Comparison of Quality of Life One Year after Bariatric Intervention: Systematic Review of the Literature with Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis

Authors: Piotr Tylec, Alicja Dudek, Grzegorz Torbicz, Magdalena Mizera, Natalia Gajewska, Michael Su, Tanawat Vongsurbchart, Tomasz Stefura, Magdalena Pisarska, Mateusz Rubinkiewicz, Piotr Malczak, Piotr Major, Michal Pedziwiatr

Abstract:

Introduction: Quality of life after bariatric surgery is an important factor when evaluating the final result of the treatment. Considering the vast surgical options, we tried to globally compare available methods in terms of quality of following the surgery. The aim of the study is to compare the quality of life a year after bariatric intervention using network meta-analysis methods. Material and Methods: We performed a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines with Bayesian network meta-analysis. Inclusion criteria were: studies comparing at least two methods of weight loss treatment of which at least one is surgical, assessment of the quality of life one year after surgery by validated questionnaires. Primary outcomes were quality of life one year after bariatric procedure. The following aspects of quality of life were analyzed: physical, emotional, general health, vitality, role physical, social, mental, and bodily pain. All questionnaires were standardized and pooled to a single scale. Lifestyle intervention was considered as a referenced point. Results: An initial reference search yielded 5636 articles. 18 studies were evaluated. In comparison of total score of quality of life, we observed that laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) (median (M): 3.606, Credible Interval 97.5% (CrI): 1.039; 6.191), laparoscopic Roux en-Y gastric by-pass (LRYGB) (M: 4.973, CrI: 2.627; 7.317) and open Roux en-Y gastric by-pass (RYGB) (M: 9.735, CrI: 6.708; 12.760) had better results than other bariatric intervention in relation to lifestyle interventions. In the analysis of the physical aspects of quality of life, we notice better results in LSG (M: 3.348, CrI: 0.548; 6.147) and in LRYGB procedure (M: 5.070, CrI: 2.896; 7.208) than control intervention, and worst results in open RYGB (M: -9.212, CrI: -11.610; -6.844). Analyzing emotional aspects, we found better results than control intervention in LSG, in LRYGB, in open RYGB, and laparoscopic gastric plication. In general health better results were in LSG (M: 9.144, CrI: 4.704; 13.470), in LRYGB (M: 6.451, CrI: 10.240; 13.830) and in single-anastomosis gastric by-pass (M: 8.671, CrI: 1.986; 15.310), and worst results in open RYGB (M: -4.048, CrI: -7.984; -0.305). In social and vital aspects of quality of life, better results were observed in LSG and LRYGB than control intervention. We did not find any differences between bariatric interventions in physical role, mental and bodily aspects of quality of life. Conclusion: The network meta-analysis revealed that better quality of life in total score one year after bariatric interventions were after LSG, LRYGB, open RYGB. In physical and general health aspects worst quality of life was in open RYGB procedure. Other interventions did not significantly affect the quality of life after a year compared to dietary intervention.

Keywords: bariatric surgery, network meta-analysis, quality of life, one year follow-up