Loading...
Loading...
Revisional bariatric surgery is a secondary surgical intervention performed following a previously undertaken obesity procedure, in cases of weight regain, inadequate weight loss, complications or newly developed metabolic/gastrointestinal conditions. Each revisional case is planned individually based on the type of the prior surgery and the current clinical picture.
Medically reviewed by Assoc. Prof. Dr. Hasan Abuoğlu
Revisional bariatric surgery is a secondary surgical intervention performed after a previous obesity operation when the patient experiences weight regain, insufficient weight loss, complications, or newly developed metabolic or gastrointestinal problems. This definition encompasses the surgical reassessment of issues arising after primary bariatric and metabolic procedures such as sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB/mini bypass), adjustable gastric banding, and endoscopic interventions. Revision is not a subcategory of bariatric surgery but a clinically defined, evidence-based continuation of it. Clinical conditions such as changes in the incretin axis, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), marginal ulcers, malnutrition, and dumping syndrome form the medical framework of revision indications.
The most common questions about this treatment
Revisional bariatric surgery is a secondary surgical intervention performed after a previous obesity operation due to weight regain, insufficient weight loss, or a newly developed problem. It is generally considered at least 18–24 months after primary surgery, once medical and behavioral options have been systematically attempted. The most common indications include: EWL below 50%, regain of 15–25% or more of weight from the nadir, treatment-resistant GERD, marginal ulcer, stricture (stenosis), and significant malnutrition. The decision is made individually based on anatomical, metabolic, nutritional, and psychological evaluation by a multidisciplinary team.
The general clinical approach is to complete an observation period of at least 18–24 months after primary surgery. This duration is needed for the weight loss to reach a plateau, for behavioral adaptation to be assessed, and for late-period complications to emerge. However, exceptions do exist: acute surgical complications (leak sequelae, obstruction, early marginal ulcer), treatment-resistant severe GERD, or advanced malnutrition may bring revision onto the agenda sooner. Each case is evaluated according to its own clinical urgency; time alone is not the sole decision criterion.
The most commonly performed revision after sleeve gastrectomy is conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. This preference is particularly strong in two scenarios: treatment-resistant GERD and weight regain. Bypass both significantly improves reflux symptoms and provides additional weight loss. In patients with high BMI and significant metabolic syndrome in whom GERD is not in the foreground, SADI-S or duodenal switch may be preferred. In selected cases with dilated sleeve anatomy and no GERD, resleeve may rarely come into consideration; the indication range is narrow. The correct choice is made through the combined evaluation of endoscopy, imaging, and the clinical picture.
Several different options exist for patients experiencing weight regain after gastric bypass. If an enlarged pouch or stoma is identified, endoscopic reduction (TORe, OverStitch) may be considered as a first-line approach. For more extensive anatomical issues, surgical revision includes options such as pouch–stoma reshaping, distalization, or conversion to SADI-S. The amount of additional weight loss varies according to the technique chosen, the patient's starting BMI, and lifestyle adherence. At the same time, medical therapy, nutritional adjustment, and behavioral support are planned together as non-surgical complementary tools.
Revision surgery carries a somewhat higher risk compared to primary surgery. The risk of leak is approximately 2 times higher and is reported at 3–5% in the literature (1–2% in primary surgery). Operative time is generally 30–60 minutes longer; adhesiolysis and tissue fragility create additional difficulty. The mortality rate is somewhat higher than in primary surgery but is reported at below 0.5% in experienced centers in the literature. This additional risk can become manageable through proper patient selection, comprehensive preoperative preparation, an experienced surgical team, and performance in a high-volume center. Sharing risks with the patient in a numerical and transparent manner is the foundation of informed consent.
Weight loss expectations are generally somewhat lower compared to primary surgery. In the literature, average EWL values are reported in the range of 50–60%, while in primary surgery this value is often 60–70%. After sleeve-to-bypass revision, an additional total body weight loss (TBWL) of approximately 15–25% is reported at 2-year follow-up. Additional weight loss may be more pronounced in revisions with a dominant malabsorptive component, such as SADI-S and duodenal switch. Individual outcomes vary according to the starting BMI, the type of revision, comorbidities, and long-term lifestyle adherence. Defining realistic goals is of critical importance to the healthy framing of treatment perception.
