Why the study?
Single-anastomosis gastric bypass variants (sleeve gastrectomy with transit bipartition, SG-TB) have emerged as simplified metabolic procedures, but their comparative efficacy and safety remained to be systematically evaluated.
Does sleeve gastrectomy with transit bipartition (SG-TB) improve weight loss and metabolic outcomes compared to sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in patients with severe obesity?
Does sleeve gastrectomy with transit bipartition (SG-TB) improve weight loss and metabolic outcomes compared to sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in patients with severe obesity?
SG-TB offers superior weight loss compared to sleeve gastrectomy and achieves metabolic outcomes equivalent to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, positioning it as an effective surgical option for severe obesity.
May warrant SG-TB preference over SG in severe obesity; extends evidence for efficacy while metabolic equivalence to RYGB needs confirmatory RCTs.
Single-anastomosis gastric bypass variants, collectively termed sleeve gastrectomy with transit bipartition (SG-TB), have emerged as simplified metabolic procedures. This meta-analysis compares the efficacy and safety of SG-TB against sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). We systematically searched multiple databases through September 2025 for comparative studies. Random-effects models were used for meta-analysis, calculating mean differences (MD) and odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Twenty studies were included. Compared to SG, SG-TB resulted in significantly greater 1-year total weight loss (TWL MD = 3.5%, CI 1.5–5.5%) and excess weight loss (EWL MD = 10.8%, CI 8.6–13.0%). For type 2 diabetes remission, SG-TB showed a positive trend but with substantial uncertainty (OR = 2.74, CI 0.61–12.32). SG-TB demonstrated significantly higher GERD remission rates versus SG (OR = 6.90, CI 1.98–24.09). Weight loss and diabetes remission were comparable between SG-TB and RYGB. Nutritional assessment revealed generally comparable profiles, with SG-TB showing better iron/vitamin B12 preservation versus RYGB but lower vitamin D levels versus SG. SG-TB had a comparable short-term safety profile to both SG and RYGB, with no significant differences in perioperative complications, despite a longer operative time versus SG. SG-TB procedures offer superior weight loss compared to SG and achieve metabolic outcomes equivalent to RYGB, with a comparable short-term safety profile. The substantial uncertainty in diabetes remission estimates against SG warrants cautious interpretation. These findings position SG-TB as a compelling and effective surgical option for severe obesity and related metabolic disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jin et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: