Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Surgical Endoscopy
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 2/2016

01-02-2016

Prediction of excess weight loss after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: data from an artificial neural network

Authors: Eric S. Wise, Kyle M. Hocking, Stephen M. Kavic

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 2/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) has become the gold standard for surgical weight loss. The success of LRYGB may be measured by excess body mass index loss (%EBMIL) over 25 kg/m2, which is partially determined by multiple patient factors. In this study, artificial neural network (ANN) modeling was used to derive a reasonable estimate of expected postoperative weight loss using only known preoperative patient variables. Additionally, ANN modeling allowed for the discriminant prediction of achievement of benchmark 50 % EBMIL at 1 year postoperatively.

Methods

Six hundred and forty-seven LRYGB included patients were retrospectively reviewed for preoperative factors independently associated with EBMIL at 180 and 365 days postoperatively (EBMIL180 and EBMIL365, respectively). Previously validated factors were selectively analyzed, including age; race; gender; preoperative BMI (BMI0); hemoglobin; and diagnoses of hypertension (HTN), diabetes mellitus (DM), and depression or anxiety disorder. Variables significant upon multivariate analysis (P < .05) were modeled by “traditional” multiple linear regression and an ANN, to predict %EBMIL180 and %EBMIL365.

Results

The mean EBMIL180 and EBMIL365 were 56.4 ± 16.5 % and 73.5 ± 21.5 %, corresponding to total body weight losses of 25.7 ± 5.9 % and 33.6 ± 8.0 %, respectively. Upon multivariate analysis, independent factors associated with EBMIL180 included black race (B = −6.3 %, P < .001), BMI0 (B = −1.1 %/unit BMI, P < .001), and DM (B = −3.2 %, P < .004). For EBMIL365, independently associated factors were female gender (B = 6.4 %, P < .001), black race (B = −6.7 %, P < .001), BMI0 (B = −1.2 %/unit BMI, P < .001), HTN (B = −3.7 %, P = .03), and DM (B = −6.0 %, P < .001). Pearson r 2 values for the multiple linear regression and ANN models were 0.38 (EBMIL180) and 0.35 (EBMIL365), and 0.42 (EBMIL180) and 0.38 (EBMIL365), respectively. ANN prediction of benchmark 50 % EBMIL at 365 days generated an area under the curve of 0.78 ± 0.03 in the training set (n = 518) and 0.83 ± 0.04 (n = 129) in the validation set.