Obesity is a chronic disease with biological, hormonal, and behavioral components, and it is not a condition that is definitively resolved by a single surgical intervention. Weight regain or insufficient weight loss does not reflect a weakness of the patient's willpower, but the natural course of the chronic disease. IFSO data indicate that 10–15% of bariatric cases worldwide are revisions [1]; this rate shows that revision is not an exception but a defined and common step in clinical practice. Revision is part of a planned roadmap, not of failure, and is an expression of the continuity of the patient–physician relationship.
GERD that develops after sleeve gastrectomy and is resistant to medical therapy, in particular, is a strong indication for revision. After conversion from sleeve to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, meaningful symptom improvement is reported in a significant proportion of patients; rates in the literature may exceed 80%. The severity of GERD, the degree of esophagitis, and mucosal changes such as Barrett's esophagus are determinative of the revision type and timing. The degree of improvement may not be the same in every patient; individual anatomical and behavioral factors affect outcomes. The decision is made through the combined evaluation of detailed endoscopic assessment, pH-metry or impedance testing, and the clinical picture.
The pre-revision evaluation is comprehensive and generally includes: upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (anatomy and mucosal assessment), barium upper GI series and/or cross-sectional imaging (anatomical mapping), complete blood count, biochemistry panel, liver and kidney function tests, HbA1c, lipid profile, thyroid function tests, comprehensive vitamin-mineral panel (B12, D, folate, iron, ferritin, calcium, zinc), cardiopulmonary evaluation, sleep apnea screening, and — when necessary — pH-metry. Psychologist and dietitian evaluation by professionals experienced in bariatric surgery are routine components. Obtaining the previous operative report is of critical importance, as it clarifies technical details such as staple lines and limb lengths.
The classical age range for bariatric and revision surgery is generally accepted as 18–65 years. Cases under the age of 18 are handled within the framework of pediatric endocrinology and bariatric surgery evaluation, parental consent, and specific indications. In candidates over the age of 65, the decision is made based on biological age, functional capacity, comorbidities, anesthesia risk, and individual expectations. Age alone is not an absolute contraindication; the determining factors are the patient's general health status, capacity to tolerate surgery, and the clinical benefit expected from revision. The evaluation is performed individually by a multidisciplinary team.
Before revision is considered, it is expected that behavioral and nutritional options have been systematically applied. These steps include portion- and quality-focused dietary planning with a dietitian experienced in bariatric surgery, meeting protein targets, re-establishing behavioral techniques such as slow eating and separating liquids from solids, a physical activity program, and — when necessary — eating behavior psychotherapy. Sleep, stress management, and review of metabolic parameters play a complementary role in the process. When this framework does not yield a sufficient response, the option of revision is brought forward as a clinical decision.
Yes. The risk of micronutrient deficiency after revision is significantly higher compared to primary surgery. Particularly after procedures with a strong malabsorptive component, such as distalization, SADI-S, and duodenal switch, deficiencies in B12, iron, folate, fat-soluble vitamins (A, D, E, K), calcium, zinc, and copper may develop. For this reason, regular laboratory monitoring and appropriate-dose vitamin and mineral supplementation continue lifelong in most patients. When B12 cannot be sufficiently absorbed orally, sublingual tablets or injectable forms may be used. Keeping protein intake at a target of 80–100 g per day is a critical component for preserving muscle mass. The supplementation regimen is personalized by the physician and dietitian based on individual laboratory results and the type of revision.
Explore other bariatric surgery options
On a global scale, the IFSO (International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders) Global Registry 2023 Report indicates that approximately 10–15% of bariatric cases are revisional procedures, and the conversion from sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is the most frequently performed revision type [1]. The 2022 ASMBS–IFSO joint statement, while expanding the indications for bariatric surgery, also positioned revision as an evidence-based treatment option [2]. The 5-year data from the STAMPEDE trial demonstrate the long-term efficacy of metabolic surgery on type 2 diabetes [5], while follow-up studies such as SLEEVEPASS document the long-term behavior of sleeve and bypass — and therefore the scenarios in which revision may become necessary. These data collectively show that revision is not a marker of failure, but a clinical reflection of the chronic disease nature of obesity and individual biological response.
