Nezam El-Tayebat Fact CheckA scientific assessment of the “نظام الطيبات” nutrition system
Choose country
Choose language: English

Mostly false Scientifically refuted Certainty of evidence: moderate provisional C-BAR-03

After sleeve gastrectomy reflux is inevitable, and patients must take acid-suppressing drugs for life.

In short: This claim is mostly false: reflux after sleeve gastrectomy is common (new reflux in roughly one in four to one in three patients, and much more acid-suppressant use than after bypass), but it is not inevitable and most patients do not need lifelong acid suppression.
Conclusion: Mostly false: reflux after sleeve is common (roughly 1 in 4 to 1 in 3 new cases) but not inevitable, and most patients do not need lifelong acid suppression.
  1. Original statement
  2. Scientific assessment
  3. Scientific evidence in detail
  4. In plain language
  5. Studies on this claim
  6. Regional context
  7. What applies in my country?
  8. References

Original statement

هو التكميم اصلا بيخلي الارتجاع حتمي

verbatim according to source. Translation by the project; the Arabic wording is authoritative.

Translation

After sleeve gastrectomy reflux is inevitable, and patients must take acid-suppressing drugs for life.

Origin

Source status
Video transcript (own words)
Attribution
Elawady (machine transcript)
Video
Dr.D Clinics - Diaa Al Awady is live!التكميم (Open source)
Published
6 May 2025
Timestamp
0:18:44 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
Attribution uncertainty
Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps available.
Claimed mechanism

The small tube-shaped stomach cannot hold contents, so everything refluxes.

Claimed health effect

Universal reflux, lifelong PPI dependence.

Population concerned

All sleeve patients

Geographic restriction by Elawady

none found

Diverging source versions

Source status
Video transcript (own words)
Attribution
Elawady (machine transcript)
Video
الخوف حقيقه ام سراب. أضرار التكميم. بين الحقيقه والسراب (Open source)
Published
19 November 2025
Timestamp
not available (transcript has no timings)
Attribution uncertainty
Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps available.

Scientific assessment

Mostly false – Essential parts of the statement are not supported by the evidence or are strongly exaggerated.

Certainty of evidence: moderate – Further research may still affect the assessment.

1. What was claimed?

That reflux affects every sleeve patient and requires lifelong PPIs.

2. What is demonstrably correct?

Reflux is frequent; PPI use is about 3.65 times more common after sleeve (I-BAR-04); one cross-sectional study found GERD symptoms in 76% at 5+ years (A-BAR-09).

3. What is wrong or exaggerated?

'Inevitable' is an exaggeration: in SLEEVEPASS 69% had no esophagitis at 10 years; in SM-BOSS reflux worsened in 31.8% and remitted in 25%.

4. What remains unclear?

Proportion needing lifelong PPIs varies widely between studies.

5. Which studies support it?

A-BAR-09, I-BAR-04; Danish national data show PPI initiation about 7 times more frequent after sleeve than bypass (I-BAR-144); in a randomised population 50% of sleeve patients used PPIs at 7.5 years (I-BAR-145).

6. Which studies contradict it?

A-BAR-07, I-BAR-05; meta-analyses of long-term studies: de novo reflux in about 23-25% (I-BAR-109, I-BAR-110) and GERD in about 35% (I-BAR-112), i.e. most patients do not develop new reflux; severe oesophagitis about 3% (I-BAR-111).

7. What applies to Germany and Europe?

Most key data are European (Sweden SOS/SOReg, Finland SLEEVEPASS, Switzerland SM-BOSS). European and international society guidelines consider bariatric surgery for severe obesity with lifelong follow-up.

8. What is known about Egypt?

No Egypt-specific outcome data were identified in this review. Elawady states in a transcript that sleeve gastrectomy is very widely performed in Egypt ('مصر كلها بتعملها'); the procedure-specific risks (reflux, deficiencies) apply wherever it is performed, and follow-up quality (supplements, endoscopy, mental-health screening) determines part of the risk.

9. What practical conclusion is appropriate?

Reflux risk should be discussed before sleeve; it is common but not universal.

Assessment details

Rationale for certainty of evidence

RCT data show that a majority do not develop esophagitis or worsening reflux.

Source quality

RCTs and meta-analysis.

Regional transferability

Directly transferable.

Individual exceptions

A substantial minority (about one third) do develop worsened reflux.

Regional scope of the claim
general (biological/medical)
Last reviewed
26 October 2026 provisional

Scientific evidence in detail

Scientifically refuted – High-quality evidence shows the opposite, or the claim contradicts well-established physiology.

