Self-selection vs Randomized Assignment of Treatment for Appendicitis.

Importance: For adults with appendicitis, several randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that antibiotics are an effective alternative to appendectomy. However, it remains unknown how the characteristics of patients in such trials compare with those of patients who select their treatment and whether outcomes differ. Objective: To compare participants in the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) randomized clinical trial (RCT) with a parallel cohort study of participants who declined randomization and self-selected treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: The CODA trial was conducted in 25 US medical centers. Participants were enrolled between May 3, 2016, and February 5, 2020; all participants were eligible for at least 1 year of follow-up, with all follow-up ending in 2021. The randomized cohort included 1094 adults with appendicitis; the self-selection cohort included patients who declined participation in the randomized group, of whom 253 selected appendectomy and 257 selected antibiotics. In this secondary analysis, characteristics and outcomes in both self-selection and randomized cohorts are described with an exploratory analysis of cohort status and receipt of appendectomy. Interventions: Appendectomy vs antibiotics. Main Outcomes and Measures: Characteristics among participants randomized to either appendectomy or antibiotics were compared with those of participants who selected their own treatment. Results: Clinical characteristics were similar across the self-selection cohort (510 patients; mean age, 35.8 years [95% CI, 34.5-37.1]; 218 female [43%; 95% CI, 39%-47%]) and the randomized group (1094 patients; mean age, 38.2 years [95% CI, 37.4-39.0]; 386 female [35%; 95% CI, 33%-38%]). Compared with the randomized group, those in the self-selection cohort were less often Spanish speaking (n = 99 [19%; 95% CI, 16%-23%] vs n = 336 [31%; 95% CI, 28%-34%]), reported more formal education (some college or more, n = 355 [72%; 95% CI, 68%-76%] vs n = 674 [63%; 95% CI, 60%-65%]), and more often had commercial insurance (n = 259 [53%; 95% CI, 48%-57%] vs n = 486 [45%; 95% CI, 42%-48%]). Most outcomes were similar between the self-selection and randomized cohorts. The number of patients undergoing appendectomy by 30 days was 38 (15.3%; 95% CI, 10.7%-19.7%) among those selecting antibiotics and 155 (19.2%; 95% CI, 15.9%-22.5%) in those who were randomized to antibiotics (difference, 3.9%; 95% CI, -1.7% to 9.5%). Differences in the rate of appendectomy were primarily observed in the non-appendicolith subgroup. Conclusions and Relevance: This secondary analysis of the CODA RCT found substantially similar outcomes across the randomized and self-selection cohorts, suggesting that the randomized trial results are generalizable to the community at large. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.

Patient Factors Associated With Appendectomy Within 30 Days of Initiating Antibiotic Treatment for Appendicitis.

IMPORTANCE: Use of antibiotics for the treatment of appendicitis is safe and has been found to be noninferior to appendectomy based on self-reported health status at 30 days. Identifying patient characteristics associated with a greater likelihood of appendectomy within 30 days in those who initiate antibiotics could support more individualized decision-making. OBJECTIVE: To assess patient factors associated with undergoing appendectomy within 30 days of initiating antibiotics for appendicitis. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this cohort study using data from the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) randomized clinical trial, characteristics among patients who initiated antibiotics were compared between those who did and did not undergo appendectomy within 30 days. The study was conducted at 25 US medical centers; participants were enrolled between May 3, 2016, and February 5, 2020. A total of 1552 participants with acute appendicitis were randomized to antibiotics (776 participants) or appendectomy (776 participants). Data were analyzed from September 2020 to July 2021. EXPOSURES: Appendectomy vs antibiotics. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Conditional logistic regression models were fit to estimate associations between specific patient factors and the odds of undergoing appendectomy within 30 days after initiating antibiotics. A sensitivity analysis was performed excluding participants who underwent appendectomy within 30 days for nonclinical reasons. RESULTS: Of 776 participants initiating antibiotics (mean [SD] age, 38.3 [13.4] years; 286 [37%] women and 490 [63%] men), 735 participants had 30-day outcomes, including 154 participants (21%) who underwent appendectomy within 30 days. After adjustment for other factors, female sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.31), radiographic finding of wider appendiceal diameter (OR per 1-mm increase, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.00-1.18), and presence of appendicolith (OR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.28-3.10) were associated with increased odds of undergoing appendectomy within 30 days. Characteristics that are often associated with increased risk of complications (eg, advanced age, comorbid conditions) and those clinicians often use to describe appendicitis severity (eg, fever: OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.82-1.98) were not associated with odds of 30-day appendectomy. The sensitivity analysis limited to appendectomies performed for clinical reasons provided similar results regarding appendicolith (adjusted OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.49-3.91). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This cohort study found that presence of an appendicolith was associated with a nearly 2-fold increased risk of undergoing appendectomy within 30 days of initiating antibiotics. Clinical characteristics often used to describe severity of appendicitis were not associated with odds of 30-day appendectomy. This information may help guide more individualized decision-making for people with appendicitis.