Revisional bariatric surgery is a secondary surgical intervention performed when a primary obesity procedure does not achieve the intended clinical outcome or develops undesirable effects over time. The aim is to correct insufficient clinical response, resolve a complication, or restructure the anatomy for a new metabolic target. Technically, revision requires a longer operative time, carries a higher risk of complications, demands more comprehensive preoperative evaluation, and requires more meticulous multidisciplinary planning. It is generally performed laparoscopically or robotically; adhesions and anatomical changes from the previous surgery necessitate flexibility in intraoperative decisions.
Revision differs from primary surgery in several critical respects. First, intra-abdominal adhesions — such as the left lobe of the liver adhering to the stomach, the omentum adhering to previous staple lines, or small bowel loops fixed to the pelvis — significantly prolong dissection time. Second, anatomical changes such as a dilated sleeve after sleeve gastrectomy, an enlarged pouch or stoma after bypass, or a fibrotic capsule after banding create unique challenges for each technique. Third, previous staple lines may have altered regional blood supply and tissue durability; the placement of new staple lines therefore requires specific surgical judgment. Fourth, the patient's nutritional history and micronutrient reserves differ, increasing the need for preoperative optimization. Fifth, patient expectations carry greater psychological weight and must be balanced with a realistic roadmap.
Revision indications are generally classified into three main categories:
Insufficient weight loss: Excess weight loss (EWL) below 50% during the first 18–24 months after primary surgery. Metabolic expectations are not met and comorbidities show only partial improvement.
Weight regain: Regaining 15–25% or more of total body weight after reaching the nadir weight. The mechanism is usually a combination of anatomical dilatation, behavioral relapse, and hormonal adaptation.
Complication or functional problem: Clinical conditions such as new-onset GERD, anastomotic stricture (stenosis), leak sequelae, chronic fistula, marginal ulcer, advanced malnutrition, dumping syndrome, and reactive hypoglycemia. In this group, the revision decision may be independent of weight; the goal is to restore quality of life and safety.
Each bariatric procedure has its own late-period issues and therefore its own revision scenarios. Revision planning begins with the question: "After which procedure, and for which problem?"
The need for revision after sleeve gastrectomy may arise due to a dilated or bulky residual sleeve, new-onset or worsening GERD, insufficient weight loss, or weight regain. In the literature, the revision rate after sleeve gastrectomy is reported to range approximately 5–25%, depending on follow-up duration and patient selection [3][4]. The dominant clinical scenarios are:
GERD-dominant scenario: When reflux, esophagitis, or Barrett's esophagus resistant to medical therapy develops, conversion from sleeve to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is the preferred approach.
Weight-dominant scenario: When insufficient weight loss or weight regain predominates, options include Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, SADI-S (single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve), or — in selected cases — resleeve.
Reasons for revision after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass include enlarged gastric pouch or gastrojejunal stoma, marginal ulcer, internal hernia, significant dumping, reactive hypoglycemia, and malnutrition. Options vary according to the type of problem:
For an enlarged pouch or stoma, endoscopic reduction (TORe — transoral outlet reduction) may be considered as a first-line approach.
In cases of insufficient weight loss or weight regain, distalization (reconfiguration of alimentary and biliopancreatic limb lengths) or conversion to SADI-S may be considered.
When dumping and reactive hypoglycemia predominate, surgical reconstruction in selected cases is considered after nutritional and medical therapies have been exhausted.
The most common problems after mini gastric bypass are bile reflux, significant malnutrition, and insufficient weight loss. Conversion to a Roux-en-Y configuration is the classical solution when bile reflux predominates. In malnutrition-dominant cases, fine-tuning procedures such as shortening the biliopancreatic limb length may be applied. For insufficient weight loss, an individualized revision plan is developed after anatomical and behavioral assessment.
Although adjustable gastric banding has largely been abandoned today, patients with historical band placement may still be candidates for revision. The most common reasons include band slippage, erosion into the gastric wall, port complications, and insufficient weight loss. The standard approach is removal of the band followed by sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass as a second stage. These two stages may be planned in a single session or in two separate sessions with a defined interval; the decision is based on the patient's anatomy and risk profile.
