4.7 Article

Bariatric Surgery and the Incidence of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis in the Swedish Obese Subjects Study

期刊

OBESITY
卷 25, 期 12, 页码 2068-2073

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/oby.21955

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases of the National Institutes of Health [R01DK105948]
  2. Swedish Rheumatism association (Reumatikerforbundet) [R-566571]
  3. Swedish Research Council [K2013-54X-11285-19]
  4. Wallenberg Centre for Molecular and Translational Medicine at the University of Gothenburg
  5. Swedish federal government under the LUA/ALF

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of bariatric surgery (vertical gastroplasty, gastric banding, or gastric bypass) compared with usual care on the incidence of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) in the Swedish Obese Subjects study. Methods: This report includes 1,991 subjects who underwent bariatric surgery and 2,018 controls with obesity from the SOS study; none of them had psoriasis or PsA at baseline. Information about psoriasis and PsA diagnosis was retrieved through the Swedish National Patient Register and questionnaires. Results: During follow-up for up to 26 years, bariatric surgery was associated with a lower incidence of psoriasis compared with usual care (number of events5174; hazard ratio 0.65; 95% CI: 0.47-0.89; P50.008). Both smoking and a longer duration of obesity were independently associated with a higher risk for psoriasis. No significant difference was detected among the three surgical procedures in terms of lowering the risk of developing psoriasis. The association between bariatric surgery and psoriasis incidence was not influenced by baseline confounders. No significant difference in the risk of developing PsA (number of events546) was detected when comparing the surgery and the control groups. Conclusions: This study shows that bariatric surgery is associated with a lower risk of developing psoriasis compared with usual care.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据