults in Asia. This indicates that the family institution needs to be incorporated into designed programmes and interventions when addressing depression in the Asian context. TRIAL : registration number : CRD42017074897.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Randomized controlled trials evaluating the effects of these 2 treatment modalities were searched from PubMed and other electronic databases between January 1991 and July 2018. The outcome variables analyzed included operating time, complications, recurrence of HH or wrap migration, reoperation, hospital stay and quality of life.
RESULTS: Five randomized controlled trials totaling 478 patients (suture=222, mesh=256) were analyzed. For reoperation variable, the odds ratio was significantly 3.26 times higher for the suture group. For recurrence of HH, the odds ratio for the suture group was nonsignificantly 1.65 times higher compared with the mesh group. Comparable effects were noted for all other variables.
CONCLUSIONS: Mesh repair seems to be superior to suture cruroplasty for large HH repair. Therefore, the routine use of mesh may be advantageous in selected cases.
METHODS: Self-administered questionnaires were distributed to 233 undergraduate dental students involved with clinical teaching. This modified and validated questionnaire focusing on students' learning environment was used in order to gain relevant information related to dental clinical teaching. Six domains with different criteria applicable to clinical teaching in dentistry were selected consisting of modelling (four criteria), coaching (four criteria), scaffolding (four criteria), articulation (four criteria), reflection (two criteria) and general learning environment (six criteria). Data analyses were performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 20.
RESULTS: Majority of the students expressed positive perceptions on their clinical learning experience towards the clinical teachers in the Faculty of Dentistry, University of Malaya, in all criteria of the domains. Few negative feedbacks concerning the general learning environment were reported.
CONCLUSION: Further improvement in the delivery of clinical teaching preferably by using wide variety of teaching-learning activities can be taken into account through students' feedback on their learning experience.
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 5-year postoperative GERD data comparing LVSG and LRYGB in adults were undertaken. Electronic databases were searched from January 2015 to March 2024 for publications meeting inclusion criteria. The Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model was applied to estimate pooled odds ratio where meta-analysis was possible. Bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 and GRADE.
RESULTS: Five RCTs were analysed (LVSG n = 554, LRYGB n = 539). LVSG was associated with increased adverse GERD outcomes compared to LRYGB at 5 years. The odds for revisional surgery to treat GERD in LVSG patients were 11 times higher compared to LRYGB (OR 11.47, 95% CI 1.83 to 71.69; p = 0.02; I2 = 0% High level of certainty). Similarly pharmacological management for increasing GERD was significantly more frequent in LVSG patients compared to LRYGB (OR 3.89, 95% CI 2.31 to 6.55; p ≤ 0.01; I2 = 0% Moderate level of certainty). Overall, LVSG was associated with significantly more interventions (both medical and surgical) for either worsening GERD and/or development of de novo GERD compared to LRYGB (OR 5.98, 95% CI 3.48 to 10.29; p ≤ 0.01; I2 = 0%) Moderate level of certainty).
CONCLUSIONS: The development and worsening of GERD symptoms are frequently associated with LVSG compared to LRYGB at 5 years postoperatively requiring either initiation or increase of pharmacotherapy or failing that revisional bariatric surgery. Appropriate patient/surgical selection is crucial to reduce these postoperative risks of GERD.