Research question: After sleeve gastrectomy, does every patient develop reflux and need lifelong acid-suppressing medication?

Research question in detail (PICO)
Population
Adults after sleeve gastrectomy
Intervention or exposure
Sleeve gastrectomy
Comparison
Preoperative status; gastric bypass
Geographic scope
universal biology
Outcomes
  • Proportion with de novo/persistent GERD
  • Proportion with long-term PPI use
  • Reflux remission

Study results as reported by the authors. Our assessment follows below.

What speaks for the claim?

What speaks against the claim?

What does the overall evidence say?

Editorial assessment based on the studies above – not itself a study result.

Which position is better supported?

Reflux after sleeve is common (roughly 1 in 4 to 1 in 3 new cases; up to about half using PPIs in some cohorts) but not inevitable; many patients have no reflux and some improve.

Why some studies weigh more

RCTs and long-term meta-analyses outweigh single-centre series with the highest rates.

Is a causal relationship established? Yes, established Sleeve causes reflux in a subset; it does not cause it in all.

Remaining uncertainty

Exact proportion on lifelong PPI therapy.

Justified conclusion

"Inevitable" and "for life for everyone" are false; "common" is correct.

Why do studies seem to disagree?

Rates differ widely (23% to 76%) because of definitions (symptoms vs pH testing vs endoscopy), selection and follow-up; none approach 100%.

Does this depend on the country?
General biological effects
Universal.
Eating habits
Not applicable (surgical procedure, not a food).
Origin of the food
Not applicable (surgical procedure, not a food).
Contaminants
Not applicable (surgical procedure, not a food).
National production conditions
Technique-dependent.
Legal rules
Not applicable.
Actual monitoring data
No Egyptian national bariatric registry data were found; one Egyptian single-surgeon series (I-BAR-105) and one Egyptian RCT (I-BAR-136) were identified.

A regional difference that changes the conclusion is not supported by robust data.

Statistical re-check
  • Proportion on PPI after sleeve in a randomised population – 13/26 (50%) after LSG at 7.5 y - frequent but not universal; small selected subgroup. recalculated
Certainty of the overall evidence (GRADE, simplified)
Main outcome
Proportion of sleeve patients with de novo GERD/long-term PPI need
Starting level
high (randomised trials)
Reasons for downgrading
  • inconsistency (wide range of estimates)
Result
moderate

Simplified assessment by a single reviewer, following the GRADE approach; not a formal GRADE panel. GRADE rates the body of evidence for one outcome, not individual studies.

Clinical guidelines and official statements checked
  • International expert consensus (Montpellier): GERD and LSG: First International Consensus Conference (I-BAR-113) (2020) · Original publication
    GERD is probably the main drawback of LSG; endoscopy before (92%) and after (78%) surgery; higher-grade oesophagitis and Barrett are contraindications to LSG; RYGB recommended for uncontrolled GERD after sleeve.
Search strategy

Documented literature searches for this review (search strings in the original database syntax).

DatabaseDateSearchLooking forHitsIncluded
PubMed26 October 2026(sleeve gastrectomy[ti]) AND (proton pump inhibitor*[tiab] OR PPI[tiab]) AND (long-term[tiab] OR 10-year[tiab] OR 10 years[tiab]) AND (reflux[tiab])supporting evidence37
Europe PMC26 October 2026TITLE:"sleeve gastrectomy" AND (ABSTRACT:"proton pump inhibitor" OR ABSTRACT:"PPI use") AND (TITLE:"long-term" OR TITLE:"10-year" OR TITLE:"ten-year" OR TITLE:"10 years")supporting evidence7
PubMed26 October 2026(sleeve gastrectomy[ti]) AND (reflux[ti] OR GERD[ti]) AND (resolution[ti] OR remission[ti] OR improvement[ti] OR improves[ti] OR decrease*[ti])contradicting evidence21
Europe PMC26 October 2026TITLE:"sleeve gastrectomy" AND (TITLE:"reflux" OR TITLE:"GERD") AND (TITLE:"improve*" OR TITLE:"resolution" OR TITLE:"remission" OR TITLE:"decrease*") AND PUB_YEAR:[2018 TO 2026]contradicting evidence15
Europe PMC26 October 2026TITLE:"sleeve gastrectomy" AND (TITLE:"reflux" OR TITLE:"GERD" OR TITLE:"esophagitis" OR TITLE:"Barrett") AND (PUB_TYPE:"Meta-Analysis" OR TITLE:"meta-analysis")both directions24

Open questions

Proportion of sleeve patients on continuous PPI beyond 10 years.

