Three-Year Outcomes of Oral Antibiotics vs Intravenous and Oral Antibiotics for Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis: A Secondary Analysis of the APPAC II Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Current short-term evidence has shown that uncomplicated acute appendicitis can be treated successfully with oral antibiotics alone, but longer-term results are lacking. Objective: To assess the treatment effectiveness of oral antibiotic monotherapy compared with combined intravenous (IV) and oral antibiotics in computed tomography-confirmed uncomplicated acute appendicitis at a longer-term follow-up. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of a predefined year 3 follow-up of the Appendicitis Acuta II (APPAC II) noninferiority, multicenter randomized clinical trial compared oral moxifloxacin with combined IV ertapenem plus oral levofloxacin and metronidazole for the treatment of uncomplicated acute appendicitis. The trial was conducted at 9 university and central hospitals in Finland from April 2017 to November 2018, with the last follow-up in November 2022. Participants included patients aged 18 to 60 years, who were randomized to receive either oral antibiotics monotherapy (n = 301) or combined IV and oral antibiotics (n = 298). Interventions: Antibiotics monotherapy consisted of oral moxifloxacin, 400 mg/d, for 7 days. Combined IV and oral antibiotics consisted of IV ertapenem sodium, 1 g/d, for 2 days plus oral levofloxacin, 500 mg/d, and metronidazole, 500 mg 3 times/d, for 5 days. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was treatment success, defined as the resolution of acute appendicitis and discharge from hospital without the need for surgical intervention and no appendicitis recurrence at the year 3 follow-up evaluated using a noninferiority design. The secondary end points included late (after 1 year) appendicitis recurrence as well as treatment-related adverse events, quality of life, length of hospital stay, and length of sick leave, which were evaluated using a superiority design. Results: After exclusions, 599 patients (mean [SD] age, 36 [12] years; 336 males [56.1%]) were randomized; after withdrawal and loss to follow-up, 582 patients (99.8%) were available for the year 3 follow-up. The treatment success at year 3 was 63.4% (1-sided 95% CI, 58.8% to ∞) in the oral antibiotic monotherapy group and 65.2% (1-sided 95% CI, 60.5% to ∞) in the combined IV and oral antibiotics group. The difference in treatment success rate between the groups at year 3 was -1.8 percentage points (1-sided 95% CI, -8.3 percentage points to ∞; P = .14 for noninferiority), with the CI limit exceeding the noninferiority margin. There were no significant differences between groups in treatment-related adverse events, quality of life, length of hospital stay, or length of sick leave. Conclusions and Relevance: This secondary analysis of the APPAC II trial found a slightly higher appendectomy rate in patients who received oral antibiotic monotherapy; however, noninferiority of oral antibiotic monotherapy compared with combined IV and oral antibiotics could not be demonstrated. The results encourage future studies to assess oral antibiotic monotherapy as a viable treatment alternative for uncomplicated acute appendicitis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03236961.

Cohort study on incidence of new-onset type 2 diabetes in patients after bariatric surgery and matched controls.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic bariatric surgery the reduces risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes in individuals with obesity, but it is unclear whether the benefit varies by sex, age, or socioeconomic status. The aim was to assess the risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes after metabolic bariatric surgery in these subgroups. METHODS: The Finnish Public Sector study, a follow-up study with matched controls nested in a large employee cohort, included patients without type 2 diabetes and with a diagnosis of obesity or self-reported BMI of at least 35 kg/m2. For each patient who had laparoscopic metabolic bariatric surgery (2008-2016), two propensity-score matched controls were selected. New-onset type 2 diabetes was ascertained from linked records from national health registries. RESULTS: The study included a total of 917 patients and 1811 matched controls with obesity. New-onset type 2 diabetes was diagnosed in 15 of the patients who had metabolic bariatric surgery (4.1 per 1000 person-years) and 164 controls (20.2 per 1000 person-years). The corresponding rate ratio (RR) was 0.20 (95% c.i. 0.12 to 0.35) and the rate difference (RD) was -16.1 (-19.8 to -12.3) per 1000 person-years. The risk reduction was more marked in individuals of low socioeconomic status (RR 0.10 (0.04 to 0.26) and RD -20.6 (-25.6 to -15.5) per 1000 person-years) than in those with higher socioeconomic status (RR 0.35 (0.18 to 0.66) and RD -11.5 (-16.9 to -6.0) per 1000 person-years) (Pinteraction = 0.017). No differences were observed between sexes or age groups. CONCLUSION: Metabolic bariatric surgery was associated with a reduced risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes in men and women and in all age groups. The greatest benefit was observed in individuals of low socioeconomic status.

