Randomized controlled trials comparing gastric bypass, gastric band, and sleeve gastrectomy: A systematic review examining validity and applicability to wider clinical practice

Abstract

SummaryConsideration of how applicable the results of surgical trials are to clinical practice is important to inform decision‐making. Randomized controlled trials comparing at least two surgical interventions (of gastric bypass, gastric band, and sleeve gastrectomy) for severe and complex obesity were examined using the PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary‐2 tool, to consider how applicable the trial results are to clinical practice, and the Risk of Bias 2 tool, to examine validity. MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases were searched for studies published between November 2013 and June 2021, and 15 were identified. Using the PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary‐2 tool, three were classified as pragmatic, with good applicability to clinical practice. Ten had more explanatory domains but did include some pragmatic characteristics, and two were predominantly explanatory. This was due to some trial design features that would not be considered applicable to the wider clinical setting, including being single‐centered, having prescribed intervention delivery methods, and intensive follow‐up regimens. Only two trials had low risk of bias, of which one was considered pragmatic. Three had high risk of bias. Overall, few trials in bariatric surgery are pragmatic with low risk of bias. Well‐designed pragmatic trials are needed to inform practice and reduce research waste.