Scholarlink

Objective <p>To compare the risk of gallstone formation after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).</p> Methods <p>We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase following PRISMA 2020. Eligible observational studies reported incident cholelithiasis after SG or RYGB. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using random-effects (DerSimonian–Laird). Prespecified subgroup analyses considered follow-up duration (&lt; 2 vs. ≥ 2 years).</p> Results <p>Ten studies (<i>n</i> = 195,665) met inclusion criteria. Overall, SG was associated with a lower risk of gallstone formation than RYGB (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53–0.88; <i>p</i> = 0.003; I²=75%). The protective association was evident in studies with &lt; 2 years of follow-up (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42–0.82; I²=46%) but not in ≥ 2-year follow-up (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.55–1.28; I²=70%). In influence analysis excluding the largest database study, the summary effect became statistically non-significant with extreme heterogeneity (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.03–2.72; I²=99%). Methodological quality was moderate to high (NOS 6–8/9).</p> Conclusions <p>SG is associated with a lower short-term risk of gallstone formation compared with RYGB, although results are heterogeneous and sensitive to study weight. Standardized outcome definitions, longer follow-up, and stratification by UDCA use are needed to refine comparative risk estimates.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparative Risk of Gallstone Formation After Sleeve Gastrectomy and Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月18日

查看全文
  • Wilson Silva-Chavez,
  • Alexander Bustamante-Cabrejo,
  • Jose Caballero-Alvarado,
  • Victor Lau-Torres,
  • Joaquin Sarmiento-Falen,
  • Carlos Zavaleta-Corvera

摘要

Objective

To compare the risk of gallstone formation after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

Methods

We searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase following PRISMA 2020. Eligible observational studies reported incident cholelithiasis after SG or RYGB. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS). Pooled odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using random-effects (DerSimonian–Laird). Prespecified subgroup analyses considered follow-up duration (< 2 vs. ≥ 2 years).

Results

Ten studies (n = 195,665) met inclusion criteria. Overall, SG was associated with a lower risk of gallstone formation than RYGB (OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.53–0.88; p = 0.003; I²=75%). The protective association was evident in studies with < 2 years of follow-up (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.42–0.82; I²=46%) but not in ≥ 2-year follow-up (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.55–1.28; I²=70%). In influence analysis excluding the largest database study, the summary effect became statistically non-significant with extreme heterogeneity (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.03–2.72; I²=99%). Methodological quality was moderate to high (NOS 6–8/9).

Conclusions

SG is associated with a lower short-term risk of gallstone formation compared with RYGB, although results are heterogeneous and sensitive to study weight. Standardized outcome definitions, longer follow-up, and stratification by UDCA use are needed to refine comparative risk estimates.