One-anastomosis gastric bypass vs sleeve gastrectomy for diabetes remission and weight loss: A meta-analysis

Table 1 Basic characteristics of patients who underwent conventional treatment and bariatric surgery, mean ± SD

Ref.	Age (years), OAGB	Age (years), SG	Females, OAGB	Females, SG	BMI (kg/m2), OAGB	BMI (kg/m2), SG	Outcomes	Comments
Musella et al[24]	48.5 ± 8.7	49.2 ± 9.1	39.6%	27.3%	48.3 ± 9.2	48.1 ± 7.8	DR & EWL%	More females in OAGB
Abdel-Rahim et al[26]	42.9 ± 6.17	42.95 ± 7.63	65%	85%	50.88±3.99	47.77 ± 6.18	DR & EWL%	Higher BMI in OAGB
Ahmad et al[27]	47.1 ± 10.8	44.6 ± 10.9	59.1%	60.9%	43.04 ± 7.87	42.85 ± 5.02	DR	No significant differences at the baseline
Abdelshafy et al[28]	44.2 ± 4.99	43.6 ± 3.7	64.5%	64.5%	44.2 ± 4.99	43.6 ± 3.7	DR	No significant differences at the baseline
Dayan et al[29]	67.6 ± 2.8	67.6 ± 2.6	61.4%	61.4%	41.8 ± 7.8	43.3 ± 5.9	DR & EWL%	No significant differences at the baseline
Madhok et al[31]	45.0 ± 25	51 ± 30	47.4%	55.4%	67.0 ± 60	65.0 ± 60	DR & EWL%	OAGB were younger, more males
Milone et al[32]	34.9 ± 6.01	33.7 ± 5.61	62.2%	53.5%	47.3 ± 3.88	46.0 ± 4.77	DR & EWL%	More women in OAGB
Toksoy et al[33]	43.9 ± 12.1	40.5 ± 10.8	65.3%	59.3%	43.1 ± 3.9	42.2 ± 4.5	DR	OAGB were older
Alkhalifah et al[36]	33.8 ± 10.4.1	35.2 ± 10	70%	74.9%	40.4 ± 7.7	36.4 ± 7.6	DR & EWL%	Higher BMI in OAGB
Catro et al[37]	42.4 ± 11	43.5 ± 10.2	73.2%	75.9%	43.8 ± 9.2	45.2 ± 9.2	DR & EWL%	No significant differences at the baseline
Das et al[38]	47.1	46.7	84.2%	69.2%	47.1 ± 9.75	52.7 ± 7.17	DR & EWL%	Less body mass index in OAGB
Ding et al[39]	46	30	15.4%	80%	34.7	43.8	DR	OAGB were older, fewer females, and had lower BMI
Gambardella et al[40]	40.1 ± 5.1	38.9 ± 4.6	45%	44.5%	47.1 ± 2.3	46.2 ± 3.6	DR & EWL%	No significant differences at the baseline
Jammu and Sharma[41]	38	23	71.2%	45.4%	42.5	35	DR	OAGB were older, more females, and high BMI
Jain et al[42]	42.9±14.0	39.9±11.7	38.6%	35%	44.3±7.88	44.5±7.16	DR & EWL%	OAGB were older
Kansou et al[43]	41.2 ± 11.3	41.2 ± 12.3	93.4%	91.9%	42.8 ± 5.0	43.4 ± 6.5	DR & EWL%	No significant differences at the baseline
Kular et al[44]	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	DR & EWL%	NA
Moradi et al[45]	47.3 ± 10.2	47.5 ± 10.9	77.3%	80.1%	44.6 ± 7.0	43.8 ± 6.9	DR	No significant differences at the baseline
Plamper et al[46]	42. ± 11	44 ± 11	76.2%	61.8%	54.1 ± 6.6	54.6 ± 10.3	DR & EWL%	OAGB younger, more females, less BMI
Ruiz-Tovar et al[47]	43.8 ± 11.5	43.9 ± 10.9	75%	75%	45 ± 4.1	46.5 ± 3.4	DR & EWL%	No significant differences at the baseline
Schmitz et al[48]	39.11 ± 0.9	41.57 ± 1.07	74.5% vs 58.1%	58.1%	64.14 ± 0.3	66.91 ± 0.6	DR & EWL%	More females, lower BMI in OAGB
Seetharamaiah et al[49]	42.89 ± 14.02	39.89 ± 11.75	62%	65%	44.32 ± 7.88	44.57 ± 7.16	DR & EWL%	No significant differences at the baseline
Shen et al[50]	42.9	42.9	NA	NA	39.0 ± 7.2	39.0 ± 7.2	DR	NA
Shivakumar et al[51]	42.9 ± 14.02	39.9 ± 11.75	61.3%	65%	44.3 ± 7.88	44.6 ± 7.16	DR & EWL%	OAGB were older
Singla et al[52]	Matched	Matched	Matched	Matched	> 50	> 50	DR & EWL%	No significant differences at the baseline
Tabesh et al[53]	41.54 ± 11.20	41.42 ± 11.77	76%	84.4%	46 ± 6.15	455.71	24 years, 17.2% vs 12.9% diabetes	Higher BMI in OAGB
Toh et al[54]	47 ± 9	40 ± 11	69.8%	61.8%	40.3 ± 9.1	43±7.9	DR & EWL%	OAGB were older with lower BMI
Vrakopoulou et al[55]	46.6 ± 7.8	45.9 ± 7.5	60%	57.1%	52.7 ± 10.8	52.2 ± 8.6	DR & EWL%	No significant differences at the baseline
Wazir et al[56]	48.21 ± 9.77	48.21 ± 9.77	70.2% females	70.2% females	49.80 ± 6.225	49.80 ± 6.225	DR	Not assessed
Sari et al[57]	20-59	20-59	79.6% females	79.6% females	≥ 35	≥ 35	DR & EWL%	Not assessed
Yang et al[58]	NA	NA	NA	NA	32.1 ± 10.3	33.9 ± 9.4	DR & EWL%	No significant differences at the baseline

OAGB: One-anastomosis gastric bypass; NA: Not available; SG: Sleeve gastrectomy; BMI: Body mass index; DR: Diabetes remission; EWL: Excess weight loss.