Metabolic bariatric surgery reduces the risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes in individuals with obesity or severe obesity. The risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes after metabolic bariatric surgery varies between socioeconomic status subgroups. In this prospective study, new-onset type 2 diabetes occurred in 1.6% of 917 patients who underwent metabolic bariatric surgery and 9.1% of 1811 propensity score-matched controls. Risk reduction was more marked in individuals of low socioeconomic status. There were no differences between sex or age groups. The reduced risk of new-onset type 2 diabetes after metabolic bariatric surgery emphasizes the need to increase access to treatment in patients with severe obesity. As the preventive effect was most pronounced in individuals of low socioeconomic status associated with both greater burden of disease and worse access to healthcare, the findings need to be taken into account in health policies to reduce health inequalities.

Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery in Patients with Obesity Class V (BMI > 60 kg/m2): a Modified Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is the preferred method to achieve significant weight loss in patients with Obesity Class V (BMI > 60 kg/m2). However, there is no consensus regarding the best procedure(s) for this population. Additionally, these patients will likely have a higher risk of complications and mortality. The aim of this study was to achieve a consensus among a global panel of expert bariatric surgeons using a modified Delphi methodology. METHODS: A total of 36 recognized opinion-makers and highly experienced metabolic and bariatric surgeons participated in the present Delphi consensus. 81 statements on preoperative management, selection of the procedure, perioperative management, weight loss parameters, follow-up, and metabolic outcomes were voted on in two rounds. A consensus was considered reached when an agreement of ≥ 70% of experts' votes was achieved. RESULTS: A total of 54 out of 81 statements reached consensus. Remarkably, more than 90% of the experts agreed that patients should be notified of the greater risk of complications, the possibility of modifications to the surgical procedure, and the early start of chemical thromboprophylaxis. Regarding the choice of the procedure, SADI-S, RYGB, and OAGB were the top 3 preferred operations. However, no consensus was reached on the limb length in these operations. CONCLUSION: This study represents the first attempt to reach consensus on the choice of procedures as well as perioperative management in patients with obesity class V. Although overall consensus was reached in different areas, more research is needed to better serve this high-risk population.