Primary Gastrointestinal Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma of the Small and Large Intestines: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Primary gastrointestinal non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (PGINHL) of small and large intestines is a group of heterogeneous, rare malignancies. Optimal treatment practices remain undefined. METHODS: A systematic review (2003-2015) was performed to assess tumor characteristics, treatment practices, and treatment outcomes of PGINHL of small and large intestines. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies (1658 patients) were included; five focused on follicular lymphoma subtype. Of the non-follicular patients, 59.3% presented with abdominal pain, 37.2% were located in ileocecum, and 53.6% were diffuse large B cell lymphoma subtype. The majority of patients (60.7%) were treated with a combination of surgery and chemotherapy. Forty-three percent of studies concluded an overall survival benefit with surgery; none reported increased postoperative morbidity or mortality. Survival outcomes were not typically stratified by emergent versus elective surgery. Multivariate analysis within individual studies associated B cell lymphoma and ileocecum location with higher survival, while advanced stage and B symptoms were associated with poorer survival. Patients with asymptomatic follicular lymphoma had no progression with a watchful waiting approach. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with non-follicular small and large intestinal PGINHLs are treated with both chemotherapy and surgery. Although surgery appears to be an important part of the treatment algorithm, definitive statements regarding its survival benefit remain limited due to lack of patient stratification based on timing and indication for surgery.

The appropriateness method has acceptable reliability and validity for assessing overuse and underuse of surgical procedures.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the findings of methodological studies on the RAND/University of California Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) appropriateness method, which was developed to assess if variation in the use of surgical procedures is because of overuse and/or underuse. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A MEDLINE literature search was performed. Studies were included if they assessed the reliability or validity of the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method for a surgical procedure or the effect of altering panelist composition or eliminating in-person discussion between rating rounds. Information was abstracted on procedure, study design, and findings. RESULTS: One thousand six hundred one titles were identified, and 37 met the inclusion criteria. The test-retest reliability is good to very good (kappa, 0.64-0.81) for total knee and hip joint replacement, coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), and carotid endarterectomy (CEA). The interpanel reliability is moderate to very good (kappa, 0.52-0.83) for CABG and hysterectomy. Construct validity has been demonstrated by comparing the appropriateness method with guidelines and/or evidence-based approaches for endoscopy, colonoscopy, CABG, hysterectomy, and CEA. Predictive validity has been studied for cardiac revascularization, in which concordance with appropriateness classification is associated with better clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our findings support use of the appropriateness method to assess variation in the rates of the procedures studied by identifying overuse and underuse. Further methodological research should be conducted as appropriateness criteria are developed and implemented for a broader range of procedures.

Appropriate use of surgical procedures for patients with cancer.

With increasing focus on improving quality and promoting patient-centered care, ensuring that patients receive appropriate surgical procedures is paramount. The appropriateness method was developed to determine which patients should and should not undergo surgical intervention versus medical therapy. This method combines the best available evidence in the literature with expert opinion to produce explicit guidance for clinicians on the relative risks and benefits of a procedure for specific clinical indications. A coordinated effort to produce appropriateness criteria for surgical oncology could improve the quality of surgical care for patients with cancer if these criteria are integrated into routine clinical practice.

