Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Bariatric Surgery and Bariatric Endoscopy for Obesity Management: A Network Meta-Analysis

Background and aims: While bariatric surgery has proven effective for obesity management, its high cost and associated risks have led to increasing interest in alternatives such as bariatric endoscopy. We compared the efficacy and safety of bariatric surgery and bariatric endoscopy for obesity management in adults with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods: A comprehensive database search identified randomized controlled trials comparing bariatric surgery and endoscopy in adults with a BMI of 30–45 kg/m² and at least 52 weeks of follow-up. The primary endpoint was percentage total body weight loss (%TBWL). Secondary endpoints included HbA1c reduction, T2DM remission, and safety. A frequentist network meta-analysis with a random-effects model was conducted. Results: 15 RCTs comprising 1,548 adults were included. We included four bariatric surgeries [Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), greater curvature plication (GCP), and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB)] and three bariatric endoscopies [endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG), primary obesity surgery endoluminal (POSE) and intragastric balloon (IGB)]. RYGB resulted in the greatest %TBWL (-19.39%), followed by LSG (-12.63%), ESG (7.74%), and POSE (5.62%). RYGB, LSG, and ESG were associated with significant reductions in HbA1c, while ESG and RYGB also achieved significant T2DM remission. Bariatric endoscopy, particularly ESG (OR 4.65; 95% CI: 0.49 to 44.47) and POSE (OR 1.06; 95% CI: 0.48 to 2.34), demonstrated a favorable safety profile, with fewer serious adverse events compared to bariatric surgery (OR 8.40; 95% CI: 1.29 to 54.78). However, overlap in the 95% confidence intervals for both efficacy and safety outcomes limits the certainty of comparative conclusions across interventions. Conclusions: Bariatric endoscopy offers a favorable safety profile and clinically meaningful weight loss, representing a minimally invasive treatment option for obesity management and metabolic improvement.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Endoscopy International Open
Published
2026-06-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2892-8092
Primary Topic
Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Bariatric Surgery and Bariatric Endoscopy for Obesity Management: A Network Meta-Analysis

Jena Velji-Ibrahim, Dhruvil Radadiya, Harsh Patel, K Devani et al.
Endoscopy International Open
Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
article

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Bariatric Surgery and Bariatric Endoscopy for Obesity Management: A Network Meta-Analysis

Jena Velji-Ibrahim, Dhruvil Radadiya, Harsh Patel, K Devani, C Hassan, Prateek Sharma, Nicola Pugliese
article en

Abstract

Background and aims: While bariatric surgery has proven effective for obesity management, its high cost and associated risks have led to increasing interest in alternatives such as bariatric endoscopy. We compared the efficacy and safety of bariatric surgery and bariatric endoscopy for obesity management in adults with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods: A comprehensive database search identified randomized controlled trials comparing bariatric surgery and endoscopy in adults with a BMI of 30–45 kg/m² and at least 52 weeks of follow-up. The primary endpoint was percentage total body weight loss (%TBWL). Secondary endpoints included HbA1c reduction, T2DM remission, and safety. A frequentist network meta-analysis with a random-effects model was conducted. Results: 15 RCTs comprising 1,548 adults were included. We included four bariatric surgeries [Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), greater curvature plication (GCP), and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB)] and three bariatric endoscopies [endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG), primary obesity surgery endoluminal (POSE) and intragastric balloon (IGB)]. RYGB resulted in the greatest %TBWL (-19.39%), followed by LSG (-12.63%), ESG (7.74%), and POSE (5.62%). RYGB, LSG, and ESG were associated with significant reductions in HbA1c, while ESG and RYGB also achieved significant T2DM remission. Bariatric endoscopy, particularly ESG (OR 4.65; 95% CI: 0.49 to 44.47) and POSE (OR 1.06; 95% CI: 0.48 to 2.34), demonstrated a favorable safety profile, with fewer serious adverse events compared to bariatric surgery (OR 8.40; 95% CI: 1.29 to 54.78). However, overlap in the 95% confidence intervals for both efficacy and safety outcomes limits the certainty of comparative conclusions across interventions. Conclusions: Bariatric endoscopy offers a favorable safety profile and clinically meaningful weight loss, representing a minimally invasive treatment option for obesity management and metabolic improvement.

Endoscopy International Open
Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (US), Prisma Health (US), Humanitas University (IT), University of Kansas (US), University of South Carolina (US), East Carolina University (US), University of Kansas Medical Center (US), Kansas City VA Medical Center (US), IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital (IT), Wake Forest University (US)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 6%
Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.