Standardized Assessment of Metabolic Bariatric Surgery Outcomes: Secondary Analysis of 2 Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: A standardized definition and reporting of metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) outcomes is not available for actual clinical practice and science. Objective: To assess the feasibility of using a clinically relevant and feasible MBS outcome score (Swiss-Finnish Bariatric Metabolic Outcome Score [SF-BARI Score]). Design, Setting, and Participants: This assessment of a bariatric surgery outcome score is based on the secondary analysis of merged 5-year individual patient data (N = 457) of 2 large randomized clinical trials (Swiss SM-BOSS [Swiss Multicenter Bypass or Sleeve Study], conducted from January 2007 to November 2011, and Finnish SLEEVEPASS [Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass Vs Sleeve Gastrectomy to Treat Morbid Obesity], conducted from March 2008 until June 2010) that compared laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in the treatment of severe obesity. This secondary analysis was performed from January 2022 to January 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the feasibility of the SF-BARI Score and the SF-BARI Score QOL (quality of life) as tools to assess MBS outcomes. The score includes percentage of total weight loss (%TWL), 4 obesity-related comorbidities (type 2 diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and obstructive sleep apnea), complications, and QOL, if available. Results: Among the 457 included patients, 323 (70.7%) were female and 134 (29.3%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 45.6 (10.7) years. Outcomes for the SF-BARI Score were available for 435 patients (95.2%) at 1 year and 398 patients (87.1%) at 5 years and for SF-BARI Score QOL in 289 (63.2%) patients at 1 year and 318 patients (69.6%) at 5 years. The SF-BARI Score was correlated with both the SF-BARI Score QOL (r = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.95-0.96; P < .001) and %TWL (r = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.84-0.89; P < .001) and with the Bariatric Analysis and Reporting Outcome System (r = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.51-0.65; P < .001). Score outcomes were categorized as excellent, very good, good, fair, and suboptimal response. There was a statistically significant difference in scores at 1 vs 5 years (4.0; 95% CI, 1.4-6.6; P = .003), and the gastric bypass group had a higher score compared with the sleeve gastrectomy group (7.4; 95% CI, 3.4-11.5; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings indicate that this metabolic bariatric surgery outcome score is a simple, relevant, and feasible composite tool to define and measure MBS outcomes, enabling standardized reporting. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00356213 (SM-BOSS) and NCT00793143 (SLEEVEPASS).

Renal Cortical Glucose Uptake Is Decreased in Insulin Resistance and Correlates Inversely With Serum Free-fatty Acids.

CONTEXT: Studies on human renal metabolism are scanty. Nowadays, functional imaging allows the characterization of renal metabolism in a noninvasive manner. We have recently demonstrated that fluorodeoxyglucose F18 (18F FDG) positron emission tomography can be used to analyze renal glucose uptake (GU) rates, and that the renal cortex is an insulin-sensitive tissue. OBJECTIVE: To confirm that renal GU is decreased in people with obesity and to test whether circulating metabolites are related to renal GU. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Eighteen people with obesity and 18 nonobese controls were studied with [18F]FDG positron emission tomography during insulin clamp. Renal scans were obtained ∼60 minutes after [18F]FDG injection. Renal GU was measured using fractional uptake rate and after correcting for residual intratubular [18F]FDG. Circulating metabolites were measured using high-throughput proton nuclear magnetic resonance metabolomics. RESULTS: Cortical GU was higher in healthy nonobese controls compared with people with obesity (4.7 [3.4-5.6] vs 3.1 [2.2-4.3], P = .004, respectively), and it associated positively with the degree of insulin sensitivity (M value) (r = 0.42, P = .01). Moreover, cortical GU was inversely associated with circulating ß-OH-butyrate (r = -0.58, P = .009), acetoacetate (r = -0.48, P = .008), citrate (r = -0.44, P = .01), and free fatty acids (r = -0.68, P < .0001), even when accounting for the M value. On the contrary, medullary GU was not associated with any clinical parameters. CONCLUSION: These data confirm differences in renal cortical GU between people with obesity and healthy nonobese controls. Moreover, the negative correlations between renal cortex GU and free fatty acids, ketone bodies, and citrate are suggestive of substrate competition in the renal cortex.

Insulin-stimulated brain glucose uptake correlates with brain metabolites in severe obesity: A combined neuroimaging study.

The human brain undergoes metabolic adaptations in obesity, but the underlying mechanisms have remained largely unknown. We compared concentrations of often reported brain metabolites measured with magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS, 3 T MRI) in the occipital lobe in subjects with obesity and lean controls under different metabolic conditions (fasting, insulin clamp, following weight loss). Brain glucose uptake (BGU) quantified with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (18F-FDG-PET)) was also performed in a subset of subjects during clamp. In dataset A, 48 participants were studied during fasting with brain 1H-MRS, while in dataset B 21 participants underwent paired brain 1H-MRS acquisitions under fasting and clamp conditions. In dataset C 16 subjects underwent brain 18F-FDG-PET and 1H-MRS during clamp. In the fasting state, total N-acetylaspartate was lower in subjects with obesity, while brain myo-inositol increased in response to hyperinsulinemia similarly in both lean participants and subjects with obesity. During clamp, BGU correlated positively with brain glutamine/glutamate, total choline, and total creatine levels. Following weight loss, brain creatine levels were increased, whereas increases in other metabolites remained not significant. To conclude, insulin signaling and glucose metabolism are significantly coupled with several of the changes in brain metabolites that occur in obesity.