Preoperative predictors of weight loss following bariatric surgery: systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Obesity affects 32% of adults in the USA. Surgery generates substantial weight loss, but 20-30% fails to achieve successful weight loss. Our objective was to identify preoperative psychosocial factors associated with weight loss following bariatric surgery. METHODS: We performed a literature search of PubMed® and the Cochrane Database of Reviews of Effectiveness between 1988 and April 2010. Articles were screened for bariatric surgery and weight loss if they included a preoperative predictor of weight loss: body mass index (BMI), preoperative weight loss, eating disorders, or psychiatric disorder/substance abuse. One thousand seven titles were reviewed, 534 articles screened, and 115 included in the review. RESULTS: Factors that may be positively associated with weight loss after surgery include mandatory preoperative weight loss (7 of 14 studies with positive association). Factors that may be negatively associated with weight loss include preoperative BMI (37 out of 62 studies with negative association), super-obesity (24 out of 33 studies), and personality disorders (7 out of 14 studies). Meta-analysis revealed a decrease of 10.1% excess weight loss (EWL) for super-obese patients (95% confidence interval (CI) [3.7-16.5%]), though there was significant heterogeneity in the meta-analysis, and an increase of 5.9% EWL for patients with binge eating at 12 months after surgery (95% CI [1.9-9.8%]). CONCLUSIONS: Further studies are necessary to investigate whether preoperative factors can predict a clinically meaningful difference in weight loss after bariatric surgery. The identification of predictive factors may improve patient selection and help develop interventions targeting specific needs of patients.

Appropriateness criteria to assess variations in surgical procedure use in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically describe appropriateness criteria (AC) developed in the United States for surgical procedures and to summarize how these criteria have been applied to identify overuse and underuse of procedures in US populations. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE literature search performed in February 2010 and May 2011. STUDY SELECTION: Studies were included if they addressed the appropriateness of a surgical procedure using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Method. Non-US studies were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION: Information was abstracted on study design, surgical procedure, and reported rates of appropriate use, overuse, and underuse. Identified AC were cross-referenced with lists of common procedures from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample and the State Ambulatory Surgery databases. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 1601 titles were identified; 39 met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 17 developed AC and 27 applied AC to US populations. Appropriateness criteria have been developed for 16 surgical procedures. Underuse has only been studied for coronary artery bypass graft surgery, and rates range from 24% to 57%. Overuse has been more broadly studied, with rates ranging from 9% to 53% for carotid endarterectomy, 0% to 14% for coronary artery bypass graft, 11% to 24% for upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy, and 16% to 70% for hysterectomy. Appropriateness criteria exist for 10 of the 25 most common inpatient procedures and 6 of the 15 top ambulatory procedures in the United States. Most studies are more than 5 years old. CONCLUSIONS: Most existing AC are outdated, and AC have never been developed for most common surgical procedures. A broad and coordinated effort to develop and maintain AC would be required to implement this tool to address variation in the use of surgical procedures.

Impact of alvimopan (entereg) on hospital costs after bowel resection: results from a large inpatient database.

PURPOSE: Delayed gastrointestinal (GI) recovery after bowel resection is associated with longer hospital stays and increased health care costs. Alvimopan (Entereg), a peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor antagonist, accelerates GI recovery after bowel-resection surgery. We undertook a study to evaluate the economic impact of alvimopan in clinical practice. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective matched cohort study using data from a large national hospital database and identified adults who had undergone small-bowel or large-bowel resection with primary anastomosis. The patients were discharged between January 1, 2009, and June 30, 2009. The surgery was performed at a hospital where alvimopan was used at least once during the study period. We matched each alvimopan patient ("user") with two controls ("non-users"). The primary outcome of total hospital costs (including the cost of alvimopan) and secondary outcomes of cost components and length of stay were compared between groups. RESULTS: The final study cohort included 480 alvimopan patients and 960 matched controls. The mean total hospital cost was $12,865 for alvimopan patients, compared with $13,905 for controls, for a difference of $1,040 (P = 0.033). There was a non-significant trend toward lower ileus-related costs between groups ($83 for alvimopan vs. $114 for controls, P = 0.086). Pharmacy and diagnostic radiology costs did not differ significantly. The mean length of stay was 5.6 days for alvimopan patients and 6.5 days for controls (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients receiving alvimopan capsules had significantly lower total hospital costs compared with controls. Along with other initiatives to improve quality and reduce costs of surgical care, alvimopan might be a good choice for use in the perioperative management of patients who undergo segmental bowel resection with primary anastomosis.