The intragastric balloon is an endoscopic, temporary procedure and is technically not considered a "revision" but rather a continuation of the patient's journey. If the target weight loss has not been achieved or weight regain has occurred after balloon removal, the patient is re-evaluated for primary bariatric surgery. Planning proceeds as if primary bariatric surgery were being considered for the first time, while behavioral insights from the balloon process contribute to clinical decision-making.
The revision technique is individualized based on the patient's initial surgery, weight trajectory, comorbidities, anatomical findings, and expectations. There is no single "standard revision"; each case is resolved within its own clinical equation.
The most frequently performed type of revision, and a strong option particularly in cases where GERD and weight regain coexist. Conversion involves reshaping part of the sleeve, creating a small gastric pouch, and performing Roux-en-Y reconstruction. Studies in the literature report significant reduction in GERD symptoms and an average additional 15–25% total body weight loss (TBWL) at 2-year follow-up after this conversion [3][4].
In patients with high BMI (> 45), resistant type 2 diabetes, and significant metabolic syndrome, SADI-S or biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch provides strong metabolic effect. These procedures involve greater malabsorption; micronutrient monitoring and long-term adherence are critically important.
May be considered in selected patients with a dilated sleeve anatomy, without GERD, and who have exhausted non-surgical options. It is a controversial approach in the international literature, has a narrow indication range, and is generally not recommended in the presence of GERD.
When an enlarged pouch or stoma is identified after gastric bypass, endoscopic revision methods — endoscopic suturing systems such as OverStitch or TORe — are considered as the first step. These approaches are less invasive and may provide meaningful weight loss in suitable patient groups. When endoscopic methods are insufficient or the anatomical issue is more extensive, laparoscopic surgical revision is considered.
Removal of the adjustable gastric band and sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass as a second stage is the classical roadmap for revision after banding. The choice between single-stage or two-stage planning is made based on the presence of band erosion, local tissue quality, and the patient's general condition.
Reversal is the restoration of bypass anatomy to near-normal intestinal continuity. It is a rarely performed procedure but may be required in cases of advanced malnutrition, uncontrollable dumping, or unmanageable complications. It is technically demanding and performed in experienced centers for selected cases.
It is important to conclude this section with the following message: in revision, the right surgical solution for the right problem is essential. There is no such thing as "a single revision"; revision is a plan tailored to each patient's anatomy, clinical picture, and goals.
The decision for revision is the result of a multidimensional evaluation that considers weight, anatomy, comorbidities, behavioral factors, and motivation. The following parameters are assessed together in candidate evaluation:
BMI trajectory: Preoperative, nadir, and current BMI values. The rate and pace of weight regain.
Time since primary surgery: A follow-up period of at least 18–24 months is generally expected; revision decisions made in the early period may lack sufficient clinical grounding due to incomplete behavioral adaptation.
Status of comorbidities: Type 2 diabetes, GERD, obstructive sleep apnea, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia.
Psychological adaptation and lifestyle: Eating behavior patterns, coping mechanisms, physical activity habits.
Nutritional status: Albumin, pre-albumin, B12, vitamin D, iron, folate, and calcium parameters.
Details of the previous surgery: The technical report of the initial surgery, intraoperative findings, complication history — and, when possible, the original operative note.
Patient expectations and motivation: Realistic goals, adherence to long-term follow-up, openness to lifestyle changes.
Contraindications include untreated active eating disorders, decompensated severe psychiatric illness, advanced malnutrition, and systematic non-surgical options that have not been exhausted. Lifestyle support, follow-up with a dietitian experienced in bariatric surgery, and — when necessary — psychological/psychiatric intervention should be attempted before surgery. Revision is a clinical decision that comes into consideration only after medical and behavioral options have been seriously exhausted.
The revision process consists of multidisciplinary pre-evaluation, meticulous preoperative preparation, a technically demanding surgical stage, and careful early postoperative follow-up. Each stage requires greater attention than primary surgery.
Pre-revision evaluation generally includes: upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, barium upper GI series and/or cross-sectional imaging (CT for anatomical mapping), complete blood count, liver and kidney function tests, comprehensive vitamin and mineral panel, HbA1c, lipid profile, thyroid function tests, cardiopulmonary evaluation, screening for sleep apnea, and consultations with a dietitian experienced in bariatric surgery and a psychologist. Obtaining the previous operative report is critical, as it clarifies the location of staple lines, limb lengths, and intraoperative complications — directly shaping surgical planning.