Conclusions

Available at https://​redcap.​vanderbilt.​edu/​surveys/​?​s=​3HCR43AKXR, this or other ANN models may be used to provide an optimized estimate of postoperative EBMIL following LRYGB.
Literature
1.
Wood GC, Benotti P, Gerhard GS, Miller EK, Zhang Y, Zaccone RJ, Argyropoulos GA, Petrick AT, Still CD (2014) A patient-centered electronic tool for weight loss outcomes after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. J Obes 2014:364941PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
2.
Colquitt JL, Pickett K, Loveman E, Frampton GK (2014) Surgery for weight loss in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 8:CD003641PubMed
3.
Carter J, Elliott S, Kaplan J, Lin M, Posselt A, Rogers S (2015) Predictors of hospital stay following laparoscopic gastric bypass: analysis of 9593 patients from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Surg Obes Relat Dis 11:288–294
4.
Tadross JA, le Roux CW (2009) The mechanisms of weight loss after bariatric surgery. Int J Obes 33(Suppl 1):S28–s32CrossRef
5.
Levine MS, Carucci LR (2014) Imaging of bariatric surgery: normal anatomy and postoperative complications. Radiology 270:327–341CrossRefPubMed
6.
7.
8.
van de Laar A (2012) Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database (BOLD) suggests excess weight loss and excess BMI loss to be inappropriate outcome measures, demonstrating better alternatives. Obes Surg 22:1843–1847CrossRefPubMed
9.
Still CD, Wood GC, Chu X, Manney C, Strodel W, Petrick A, Gabrielsen J, Mirshahi T, Argyropoulos G, Seiler J, Yung M, Benotti P, Gerhard GS (2014) Clinical factors associated with weight loss outcomes after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery. Obesity 22:888–894PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
10.
Dallal RM, Quebbemann BB, Hunt LH, Braitman LE (2009) Analysis of weight loss after bariatric surgery using mixed-effects linear modeling. Obes Surg 19:732–737CrossRefPubMed
11.
Coleman KJ, Huang YC, Hendee F, Watson HL, Casillas RA, Brookey J (2014) Three-year weight outcomes from a bariatric surgery registry in a large integrated healthcare system. Surg Obes Relat Dis 10:396–403CrossRefPubMed
12.
Alger-Mayer S, Polimeni JM, Malone M (2008) Preoperative weight loss as a predictor of long-term success following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Obes Surg 18:772–775CrossRefPubMed
13.
Alger-Mayer S, Rosati C, Polimeni JM, Malone M (2009) Preoperative binge eating status and gastric bypass surgery: a long-term outcome study. Obes Surg 19:139–145CrossRefPubMed
14.
Livhits M, Mercado C, Yermilov I, Parikh JA, Dutson E, Mehran A, Ko CY, Gibbons MM (2012) Preoperative predictors of weight loss following bariatric surgery: systematic review. Obes Surg 22:70–89CrossRefPubMed
15.
Mitchell JE, King WC, Courcoulas A, Dakin G, Elder K, Engel S, Flum D, Kalarchian M, Khandelwal S, Pender J, Pories W, Wolfe B (2015) Eating behavior and eating disorders in adults before bariatric surgery. Int J Eat Disord 48:215–222
16.
Edwards-Hampton SA, Madan A, Wedin S, Borckardt JJ, Crowley N, Byrne KT (2014) A closer look at the nature of anxiety in weight loss surgery candidates. Int J Psychiatry Med 47:105–113CrossRefPubMed
17.
Stein J, Stier C, Raab H, Weiner R (2014) Review article: the nutritional and pharmacological consequences of obesity surgery. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 40:582–609CrossRefPubMed
18.
Munoz M, Botella-Romero F, Gomez-Ramirez S, Campos A, Garcia-Erce JA (2009) Iron deficiency and anaemia in bariatric surgical patients: causes, diagnosis and proper management. Nutr Hosp 24:640–654PubMed
19.
Dumont TM, Rughani AI, Tranmer BI (2011) Prediction of symptomatic cerebral vasospasm after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage with an artificial neural network: feasibility and comparison with logistic regression models. World Neurosurg 75:57–63 discussion 25-58 CrossRefPubMed
20.
Lee YC, Lee WJ, Lee TS, Lin YC, Wang W, Liew PL, Huang MT, Chien CW (2007) Prediction of successful weight reduction after bariatric surgery by data mining technologies. Obes Surg 17:1235–1241CrossRefPubMed
21.
Piaggi P, Lippi C, Fierabracci P, Maffei M, Calderone A, Mauri M, Anselmino M, Cassano GB, Vitti P, Pinchera A, Landi A, Santini F (2010) Artificial neural networks in the outcome prediction of adjustable gastric banding in obese women. PLoS One 5:e13624PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
22.
Yoldas O, Tez M, Karaca T (2012) Artificial neural networks in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. Am J Emerg Med 30:1245–1247CrossRefPubMed
23.
Presnell SR, Cohen FE (1993) Artificial neural networks for pattern recognition in biochemical sequences. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 22:283–298CrossRefPubMed
24.
Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG (2009) Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 42:377–381PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
25.
Cook NR (2007) Use and misuse of the receiver operating characteristic curve in risk prediction—response. Circulation 116:E134–E134CrossRef
26.
Debnath J, Chatterjee S, Sharma V (2013) Artificial neural networks in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis: should imaging be a part of it? Am J Emerg Med 31:258–259CrossRefPubMed
27.
Hsieh CH, Lu RH, Lee NH, Chiu WT, Hsu MH, Li YC (2011) Novel solutions for an old disease: diagnosis of acute appendicitis with random forest, support vector machines, and artificial neural networks. Surgery 149:87–93CrossRefPubMed
28.
Sakai S, Kobayashi K, Toyabe S, Mandai N, Kanda T, Akazawa K (2007) Comparison of the levels of accuracy of an artificial neural network model and a logistic regression model for the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. J Med Syst 31:357–364CrossRefPubMed
29.
Gholipour C, Fakhree MB, Shalchi RA, Abbasi M (2009) Prediction of conversion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy to open surgery with artificial neural networks. BMC surgery 9:13PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
30.
Gohari MR, Biglarian A, Bakhshi E, Pourhoseingholi MA (2011) Use of an artificial neural network to determine prognostic factors in colorectal cancer patients. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev APJCP 12:1469–1472PubMed
31.
Biglarian A, Bakhshi E, Gohari MR, Khodabakhshi R (2012) Artificial neural network for prediction of distant metastasis in colorectal cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev APJCP 13:927–930CrossRefPubMed
32.
Dolgobrodov SG, Moore P, Marshall R, Bittern R, Steele RJ, Cuschieri A (2007) Artificial neural network: predicted vs observed survival in patients with colonic cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 50:184–191CrossRefPubMed
33.
34.
Feng F, Wu Y, Wu Y, Nie G, Ni R (2012) The effect of artificial neural network model combined with six tumor markers in auxiliary diagnosis of lung cancer. J Med Syst 36:2973–2980CrossRefPubMed
35.
Faradmal J, Soltanian AR, Roshanaei G, Khodabakhshi R, Kasaeian A (2014) Comparison of the performance of log-logistic regression and artificial neural networks for predicting breast cancer relapse. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev APJCP 15:5883–5888CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Prediction of excess weight loss after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: data from an artificial neural network
Authors
Eric S. Wise
Kyle M. Hocking
Stephen M. Kavic
Publication date
01-02-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 2/2016
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4225-7

Other articles of this Issue 2/2016

Surgical Endoscopy 2/2016 Go to the issue

OriginalPaper

Sleeve gastrectomy, but not duodenojejunostomy, preserves total beta-cell mass in Goto-Kakizaki rats evaluated by three-dimensional optical projection tomography

OriginalPaper

Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison of short-term surgical outcomes

OriginalPaper

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic versus open lateral lymph node dissection for advanced lower rectal cancer

OriginalPaper

Biliary stenting is not a prerequisite to endoscopic placement of duodenal covered self-expandable metal stents

OriginalPaper

Electromagnetic organ tracking allows for real-time compensation of tissue shift in image-guided laparoscopic rectal surgery: results of a phantom study

OriginalPaper

Quality of life in non-early rectal cancer treated by neoadjuvant radio-chemotherapy and endoluminal loco-regional resection (ELRR) by transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) versus laparoscopic total mesorectal excision