Risk of surgery following recent myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the impact of recent myocardial infarction (MI) on outcomes after subsequent surgery in the contemporary clinical setting. BACKGROUND: Prior work shows that a history of a recent MI is a risk factor for complications following noncardiac surgery. However, this data does not reflect current advances in clinical management. METHODS: Using the California Patient Discharge Database, we retrospectively analyzed patients undergoing hip surgery, cholecystectomy, colectomy, elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, and lower extremity amputation from 1999 to 2004 (n = 563,842). Postoperative 30-day MI rate, 30-day mortality, and 1-year mortality were compared for patients with and without a recent MI using univariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression. Relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals were estimated using bootstrapping with 1000 repetitions. RESULTS: Postoperative MI rate for the recent MI cohort decreased substantially as the length of time from MI to operation increased (0-30 days = 32.8%, 31-60 days = 18.7%, 61-90 days = 8.4%, and 91-180 days = 5.9%), as did 30-day mortality (0-30 days = 14.2%, 31-60 days = 11.5%, 61-90 days = 10.5%, and 91-180 days = 9.9%). MI within 30 days of an operation was associated with a higher risk of postoperative MI (RR range = 9.98-44.29 for the 5 procedures), 30-day mortality (RR range, 1.83-3.84), and 1-year mortality (RR range, 1.56-3.14). CONCLUSIONS: A recent MI remains a significant risk factor for postoperative MI and mortality following surgery. Strategies such as delaying elective operations for at least 8 weeks and medical optimization should be considered.

Coronary revascularization after myocardial infarction can reduce risks of noncardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest that preoperative coronary revascularization overall does not improve outcomes after noncardiac surgery. It is not known whether this holds true for high-risk patients with a history of recent MI. Our objective was to determine whether preoperative revascularization improves outcomes after noncardiac surgery in patients with a recent MI. STUDY DESIGN: Using the California Patient Discharge Database, we retrospectively analyzed patients with a recent MI who underwent hip surgery, cholecystectomy, bowel resection, elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, and lower extremity amputation from 1999 to 2004 (n = 16,478). Postoperative 30-day reinfarction and 30-day and 1-year mortality were compared for patients who underwent preoperative revascularization (percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, coronary stenting, or coronary artery bypass graft) and those who were not revascularized using univariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression. Relative risks with 95% confidence intervals were estimated using bootstrapping with 1,000 repetitions. RESULTS: Patients with a recent MI who were revascularized before surgery had an approximately 50% decreased rate of reinfarction (5.1% versus 10.0%; p < 0.001) and 30-day (5.2% versus 11.3%; p < 0.001) and 1-year mortality (18.3% versus 35.8%; p < 0.001) compared with those who were not. Stenting within 1 month of surgery was associated with a trend toward increased reinfarction (relative risk: 1.36; 95% CI, 0.96-1.97), and coronary artery bypass graft was associated with a decreased risk (relative risk: 0.70; 95% CI, 0.55-0.95). CONCLUSIONS: This large sample representing real world practice suggests that patients with a recent MI can benefit from preoperative revascularization. Coronary artery bypass graft can improve outcomes more than stenting, especially when surgery is necessary within 1 month of revascularization, but additional prospective studies are indicated.

Using breast cancer quality indicators in a vulnerable population.