How deeply was this checked?

11 linked studies: 0 checked in full text (0 of them with a structured risk-of-bias assessment), 11 on the basis of the abstract, 0 bibliographically only. No formal assessment with two independent reviewers and no independent human expert review has taken place yet.

Last scientific review: 26 October 2026

History of the verdict
  1. 25 October 2026 · Phase 1 · Initial assessment: Mostly false (moderate)
  2. 26 October 2026 · Phase 4 (systematic evidence review) · Re-examined with extended evidence; verdict unchanged: Mostly false (moderate)
    Unchanged. New meta-analyses (I-BAR-109, I-BAR-110, I-BAR-112) and national PPI data (I-BAR-144) confirm frequent but not universal reflux.
    New sources: I-BAR-109 I-BAR-110 I-BAR-111 I-BAR-112 I-BAR-145 I-BAR-142 I-BAR-144

In plain language

Elawady said reflux is 'inevitable' after sleeve gastrectomy. Studies show reflux is common, but not universal. In randomized trials roughly one third of patients had worse reflux or inflammation of the gullet, while most did not. Some patients even had less reflux after surgery.

Studies on this claim

Studies supporting the claim (2)

  • Endoscopy 5+ years after sleeve

    Sebastianelli L et al.. Obes Surg 2019 · PMID 30666544 · DOI 10.1007/s11695-019-03704-y
    Cross-sectional studycited by the Tayebat archiveabstract checked

    About 1 in 5 had Barrett's changes; reflux symptoms rose from 22% to 76%.

    After sleeve gastrectomy reflux is inevitable, and patients must take acid-suppressing drugs for life.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Prevalence

    How was the study done?

    Cross-sectional

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    90

    What was actually found?

    High BE and GERD

    How large was the observed effect?

    BE 18.8%

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Reflux is frequent after sleeve

    What are the study's limitations?

    Small, no control

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports reflux claim

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    European

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Exact risk

    Scientific details →

  • Meta-analysis: Barrett's after sleeve

    Chandan S et al.. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2025 · PMID 39059544 · DOI 10.1016/j.cgh.2024.06.041
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key study

    About 5.6% developed new Barrett's esophagus; reflux and acid-medication use were about 3 times more frequent after sleeve.

    After sleeve gastrectomy reflux is inevitable, and patients must take acid-suppressing drugs for life.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    BE after SG

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    2046

    What was actually found?

    BE 5.6%; GERD x3

    How large was the observed effect?

    RR GERD 3.32

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Reflux is a major downside of sleeve

    What are the study's limitations?

    Heterogeneous observational

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports reflux/BE claim, not 'inevitable'

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cancer risk

    Scientific details →

Studies contradicting or limiting the claim (7)

  • Finnish trial: sleeve vs bypass after 10 years

    Salminen P et al.. JAMA Surg 2022 · PMID 35731535 · DOI 10.1001/jamasurg.2022.2229
    Randomised controlled trialcited by the Tayebat archiveabstract checked★ key study

    Esophagitis was found in 31% after sleeve vs 7% after bypass; Barrett's esophagus was 4% in both groups.

    After sleeve gastrectomy reflux is inevitable, and patients must take acid-suppressing drugs for life.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Compare sleeve vs bypass

    How was the study done?

    RCT with 10-year follow-up

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    240 patients

    What was actually found?

    More esophagitis after sleeve; Barrett's equal

    How large was the observed effect?

    31% vs 7%; BE 4% vs 4%

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Sleeve often causes reflux damage; bypass less so

    What are the study's limitations?

    Attrition; small

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports reflux claim, not sleeve-specific Barrett's

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Directly European

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cancer risk

    Scientific details →

  • Swiss trial: sleeve vs bypass

    Peterli R et al.. JAMA 2018 · PMID 29340679 · DOI 10.1001/jama.2017.20897
    Randomised controlled trialindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key study

    Reflux got worse in about 32% after sleeve vs 6% after bypass.

    After sleeve gastrectomy reflux is inevitable, and patients must take acid-suppressing drugs for life.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Compare procedures

    How was the study done?

    RCT

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    217

    What was actually found?

    More reflux after sleeve

    How large was the observed effect?

    31.8% vs 6.3%

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Reflux is common but not universal

    What are the study's limitations?