IFSO Consensus on Definitions and Clinical Practice Guidelines for Obesity Management-an International Delphi Study.

INTRODUCTION: This survey of international experts in obesity management was conducted to achieve consensus on standardized definitions and to identify areas of consensus and non-consensus in metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) to assist in an algorithm of clinical practice guidelines for the management of obesity. METHODS: A three-round Delphi survey with 136 statements was conducted by 43 experts in obesity management comprising 26 bariatric surgeons, 4 endoscopists, 8 endocrinologists, 2 nutritionists, 2 counsellors, an internist, and a pediatrician spanning six continents over a 2-day meeting in Hamburg, Germany. To reduce bias, voting was unanimous, and the statements were neither favorable nor unfavorable to the issue voted or evenly balanced between favorable and unfavorable. Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% inter-voter agreement. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on all 15 essential definitional and reporting statements, including initial suboptimal clinical response, baseline weight, recurrent weight gain, conversion, and revision surgery. Consensus was reached on 95/121 statements on the type of surgical procedures favoring Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy, and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty. Moderate consensus was reached for sleeve gastrectomy single-anastomosis duodenoileostomy and none on the role of intra-gastric balloons. Consensus was reached for MBS in patients > 65 and < 18 years old, with a BMI > 50 kg/m2, and with various obesity-related complications such as type 2 diabetes, liver, and kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: In this survey of 43 multi-disciplinary experts, consensus was reached on standardized definitions and reporting standards applicable to the whole medical community. An algorithm for treating patients with obesity was explored utilizing a thoughtful multimodal approach.

A core outcome set for appendicitis: A consensus approach utilizing modified Delphi methodology.

BACKGROUND: Appendicitis is one of the most common pathologies encountered by general and acute care surgeons. The current literature is inconsistent, as it is fraught with outcome heterogeneity, especially in the area of nonoperative management. We sought to develop a core outcome set (COS) for future appendicitis studies to facilitate outcome standardization and future data pooling. METHODS: A modified Delphi study was conducted after identification of content experts in the field of appendicitis using both the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) landmark appendicitis articles and consensus from the EAST ad hoc COS taskforce on appendicitis. The study incorporated three rounds. Round 1 utilized free text outcome suggestions, then in rounds 2 and 3 the suggests were scored using a Likert scale of 1 to 9 with 1 to 3 denoting a less important outcome, 4 to 6 denoting an important but noncritical outcome, and 7 to 9 denoting a critically important outcome. Core outcome status consensus was defined a priori as >70% of scores 7 to 9 and <15% of scores 1 to 3. RESULTS: Seventeen panelists initially agreed to participate in the study with 16 completing the process (94%). Thirty-two unique potential outcomes were initially suggested in round 1 and 10 (31%) met consensus with one outcome meeting exclusion at the end of round 2. At completion of round 3, a total of 17 (53%) outcomes achieved COS consensus. CONCLUSION: An international panel of 16 appendicitis experts achieved consensus on 17 core outcomes that should be incorporated into future appendicitis studies as a minimum set of standardized outcomes to help frame future cohort-based studies on appendicitis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test or Criteria; Level V.

