Literature DB >> 22923311

Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database (BOLD) suggests excess weight loss and excess BMI loss to be inappropriate outcome measures, demonstrating better alternatives.

Arnold van de Laar1.   

Abstract

Excess weight loss (%EWL) results show significant variation by initial body mass index (BMI): the heavier the patient, the lower the result. It is unclear whether this effect originates from the arithmetic construction of this outcome measure or from any true difference in bariatric impact on heavier and lighter patients. Outcome measures generating inappropriate variation would actually be unsuited for bariatric reports with possible implications on existing bariatric evidence. Nadir weight loss results after laparoscopic gastric bypass in 7,212 women from the Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database (BOLD) are calculated for %EWL and 26 different relative measures using the formula 100% × (initial BMI - nadir BMI)/(initial BMI - a), with reference point 0 ≤ a ≤ 25. Variations by initial BMI and deviations in results using each relative measure are compared. Mean initial BMI, 47.5 kg/m(2). Mean nadir BMI, 28.9 kg/m(2). Mean nadir results of the lighter (A) and heavier (B) halves (2× n=3, 606) by reference point, a=25 (excess BMI loss (%EBMIL)), 95.3% (A)-77.2% (B); a=ideal weight (%EWL), 81.7% (A)-70.4% (B); a=10, 49.6% (A)-49.7% (B); a=0 (total weight loss (%TWL)), 37.7% (A)-40.2% (B). Variation by initial BMI is significant using all relative measures, except those with a = 9 (p = 0.396) and a = 10 (p = 0.504). The smallest variation coefficient is 21.5% at 8 ≤ a ≤ 14. Gastric bypass works equally effective for all female patients, reducing the part of body mass above 10 kg/m(2) by an average of 49.6%, regardless of their initial BMI. In contrast, %EWL and %EBMIL generate variation by initial BMI, providing lighter patients inappropriately with better results, potentially interfering with the significance of bariatric evidence. These two most widespread used outcome measures in bariatric surgery are therefore actually unsuited for comparing patients or groups. This BOLD data makes a strong argument for abandoning %EWL and %EBMIL altogether and reporting bariatric relative outcome as %TWL only.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22923311     DOI: 10.1007/s11695-012-0736-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Obes Surg        ISSN: 0960-8923            Impact factor:   4.129


  11 in total

1.  Standards for Reporting Results.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 4.129

2.  Laparoscopic gastric bypass versus laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding: a comparative study of 1,200 cases.

Authors:  Laurent Biertho; Rudolf Steffen; Thomas Ricklin; Fritz F Horber; Alfons Pomp; William B Inabnet; Daniel Herron; Michel Gagner
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 6.113

Review 3.  Preoperative predictors of weight loss following bariatric surgery: systematic review.

Authors:  Masha Livhits; Cheryl Mercado; Irina Yermilov; Janak A Parikh; Erik Dutson; Amir Mehran; Clifford Y Ko; Melinda Maggard Gibbons
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.129

4.  1983 metropolitan height and weight tables.

Authors: 
Journal:  Stat Bull Metrop Life Found       Date:  1983 Jan-Jun

Review 5.  Critical analysis of long term weight loss following gastric bypass.

Authors:  R B Reinhold
Journal:  Surg Gynecol Obstet       Date:  1982-09

6.  Relative outcome measures for bariatric surgery. Evidence against excess weight loss and excess body mass index loss from a series of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients.

Authors:  Arnold van de Laar; Laura de Caluwé; Bruno Dillemans
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 4.129

7.  Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity: technique and preliminary results of our first 400 patients.

Authors:  K D Higa; K B Boone; T Ho; O G Davies
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2000-09

8.  Mortality of eating disorders: a follow-up study of treatment in a specialist unit 1974-2000.

Authors:  Agneta M Rosling; Pär Sparén; Claes Norring; Anne-Liis von Knorring
Journal:  Int J Eat Disord       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 4.861

9.  Minimal reporting requirements for weight loss: current methods not ideal.

Authors:  John B Dixon; Tracey McPhail; Paul E O'Brien
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 4.129

10.  Twenty years of biliopancreatic diversion: what is the goal of the surgery?

Authors:  Simon Biron; Frédéric-Simon Hould; Stéfane Lebel; Simon Marceau; Odette Lescelleur; Serge Simard; Picard Marceau
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.129

View more
  30 in total

1.  Comparability of weight loss reporting after gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy using BOLD data 2008-2011.

Authors:  John P Sczepaniak; Milton L Owens; Heena Shukla; John Perlegos; William Garner
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 4.129

Review 2.  Behavioural Interventions for Severe Obesity Before and/or After Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Fiona Stewart; Alison Avenell
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 4.129

3.  Reply to the Letter to Editor Entitled "The %EBMIL/%EWL Double-Booby Trap. A Comment on Studies that Compare the Effect of Bariatric Surgery Between Heavier and Lighter Patients".

Authors:  Ji Yeon Park; Yong Jin Kim
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.129

4.  The %EBMIL/%EWL Double Booby-Trap. A Comment on Studies that Compare the Effect of Bariatric Surgery Between Heavier and Lighter Patients.

Authors:  A W van de Laar
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.129

5.  Total Weight Loss as the Outcome Measure of Choice After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.

Authors:  Ricard Corcelles; Mena Boules; Dvir Froylich; Amani Hag; Christopher R Daigle; Ali Aminian; Stacy A Brethauer; Barto Burguera; Philip R Schauer
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 4.129

6.  Red cell distribution width is a novel biomarker that predicts excess body-mass index loss 1 year after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

Authors:  Eric S Wise; Kyle M Hocking; Adam Weltz; Anna Uebele; Jose J Diaz; Stephen M Kavic; Mark D Kligman
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Validating the alterable weight loss (AWL) metric with 2-year weight loss outcome of 500 patients after gastric bypass.

Authors:  A W van de Laar; M H Dollé; L M de Brauw; S C Bruin; Y I Acherman
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 4.129

8.  Health Disparities in Adolescent Bariatric Surgery: Nationwide Outcomes and Utilization.

Authors:  Omar Nunez Lopez; Daniel C Jupiter; Fredrick J Bohanon; Ravi S Radhakrishnan; Kanika A Bowen-Jallow
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  2017-09-01       Impact factor: 5.012

9.  The Impact of Preoperative BMI (Obesity Class I, II, and III) on the 12-Month Evolution of Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass.

Authors:  Eva M Ramírez; Omar Espinosa; Ricardo Berrones; Elisa M Sepúlveda; Lizbeth Guilbert; Miguel Solís; Carlos Zerrweck
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 4.129

10.  Weight-Independent Percentile Chart of 2880 Gastric Bypass Patients: a New Look at Bariatric Weight Loss Results.

Authors:  Arnold W van de Laar; Maurits de Brauw; Sjoerd C Bruin; Yair I Acherman
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 4.129

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.