    Exploratory reflux outcome

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports increase, refutes 'inevitable'

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    European

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Long-term BE

    Scientific details →

  • Meta-analysis: reflux after sleeve

    Yeung et al.. Ann Surg 2020 · PMID 30921053 · DOI 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003275
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key study

    About 23 in 100 developed new reflux after sleeve, 28 in 100 had oesophagitis at long-term endoscopy, and 4 in 100 needed a second operation for reflux.

    About 1 in 4 develop de novo reflux - common, not inevitable.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Estimate reflux after sleeve

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    10,718 patients

    What was actually found?

    De novo reflux 23%; oesophagitis 28%; Barrett 8%

    How large was the observed effect?

    Proportions

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Reflux is a frequent downside, not universal

    What are the study's limitations?

    Heterogeneous, uncontrolled

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports "increases reflux"; contradicts "inevitable"

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cancer risk

    Scientific details →

  • Meta-analysis: reflux 4+ years after sleeve

    Hajibandeh et al.. Curr Obes Rep 2023 · PMID 37535236 · DOI 10.1007/s13679-023-00521-4
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key study

    About 1 in 4 developed new reflux and about 7 in 100 had Barrett changes; authors think the Barrett figure may be too high.

    De novo GORD 24.8%: about three in four do not develop it.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Long-term reflux complications

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    7,904 patients

    What was actually found?

    GORD 24.8%, BE 6.7%

    How large was the observed effect?

    Proportions

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Most patients do not get new reflux

    What are the study's limitations?

    Reporting bias

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Contradicts "inevitable"

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cancer risk

    Scientific details →

  • How often severe gullet inflammation follows sleeve

    Alqasem et al.. Obes Surg 2026 · PMID 41964778 · DOI 10.1007/s11695-026-08605-5
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    About 3 in 100 sleeve patients had severe inflammation of the gullet at endoscopy.

    Severe oesophagitis in about 3% - reflux is frequent but mostly not severe.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Severe oesophagitis after SG

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    1,587

    What was actually found?

    3% (7% in prospective studies)

    How large was the observed effect?

    Proportion

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Severe damage is uncommon

    What are the study's limitations?

    Small, observational

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Limits "inevitable" framing

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cancer risk

    Scientific details →

  • How often reflux disease develops after sleeve

    Trujillo et al.. Obes Surg 2024 · PMID 38483740 · DOI 10.1007/s11695-024-07163-y
    Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    About 1 in 3 patients developed reflux disease after sleeve (about 6 in 10 in trials with systematic testing).

    Upper estimates (58% in trials) still far from universal.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Incidence of GERD after LSG

    How was the study done?

    Meta-analysis

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    20,495

    What was actually found?

    35% overall

    How large was the observed effect?

    Proportion 0.35

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Reflux is common

    What are the study's limitations?

    Very heterogeneous

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports reflux claim; not "inevitable"

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Severity

    Scientific details →

  • Trial follow-up: Barrett changes 7 years after sleeve or bypass

    Lee et al.. ANZ J Surg 2025 · PMID 39829211 · DOI 10.1111/ans.19369
    Randomised controlled trialindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    Barrett changes were found in 8 of 26 examined sleeve patients and 3 of 22 bypass patients; the difference was not statistically certain.

    PPI use 50% after LSG - frequent, not universal.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    BE after LSG vs LRYGB

    How was the study done?

    RCT follow-up

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    48

    What was actually found?

    30.8% vs 13.6%

    How large was the observed effect?

    P=0.19

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Endoscopy checks may be useful

    What are the study's limitations?

    Small, selected

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Partly supports Barrett concern

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Applicable

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Cancer risk

    Scientific details →

Studies with mixed or unclear results (2)

  • Swiss trial: sleeve vs bypass after 10 years

    Kraljevic et al.. JAMA Surg 2025 · PMID 39969869 · DOI 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.7052
    Randomised controlled trialindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key study

    After more than 10 years, 3 in 10 sleeve patients needed a conversion operation (for reflux or weight) vs about 1 in 20 after bypass; new reflux was more common after sleeve.

    Reflux-driven conversions common but most SG patients were not converted.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    Compare long-term SG and RYGB

    How was the study done?

    RCT

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    217

    What was actually found?

    More conversions and de novo GERD after SG

    How large was the observed effect?

    29.9% vs 5.5% conversions

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Sleeve has more long-term reflux problems

    What are the study's limitations?