BACKGROUND: Adherence to quality indicators may be especially important to disease-specific outcomes for uninsured, vulnerable patients. The objective of this study was to measure adherence to National Initiative for Cancer Care Quality (NICCQ) breast cancer quality indicators in a public hospital and compare performance to published rates in a previously collected 5-city cohort. METHODS: One hundred five consecutive, newly diagnosed, stage I-III, breast cancer patients at a public hospital (from 2005 to 2007) were identified. Adherence rates to 31 quality indicators were measured by using medical record abstraction. Rates were calculated for individual indicators, aggregated domains, and components of care and were compared with the 5-city cohort results by using a 2-sided test of proportions. RESULTS: Overall adherence to the NICCQ indicators at the public hospital was 82%, versus 86% in the 5-city cohort. Public hospital adherence was better in 3 domains and components (Management of Treatment Toxicity 95% vs 73%, Referrals 76% vs 15%, and Documentation of Key Clinical Factors 72% vs 64%, P < .05 for all), but it was lower in others (Testing 82% vs 96%, Adjuvant Therapy 76% vs 83%, Surgery 72% vs 86%, Surveillance 63% vs 94%, and Respect for Patient Preferences 52% vs 72%, P < .001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: The results showed that it is possible to deliver breast cancer care to vulnerable patients comparable in quality to the care received by the broader population. Further study should identify the factors that lead to variation in adherence across domains of quality.

RAND/UCLA Quality-of-Care Measures for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: Tools for Assessing Quality of Care and Appropriateness of Surgery.

Claims relating to carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) are common in workers' compensation systems. Given that the human and economic costs related to CTS are considerable, healthcare organizations must be able to offer high-quality care to people affected by this condition. The study on which this article is based is a step toward improving care for CTS. It has produced two unique tools for institutions to use, one for assessing the quality of care received by a population of patients who have or may have CTS, and the other for identifying the appropriateness of surgery for individual patients. Tools that assist in measuring quality of care are fundamental to efforts to improve healthcare quality. Tools that assess the appropriateness of surgery ensure that people who need surgery receive it and, conversely, that people are not subjected to inappropriate operations. Applied in this way, these two tools are likely to improve clinical circumstances and economic outcomes for people with CTS. Together, they can be useful to provider organizations, medical groups, medical certification boards, and other associated decisionmakers attempting to assess, monitor, and provide appropriate care for people with CTS.

Patient behaviors associated with weight regain after laparoscopic gastric bypass.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing gastric bypass lose substantial weight, but 20% regain weight starting at 2 years after surgery. Our objective was to identify behavioral predictors of weight regain after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). METHODS: We retrospectively surveyed 197 patients for factors predictive of weight regain (≥15% from lowest weight to weight at survey completion). Consecutive patients who had bariatric surgery from 1/2003 through 12/2008 were identified from an existing database. Response rate was 76%, with 150 patients completing the survey. RESULTS: Follow-up after LRYGB was 45.0 ± 12.7 months, 22% of patients had weight regain. After controlling for age, gender, and follow-up time, factors associated with weight regain included low physical activity (odds ratio (OR) 6.92, P = 0.010), low self-esteem (OR 6.86, P = 0.008), and Eating Inventory Disinhibition (OR 1.30, P = 0.029). CONCLUSIONS: Physical activity, self-esteem, and maladaptive eating may be associated with weight regain after LRYGB. These factors should be addressed in prospective studies of weight loss following bariatric surgery, as they may identify patients at risk for weight regain who may benefit from tailored interventions.

Improving breast cancer quality of care with the use of patient navigators.

The continuum of breast cancer care requires multidisciplinary efforts. Patient navigators, who perform outreach, coordination, and education, have been shown to improve some areas of care. However, little research has assessed the impact of navigators on breast cancer treatment in uninsured populations. Our objective is to report on the impact of a patient navigator program on breast cancer quality of care at a public hospital. One hundred consecutive newly diagnosed patients with breast cancer (Stages I to III) were identified (2005 to 2007). Forty-nine patients were treated before the use of navigators and 51 after program implementation. Nine breast cancer quality indicators were used to evaluate quality of care. Overall adherence to the quality indicators improved from 69 to 86 per cent with the use of patient navigators (P < 0.01). Only one individual indicator, use of surveillance mammography, improved significantly (52 to 76%, P < 0.05). All nine indicators reached 75 per cent or greater adherence rates after implementation of the navigator program compared with only four before implementation. Patient navigators appear to improve breast cancer quality of care in a public hospital. In populations in which cultural, linguistic, and financial barriers are prevalent, navigator programs can be effective in narrowing the observed gaps in the quality of cancer care.