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus antibiotic therapy for acute cholecystitis in patients over 75 years: Randomized clinical trial and retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The prevalence of acute cholecystitis among elderly patients is increasing. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) to antibiotics in elderly patients with acute cholecystitis. METHODS: A randomized multicenter clinical trial including patients over 75 years with acute calculous cholecystitis was conducted in four hospitals in Finland between January 2017 and December 2019. Patients were randomized to undergo LC or antibiotic therapy. Due to patient enrollment challenges, the trial was prematurely terminated in December 2019. To assess all eligible patients, we performed a retrospective cohort study including all patients over 75 years with acute cholecystitis during the study period. The primary outcome was morbidity. Predefined secondary outcomes included mortality, readmission rate, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Among 42 randomized patients (LC n = 24, antibiotics n = 18, mean age 82 years, 43% women), the complication rate was 17% (n = 4/24) after cholecystectomy and 33% (n = 6/18, 5/6 patients underwent cholecystectomy due to antibiotic treatment failure) after antibiotics (p = 0.209). In the retrospective cohort (n = 630, mean age 83 years, 49% women), 37% (236/630) of the patients were treated with cholecystectomy and 63% (394/630) with antibiotics. Readmissions were less common after surgical treatment compared with antibiotics in both randomized and retrospective cohort patients (8% vs 44%, p < 0.001% and 11 vs 32%, p < 0.001, respectively). There was no 30-day mortality within the randomized trial. In the retrospective patient cohort, overall mortality was 6% (35/630). CONCLUSIONS: LC may be superior to antibiotic therapy for acute cholecystitis in the selected group of elderly patients with acute cholecystitis.

Development and validation of an interpretable machine learning-based calculator for predicting 5-year weight trajectories after bariatric surgery: a multinational retrospective cohort SOPHIA study.

BACKGROUND: Weight loss trajectories after bariatric surgery vary widely between individuals, and predicting weight loss before the operation remains challenging. We aimed to develop a model using machine learning to provide individual preoperative prediction of 5-year weight loss trajectories after surgery. METHODS: In this multinational retrospective observational study we enrolled adult participants (aged ≥18 years) from ten prospective cohorts (including ABOS [NCT01129297], BAREVAL [NCT02310178], the Swedish Obese Subjects study, and a large cohort from the Dutch Obesity Clinic [Nederlandse Obesitas Kliniek]) and two randomised trials (SleevePass [NCT00793143] and SM-BOSS [NCT00356213]) in Europe, the Americas, and Asia, with a 5 year follow-up after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy, or gastric band. Patients with a previous history of bariatric surgery or large delays between scheduled and actual visits were excluded. The training cohort comprised patients from two centres in France (ABOS and BAREVAL). The primary outcome was BMI at 5 years. A model was developed using least absolute shrinkage and selection operator to select variables and the classification and regression trees algorithm to build interpretable regression trees. The performances of the model were assessed through the median absolute deviation (MAD) and root mean squared error (RMSE) of BMI. FINDINGS: 10 231 patients from 12 centres in ten countries were included in the analysis, corresponding to 30 602 patient-years. Among participants in all 12 cohorts, 7701 (75·3%) were female, 2530 (24·7%) were male. Among 434 baseline attributes available in the training cohort, seven variables were selected: height, weight, intervention type, age, diabetes status, diabetes duration, and smoking status. At 5 years, across external testing cohorts the overall mean MAD BMI was 2·8 kg/m2 (95% CI 2·6-3·0) and mean RMSE BMI was 4·7 kg/m2 (4·4-5·0), and the mean difference between predicted and observed BMI was -0·3 kg/m2 (SD 4·7). This model is incorporated in an easy to use and interpretable web-based prediction tool to help inform clinical decision before surgery. INTERPRETATION: We developed a machine learning-based model, which is internationally validated, for predicting individual 5-year weight loss trajectories after three common bariatric interventions. FUNDING: SOPHIA Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking, supported by the EU's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme, the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations, Type 1 Diabetes Exchange, and the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation and Obesity Action Coalition; Métropole Européenne de Lille; Agence Nationale de la Recherche; Institut national de recherche en sciences et technologies du numérique through the Artificial Intelligence chair Apprenf; Université de Lille Nord Europe's I-SITE EXPAND as part of the Bandits For Health project; Laboratoire d'excellence European Genomic Institute for Diabetes; Soutien aux Travaux Interdisciplinaires, Multi-établissements et Exploratoires programme by Conseil Régional Hauts-de-France (volet partenarial phase 2, project PERSO-SURG).