    Attrition

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Supports reflux and bypass-preference parts

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Directly European

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Mortality differences

    Scientific details →

  • Danish study: acid medicines after sleeve vs bypass

    Gormsen et al.. Int J Obes (Lond) 2024 · PMID 39043831 · DOI 10.1038/s41366-024-01593-5
    Cohort studyindependent cross-checkabstract checked

    Sleeve patients were much more likely to start acid-reducing medicines and to keep taking them than bypass patients.

    PPI initiation HR 7.06 vs RYGB; continuous use OR 1.45; universality not shown.

    Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim

    Original publication · Scientific details

    Study explained simply
    What did the researchers want to find out?

    PPI use after SG vs RYGB

    How was the study done?

    National cohort

    How many people, animals or samples were studied?

    17,740

    What was actually found?

    More PPI use after SG

    How large was the observed effect?

    HR 7.06

    What do the results mean in everyday life?

    Many sleeve patients need acid medicines

    What are the study's limitations?

    Small SG group

    What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

    Partly supports

    Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

    Directly European

    What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

    Lifelong need for all

    Scientific details →

Regional context

Germany / EU

Most key data are European (Sweden SOS/SOReg, Finland SLEEVEPASS, Switzerland SM-BOSS). European and international society guidelines consider bariatric surgery for severe obesity with lifelong follow-up.

Egypt

No Egypt-specific outcome data were identified in this review. Elawady states in a transcript that sleeve gastrectomy is very widely performed in Egypt ('مصر كلها بتعملها'); the procedure-specific risks (reflux, deficiencies) apply wherever it is performed, and follow-up quality (supplements, endoscopy, mental-health screening) determines part of the risk.

What applies in my country?

General scientific assessment

Mostly false Mostly false: reflux after sleeve is common (roughly 1 in 4 to 1 in 3 new cases) but not inevitable, and most patients do not need lifelong acid suppression.

This statement concerns biological or medical relationships. The scientific assessment above applies regardless of the country; country-specific food data do not change it.

References

  1. Systematic Endoscopy 5 Years After Sleeve Gastrectomy Results in a High Rate of Barrett's Esophagus: Results of a Multicenter Study.. Sebastianelli L et al.. Obes Surg 2019 · PMID 30666544 · DOI 10.1007/s11695-019-03704-y
  2. Risk of De Novo Barrett's Esophagus Post Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Studies With Long-Term Follow-Up.. Chandan S et al.. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2025 · PMID 39059544 · DOI 10.1016/j.cgh.2024.06.041
  3. Effect of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy vs Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass on Weight Loss, Comorbidities, and Reflux at 10 Years in Adult Patients With Obesity: The SLEEVEPASS Randomized Clinical Trial.. Salminen P et al.. JAMA Surg 2022 · PMID 35731535 · DOI 10.1001/jamasurg.2022.2229
  4. Effect of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy vs Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass on Weight Loss in Patients With Morbid Obesity: The SM-BOSS Randomized Clinical Trial.. Peterli R et al.. JAMA 2018 · PMID 29340679 · DOI 10.1001/jama.2017.20897
  5. Does Sleeve Gastrectomy Expose the Distal Esophagus to Severe Reflux?: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.. Yeung et al.. Ann Surg 2020 · PMID 30921053 · DOI 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003275
  6. Meta-analysis of Long-term De Novo Acid Reflux-Related Outcomes Following Sleeve Gastrectomy: Evidence Against the Need for Routine Postoperative Endoscopic Surveillance.. Hajibandeh et al.. Curr Obes Rep 2023 · PMID 37535236 · DOI 10.1007/s13679-023-00521-4
  7. Prevalence of Severe Erosive Esophagitis After Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.. Alqasem et al.. Obes Surg 2026 · PMID 41964778 · DOI 10.1007/s11695-026-08605-5
  8. Incidence of Post-operative Gastro-esophageal Reflux Disorder in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.. Trujillo et al.. Obes Surg 2024 · PMID 38483740 · DOI 10.1007/s11695-024-07163-y
  9. Long-term effect of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy on reflux and Barrett's oesophagus: a randomized controlled trial.. Lee et al.. ANZ J Surg 2025 · PMID 39829211 · DOI 10.1111/ans.19369
  10. Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass vs Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy for Obesity: The SM-BOSS Randomized Clinical Trial.. Kraljevic et al.. JAMA Surg 2025 · PMID 39969869 · DOI 10.1001/jamasurg.2024.7052
  11. Use of proton pump inhibitors after laparoscopic gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy: a nationwide register-based cohort study.. Gormsen et al.. Int J Obes (Lond) 2024 · PMID 39043831 · DOI 10.1038/s41366-024-01593-5

← Back to overview