Health Outcomes of Gastric Bypass Patients Compared to Nonsurgical, Nonintervened Severely Obese

Favorable health outcomes at 2 years postbariatric surgery have been reported. With exception of the Swedish Obesity Subjects (SOS) study, these studies have been surgical case series, comparison of surgery types, or surgery patients compared to subjects enrolled in planned nonsurgical intervention. This study measured gastric bypass effectiveness when compared to two separate severely obese groups not participating in designed weight-loss intervention. Three groups of severely obese subjects (N = 1,156, BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2) were studied: gastric bypass subjects (n = 420), subjects seeking gastric bypass but did not have surgery (n = 415), and population-based subjects not seeking surgery (n = 321). Participants were studied at baseline and 2 years. Quantitative outcome measures as well as prevalence, incidence, and resolution rates of categorical health outcome variables were determined. All quantitative variables (BMI, blood pressure, lipids, diabetes-related variables, resting metabolic rate (RMR), sleep apnea, and health-related quality of life) improved significantly in the gastric bypass group compared with each comparative group (all P < 0.0001, except for diastolic blood pressure and the short form (SF-36) health survey mental component score at P < 0.01). Diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension resolved much more frequently in the gastric bypass group than in the comparative groups (all P < 0.001). In the surgical group, beneficial changes of almost all quantitative variables correlated significantly with the decrease in BMI. We conclude that Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery when compared to severely obese groups not enrolled in planned weight-loss intervention was highly effective for weight loss, improved health-related quality of life, and resolution of major obesity-associated complications measured at 2 years

Culprit vessel–only versus multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction

Background The optimal revascularization strategy in patients with multivessel disease presenting with cardiogenic shock complicating ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction remains unknown. Methods and Results Databases were searched from 1999 to October 2016. Studies comparing immediate/single-stage multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI) versus culprit vessel-only PCI (CO-PCI) in patients with multivessel disease, ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, and cardiogenic shock were included. Primary end point was short-term (in-hospital or 30 days) mortality. Secondary end points included long-term mortality, cardiovascular death, reinfarction, and repeat revascularization. Safety end points were in-hospital stroke, renal failure, and major bleeding. The meta-analysis included 11 nonrandomized studies and 5850 patients (1157 MV-PCI and 4693 CO-PCI). There was no significant difference in short-term mortality with MV-PCI versus CO-PCI (odds ratio [OR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-1.43; P=0.61). Similarly, there were no significant differences in long-term mortality (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.54-1.30; P=0.43), cardiovascular death (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.42-1.23; P=0.23), reinfarction (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 0.84-3.26; P=0.15), or repeat revascularization (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.76-1.69; P=0.54) between the 2 groups. There was a nonsignificant trend toward higher in-hospital stroke (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.98-2.72; P=0.06) and renal failure (OR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.98-1.72; P=0.06), with no difference in major bleeding (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.39-5.63; P=0.57) with MV-PCI when compared with CO-PCI. Conclusions This meta-analysis of nonrandomized studies suggests that in patients with cardiogenic shock complicating ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, there may be no significant benefit with single-stage MV-PCI compared with CO-PCI. Given the limitations of observational data, randomized trials are needed to determine the role of MV-PCI in this settin