FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2955123744> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2955123744 endingPage "1646" @default.
• W2955123744 startingPage "1646" @default.
• W2955123744 abstract "We appreciate the interest in and the thoughtful comments by Magouliotis et al. regarding our paper entitled “Comparison of one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and Roux-en-Y-gastric bypass (RYGB) for treatment of obesity: a 5-year study” [ [1] Bhandari M, Nautiyal HK, Kosta S, Mathur W, Fobi M. Comparison of one-anastomosis gastric bypass and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for treatment of obesity: a 5-year study. Surg Obes Relat Dis. In press 2019. Google Scholar ]. We appreciate the corroboration of the essential findings in our study by their updated meta-analysis [ [2] Magouliotis DE, Tasiopoulou VS, Tzovaras G. One anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity: an updated meta-analysis. Obes Surg. Epub 2019 Jun 6. Google Scholar ]. Though there is still need for further studies, particularly prospective randomized studies, our findings that the OAGB is a less demanding operation that takes less operating time and is more effective for weight loss compared with the RYGB is similar to other reports [ [2] Magouliotis DE, Tasiopoulou VS, Tzovaras G. One anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity: an updated meta-analysis. Obes Surg. Epub 2019 Jun 6. Google Scholar ]. Also, the increased incidence of protein malnutrition after the OAGB compared with the RYGB in our study supports other reports [ [3] Robert M. Espalieu P. Pelascini E. et al. Efficacy and safety of one anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for obesity (YOMEGA): a multicentre, randomized, open-label, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2019; 393: 1299-1309 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (166) Google Scholar ]. Unveiling the malabsorptive nature of one anastomosis gastric bypass: a closer lookSurgery for Obesity and Related DiseasesVol. 15Issue 9PreviewWe read with great interest the article by Bhandari et al. [1] evaluating the outcomes after either one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Given the significance of the presented evidence, we would like to further stress certain points in conjunction with the data reported in our recent meta-analysis [2]. Full-Text PDF" @default.
• W2955123744 created "2019-07-12" @default.
• W2955123744 creator A5007265821 @default.
• W2955123744 creator A5010619454 @default.
• W2955123744 creator A5021334037 @default.
• W2955123744 creator A5066564476 @default.
• W2955123744 creator A5073565543 @default.
• W2955123744 date "2019-09-01" @default.
• W2955123744 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2955123744 title "Reply to letter to the editor: Comparison of one-anastomosis gastric bypass and Roux-en-Y-gastric bypass for treatment of obesity: a 5-year study" @default.
• W2955123744 cites W2920729423 @default.
• W2955123744 cites W2944848623 @default.
• W2955123744 cites W2948760334 @default.
• W2955123744 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2019.06.031" @default.
• W2955123744 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31427223" @default.
• W2955123744 hasPublicationYear "2019" @default.
• W2955123744 type Work @default.
• W2955123744 sameAs 2955123744 @default.
• W2955123744 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2955123744 countsByYear W29551237442021 @default.
• W2955123744 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2955123744 hasAuthorship W2955123744A5007265821 @default.
• W2955123744 hasAuthorship W2955123744A5010619454 @default.
• W2955123744 hasAuthorship W2955123744A5021334037 @default.
• W2955123744 hasAuthorship W2955123744A5066564476 @default.
• W2955123744 hasAuthorship W2955123744A5073565543 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConcept C136269033 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConcept C2779400339 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConcept C3019402062 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConcept C3020583074 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConcept C511355011 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConcept C544821477 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConcept C61434518 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConcept C8443397 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConceptScore W2955123744C126322002 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConceptScore W2955123744C136269033 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConceptScore W2955123744C141071460 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConceptScore W2955123744C168563851 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConceptScore W2955123744C2779400339 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConceptScore W2955123744C3019402062 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConceptScore W2955123744C3020583074 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConceptScore W2955123744C511355011 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConceptScore W2955123744C544821477 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConceptScore W2955123744C61434518 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConceptScore W2955123744C71924100 @default.
• W2955123744 hasConceptScore W2955123744C8443397 @default.
• W2955123744 hasIssue "9" @default.
• W2955123744 hasLocation W29551237441 @default.
• W2955123744 hasLocation W29551237442 @default.
• W2955123744 hasOpenAccess W2955123744 @default.
• W2955123744 hasPrimaryLocation W29551237441 @default.
• W2955123744 hasRelatedWork W2036319525 @default.
• W2955123744 hasRelatedWork W2064166124 @default.
• W2955123744 hasRelatedWork W2293896959 @default.
• W2955123744 hasRelatedWork W2330173280 @default.
• W2955123744 hasRelatedWork W2472793945 @default.
• W2955123744 hasRelatedWork W2594192747 @default.
• W2955123744 hasRelatedWork W2907936542 @default.
• W2955123744 hasRelatedWork W2955123744 @default.
• W2955123744 hasRelatedWork W4248036565 @default.
• W2955123744 hasRelatedWork W4255309634 @default.
• W2955123744 hasVolume "15" @default.
• W2955123744 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2955123744 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2955123744 magId "2955123744" @default.
• W2955123744 workType "article" @default.