Career Needs Assessment for Early Career Academic Surgeons Using a Modified Accelerated Delphi Process.

INTRODUCTION: Over the past 2 decades, physicians' wellbeing has become a topic of interest. It is currently unclear what the current needs are of early career academic surgeons (ECAS). METHODS: Consensus statements on academic needs were developed during a Delphi process, including all presenters from the previous European Surgical Association (ESA) meetings (2018-2022). The Delphi involved (1) a literature review, (2) Delphi form generation, and (3) an accelerated Delphi process. The Delphi form was generated by a steering group that discussed findings identified within the literature. The modified accelerated e-consensus approach included 3 rounds over a 4-week period. Consensus was defined as >80% agreement in any round. RESULTS: Forty respondents completed all 3 rounds of the Delphi. Median age was 37 years (interquartile range 5), and 53% were female. Majority were consultant/attending (52.5%), followed by PhD (22.5%), fellowship (15%), and residency (10%). ECAS was defined as a surgeon in 'development' years of clinical and academic practice relative to their career goals (87.9% agreement). Access to split academic and clinical contracts is desirable (87.5%). Consensus on the factors contributing to ECAS underperformance included: burnout (94.6%), lack of funding (80%), lack of mentorship (80%), and excessive clinical commitments (80%). Desirable factors to support ECAS development included: access to e-learning (90.9%), face-to-face networking opportunities (95%), support for research team development (100%), and specific formal mentorship (93.9%). CONCLUSION: The evolving role and responsibilities of ECAS require increasing strategic support, mentorship, and guidance on structured career planning. This will facilitate workforce sustainability in academic surgery in the future.

Validation of the individualized metabolic surgery score for bariatric procedure selection in the merged data of two randomized clinical trials (SLEEVEPASS and SM-BOSS).

BACKGROUND: LSG and LRYGB are globally the most common bariatric procedures. IMS score categorizes T2D severity (mild, moderate, and severe) based on 4 independent preoperative predictors of long-term remission as follows: T2D duration, number of diabetes medications, insulin use, and glycemic control. IMS score has not been validated in a randomized patient cohort. OBJECTIVES: To assess the feasibility of individualized metabolic surgery (IMS) score in facilitating procedure selection between laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) for patients with severe obesity and type 2 diabetes (T2D). SETTING: Merged individual patient-level 5-year data of 2 large randomized clinical trials (SLEEVEPASS and SM-BOSS [Swiss Multicenter Bypass or Sleeve Study]). METHODS: IMS score was calculated for study patients and its performance was analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-nine out of 155 patients with T2D had available preoperative data to calculate IMS score as follows: mild stage (n = 41/139), moderate stage (n = 77/139), severe stage (n = 21/139). At 5 years, 135 (87.1%, 67 LSG/68 LRYGB) were available for follow-up and 121 patients had both pre- and postoperative data. Diabetes remission rates according to preoperative IMS score were as follows: mild stage 87.5% (n = 14/16) after LSG and 85.7% (n = 18/21) after LRYGB (P = .999), moderate stage 42.9% (n = 15/35) and 45.2% (n = 14/31) (P = .999), and severe stage 18.2% (n = 2/11) and 0% (n = 0/7) (P = .497), respectively. The T2D remission rate varied significantly between the stages as follows: mild versus moderate odds ratio (OR) 8.3 (95% CI, 2.8-24.0; P < .001), mild versus severe OR 52.2 (95% CI 9.0-302.3; P < .001), and moderate versus severe OR 6.3 (95% CI, 1.3-29.8; P = .020). CONCLUSIONS: In our study, remission rates of T2D were not statistically different after LSG and LRYGB among all patients and among patients with mild, moderate, and severe diabetes stratified by the IMS score. However, the study may be underpowered to detect differences due to small number of patients in each subgroup. IMS score seemed to be useful in predicting long-term T2D remission after bariatric surgery.