{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2025,7,30]],"date-time":"2025-07-30T11:45:18Z","timestamp":1753875918095,"version":"3.41.2"},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Oxford University Press (OUP)","issue":"Supplement_5","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,1]],"date-time":"2025-02-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1738368000000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/pages\/standard-publication-reuse-rights"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":[],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,26]]},"abstract":"Abstract<\/jats:title>\n \n Background<\/jats:title>\n Despite metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) being an effective treatment for clinically severe obesity, some patients experience insufficient weight loss (IWL) and weight regain (WR). MBS also has a significant impact on obesity-related comorbidities, perhaps not reflected in categorical definitions of IWL and WR. Therefore, MBS success should not only be measured by a percentage of weight change. Our study aims to investigate whether the definitions of anthropometric criteria used to determine unsuccessful weight loss have clinical significance for MBS unsuccess.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Methods<\/jats:title>\n We conducted a single-centre retrospective cohort study with 1042 consecutive patients submitted to MBS between 2019 and 2021. In terms of anthropometric criteria, at 2 years of follow-up, unsuccessful weight loss was explored as IWL and WR, both as a dichotomous (IWL defined as percentage of total weight loss (%TWL) &lt;20% and WR as an increase in excess weight loss (%EWL) &gt;30% from nadir) and a continuous variable. MBS clinical unsuccess was defined as a composite endpoint including the worsened or unchanged comorbidities (hypertension, type 2 diabetes, dyslipidaemia, and OSA), need for revisional bariatric surgery and mortality at 90 days. Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristic (AUC-ROC) curve was computed to evaluate model performance.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Results and Discussion<\/jats:title>\n At 2 years of follow-up, for dichotomous definitions (defining anthropometric unsuccessful weight loss), AUC-ROC showed that any anthropometric criteria weren\u2019t good enough to predict unsuccess of bariatric surgery, although IWR was significantly superior to WR [Fig. 1, AUC IWL 0.54 (95%c.i.: 0.52\u20130.56); AUC WR 0.51 (95% c.i.: 0.49\u20130.52), P = 0.001]. For continuous variables (Fig. 2), AUC-ROC for TWL was 0.62 (95% c.i.: 0.58\u20130.66) and for EWL was 0.58 (95% c.i.: 0.54\u20130.62), suggesting that for the definition of anthropometric criteria (both IWL and WR) a new cut-off could improve prediction of MBS clinical unsuccess.<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>\n \n Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n The present study shows how different definitions of IWL and WR could not reflect the outcomes of MBS, since no single anthropometric criteria can reliably predict the unsuccess of metabolic bariatric surgery (remission of comorbidities, need for revisional surgery, and mortality).<\/jats:p>\n <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1093\/bjs\/znaf036.066","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,26]],"date-time":"2025-02-26T05:20:05Z","timestamp":1740547205000},"source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":0,"title":["IBC Oxford University Poster Abstract 15 - Unsuccess of metabolic and bariatric surgery\u2014beyond the anthropometric criteria: a retrospective cohort study"],"prefix":"10.1093","volume":"112","author":[{"given":"F","family":"Amorim-Cruz","sequence":"first","affiliation":[]},{"given":"H","family":"Santos-Sousa","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"J","family":"Nogueiro","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"S","family":"Vaz","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"P","family":"Vieira-Sousa1","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"B","family":"Peleteiro","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"J","family":"Lemos","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"F","family":"Resende","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"A","family":"Costa-Pinho","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"J","family":"Preto","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"P","family":"Freitas","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"S","family":"Carneiro","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]},{"given":"E Lima","family":"da-Costa","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[]}],"member":"286","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,26]]},"container-title":["British Journal of Surgery"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/bjs\/article-pdf\/112\/Supplement_5\/znaf036.066\/62170403\/znaf036.066.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"syndication"},{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/bjs\/article-pdf\/112\/Supplement_5\/znaf036.066\/62170403\/znaf036.066.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,26]],"date-time":"2025-02-26T05:20:06Z","timestamp":1740547206000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/academic.oup.com\/bjs\/article\/doi\/10.1093\/bjs\/znaf036.066\/8042667"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,2]]},"references-count":0,"journal-issue":{"issue":"Supplement_5","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,26]]},"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,26]]}},"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1093\/bjs\/znaf036.066","relation":{},"ISSN":["0007-1323","1365-2168"],"issn-type":[{"type":"print","value":"0007-1323"},{"type":"electronic","value":"1365-2168"}],"subject":[],"published-other":{"date-parts":[[2025,2]]},"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,2]]},"article-number":"znaf036.066"}}