Behavioral factors associated with successful weight loss after gastric bypass.

Patients undergoing bariatric surgery lose substantial weight (> or = 50% excess weight loss [EWL]), but an estimated 20 per cent fail to achieve this goal. Our objective was to identify behavioral predictors of weight loss after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. We retrospectively surveyed 148 patients using validated instruments for factors predictive of weight loss. Success was defined as > or =50 per cent EWL and failure as <50 per cent EWL. Mean follow-up after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was 40.1 +/- 15.3 months, with 52.7 per cent of patients achieving successful weight loss. After controlling for age, gender, and preoperative body mass index, predictors of successful weight loss included surgeon follow-up (odds ratio [OR] 8.2, P < 0.01), attendance of postoperative support groups (OR 3.7, P = 0.02), physical activity (OR 3.5, P < 0.01), single or divorced marital status (OR 3.2, P = 0.03), self-esteem (OR 0.3, P = 0.02), and binge eating (OR 0.9, P < 0.01). These factors should be addressed in prospective studies of weight loss after bariatric surgery, as they may identify patients at risk for weight loss failure who may benefit from early tailored interventions.

Exercise following bariatric surgery: systematic review.

The contribution of physical activity on the degree of weight loss following bariatric surgery is unclear. To determine impact of exercise on postoperative weight loss. Medline search (1988-2009) was completed using MeSH terms including bariatric procedures and a spectrum of patient factors with potential relationship to weight loss outcomes. Of the 934 screened articles, 14 reported on exercise and weight loss outcomes. The most commonly used instruments to measure activity level were the Baecke Physical Activity Questionnaire, the International Physical Activity Questionnaire, and a variety of self-made questionnaires. The definition of an active patient varied but generally required a minimum of 30 min of exercise at least 3 days per week. Thirteen articles reported on exercise and degree of postoperative weight loss (n = 4,108 patients). Eleven articles found a positive association of exercise on postoperative weight loss, and two did not. Meta-analysis of three studies revealed a significant increase in 1-year postoperative weight loss (mean difference = 4.2% total body mass index (BMI) loss, 95% confidence interval (CI; 0.26-8.11)) for patients who exercise postoperatively. Exercise following bariatric surgery appears to be associated with a greater weight loss of over 4% of BMI. While a causal relationship cannot be established with observational data, this finding supports the continued efforts to encourage and support patients' involvement in post-surgery exercise. Further research is necessary to determine the recommended activity guidelines for this patient population.

Does weight loss immediately before bariatric surgery improve outcomes: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative weight loss before bariatric surgery has been proposed as a predictive factor for improved patient compliance and the degree of excess weight loss achieved after surgery. In the present study, we sought to determine the effect of preoperative weight loss on postoperative outcomes. METHODS: A search of MEDLINE was completed to identify the patient factors associated with weight loss after bariatric surgery. Of the 909 screened reports, 15 had reported on preoperative weight loss and the degree of postoperative weight loss achieved. A meta-analysis was performed that compared the postoperative weight loss and perioperative outcomes in patients who had lost weight preoperatively compared to those who had not. RESULTS: Of the 15 articles (n = 3404 patients) identified, 5 found a positive effect of preoperative weight loss on postoperative weight loss, 2 found a positive short-term effect that was not sustained long term, 5 did not find an effect difference, and 1 found a negative effect. A meta-analysis revealed a significant increase in the 1-year postoperative weight loss (mean difference of 5% EWL, 95% confidence interval 2.68-7.32) for patients who had lost weight preoperatively. A meta-analysis of other outcomes revealed a decreased operative time for patients who had lost weight preoperatively (mean difference 23.3 minutes, 95% confidence interval 13.8-32.8). CONCLUSION: Preoperative weight loss before bariatric surgery appears to be associated with greater weight loss postoperatively and might help to identify patients who would have better compliance after surgery.