Standard preoperative practice includes a 2–4 week liver-shrinking diet; however, since hepatic steatosis is often already reduced in patients who have undergone prior sleeve or bypass procedures, this duration may be individualized. Micronutrient deficiencies — particularly B12, iron, vitamin D, and folate — are corrected preoperatively. In patients with GERD, proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy is optimized; healing is awaited if active esophagitis is present. Smoking cessation is particularly important, as it reduces the risk of marginal ulcer and anastomotic leak.
Revision surgery is most commonly performed via laparoscopic or robotic approaches. Open surgery is today reserved only for selected cases in which laparoscopy is technically unsuitable. Adhesiolysis takes significantly more time compared to primary surgery, and tissues may be more fragile. Operative time is typically 30–60 minutes longer than primary surgery, though this duration varies between patients. Staple line decisions are of critical importance: placements that avoid overlap with previous staple lines and preserve blood supply are preferred. When necessary, intraoperative endoscopy, leak tests, and indocyanine green perfusion assessment are used.
Hospital stay after revision typically lasts 3–5 days; this may be about 1 day longer than after primary surgery. Because the risk of leak is higher than in primary surgery, early feeding protocols are initiated more cautiously. Drain monitoring is performed routinely; the appearance, volume, and biochemical properties of drain fluid are followed. In selected patients, early leak screening may be performed with contrast imaging. Thromboembolism prophylaxis, early mobilization, pain management, and nausea control are standard components of postoperative care. The time to return to work and social life varies according to the type of surgery, the physical demands of the job, and individual recovery pace, and is personalized through physician follow-up.
Outcomes after revision vary significantly according to the patient's primary surgery, the type of revision, comorbidities, and long-term adherence. A realistic discussion of expectations is critical to the healthy framing of treatment perception.
In the literature, average EWL values after revision are generally reported in the range of 50–60%, while this value is often 60–70% in primary surgery [3][4]. At 2-year follow-up after sleeve-to-bypass revision, an additional total body weight loss (TBWL) of approximately 15–25% is reported. Additional weight loss may be more pronounced in revisions with a dominant malabsorptive component, such as SADI-S and duodenal switch. Individual outcomes vary according to the patient's starting BMI, genetic-metabolic profile, adherence, and comorbidities.
Type 2 diabetes remission rates after revision are close to those of primary surgery; somewhat lower values are also reported in the literature. The long-term data from the STAMPEDE trial demonstrate the durable effect of metabolic surgery on diabetes control [5]. Significant improvement in GERD symptoms is reported after sleeve-to-bypass revision, with rates exceeding 80% in the literature. Improvements in sleep apnea, hypertension, and dyslipidemia are also expected, though these vary according to individual biological response.
Quality-of-life scales (such as BAROS and IWQOL-Lite) document meaningful improvements after revision. From a psychological perspective, revision may strengthen the sense of control over eating behavior in some patients. The sustainability of this effect is directly linked to continued long-term multidisciplinary follow-up.
Revision surgery carries a somewhat higher risk in certain categories compared to primary surgery. A clear, numerical, and individualized discussion of these risks with the patient is essential to the sound basis of informed consent and expectations.
Leak risk: The risk of anastomotic or staple line leak after revision is approximately 2 times higher than in primary surgery and is reported at 3–5% in the literature (1–2% in primary surgery). Lower rates are reported in high-volume centers.
Bleeding: The risk of intraoperative and postoperative bleeding is somewhat increased due to adhesiolysis and tissue fragility.
Adhesions and small bowel obstruction: Adhesions from previous surgery both create surgical difficulty and may increase the long-term risk of obstruction.
Anastomotic stricture (stenosis): May develop particularly at the gastrojejunal anastomosis and can be managed with endoscopic dilation.
Malnutrition: After distalization or SADI-S, the risk of deficiency in protein, fat-soluble vitamins, and trace elements increases; lifelong micronutrient supplementation and regular follow-up are required.
Need for reversal: A rare but possible outcome; arises in cases of advanced malnutrition, uncontrollable dumping, or serious surgical complications.
Mortality: The mortality rate is somewhat higher than in primary surgery; however, it is reported at below 0.5% in experienced centers in the literature.
Psychosocial risks: Perception of repeated failure, depressive mood, disengagement from long-term follow-up, and weakening of support systems are risks that should be addressed in a clinically planned manner.
Long-term follow-up after revision is as decisive as the surgery itself. The follow-up and lifestyle framework generally consists of the following components:
Frequency of visits: Multidisciplinary check-ups at 3, 6, and 12 months in the first year, followed by annual follow-up. Additional appointments are scheduled in case of suspected anatomical or metabolic changes.
Micronutrient monitoring: B12, iron, ferritin, folate, vitamin D, calcium, zinc, copper, and — in malabsorptive procedures — vitamins A, E, and K are monitored regularly. Vitamin and mineral supplementation continues lifelong in most patients. Sublingual tablets or injectable forms of B12 may be used when oral absorption is insufficient.
Protein target: A daily intake of 80–100 g of protein is among the critical goals for preserving muscle mass and supporting wound healing. Protein sources with high bioavailability — chicken, fish, eggs, dairy products, and legumes — are recommended.
Nutritional rules: Avoidance of carbonated beverages, not combining liquids and solids in the same meal, small portions with slow eating, and the inclusion of vegetables, fruits, and nuts in daily nutrition are among the core recommendations.
Behavioral support: Eating behavior psychotherapy, cognitive-behavioral techniques, and support groups reinforce long-term success.
Exercise protocol: Cardiovascular endurance combined with resistance training are core components for preserving muscle mass and maintaining metabolic rate.
Concurrent medical therapy: In selected patients, obesity pharmacotherapies such as GLP-1 receptor agonists may be considered as an additional tool in the management of post-surgical weight regain. The decision is always made based on the individual clinical picture.
Assoc. Prof. Hasan Abuoğlu, MD has been practicing general surgery in Istanbul for over 25 years. He is a member of the Turkish Society of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery (TBMCD) and IFSO in the field of bariatric and metabolic surgery [6]. At the core of his clinical approach lies multidisciplinary team collaboration: an evaluation process that brings together endocrinology, a dietitian experienced in bariatric surgery, a clinical psychologist, and the surgical team.
The core principle he follows in revision decisions is that revision is never rushed, and surgery is not considered until medical, behavioral, and nutritional options have been systematically exhausted. Each patient's initial surgery is evaluated not within a judgmental framework but as part of the patient's journey. The priority in patient communication is to establish realistic expectations, share the anatomical and metabolic picture in a clear manner, and draw a common roadmap together with the patient. Long-term follow-up is designed not as a calendar, but as the continuity of the patient–physician relationship.
Disclaimer: In any surgical or interventional procedure, results may vary from person to person. It is recommended to obtain detailed consultation from your physician before the procedure. This content is intended for informational purposes only and does not substitute for medical diagnosis, treatment, or examination by a physician. A personalized evaluation and treatment plan can only be made after a physician examination.
[1] IFSO (International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders). Global Registry Report 2023. — https://www.ifso.com/ifso-registry/
[2] Eisenberg D, Shikora SA, Aarts E, et al. 2022 ASMBS and IFSO: Indications for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. SOARD, 2022. — https://www.soard.org/
[3] Mahawar KK, Graham Y, Carr WRJ, et al. Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review of Comparative Outcomes with Respective Primary Procedures. — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
[4] Felsenreich DM, Langer FB, Bichler C, et al. Sleeve Gastrectomy: Long-Term Outcomes and Revisional Procedures. Obesity Surgery. — https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
[5] Schauer PR, Bhatt DL, Kirwan JP, et al. Bariatric Surgery versus Intensive Medical Therapy for Diabetes — 5-Year Outcomes (STAMPEDE). NEJM, 2017. — https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1600869
[6] Turkish Society of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery (TBMCD). — https://www.tbmcd.org.tr/
For detailed information about bariatric and metabolic surgery procedures, you may use the contact channels below. Initial consultations for international patients can be arranged remotely via video call or WhatsApp.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Hasan Abuoğlu
Associate Professor of General Surgery
