Skip to main content

Major dietary patterns and their associations with total weight loss and weight loss composition 2–4 years after sleeve gastrectomy

Abstract

Background

Food intakes 1–2 years following bariatric surgery depend more on patients than the surgery’s gastrointestinal tract changes. This study aimed to determine the major dietary patterns of patients after the first two years of sleeve gastrectomy and to investigate their associations with total weight loss (TWL) and the proportion of TWL as fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM) loss.

Methods

This cross-sectional study included 146 patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy 2–4 years after surgery. Dietary patterns were determined using principal component analysis based on the 19 food groups. The percentage of FM loss relative to TWL (%FML) and FFM loss relative to TWL (%FFML) were calculated. A suboptimal clinical response was defined as a TWL of less than 25%. High FM loss and excessive FFM loss were defined based on the highest tertiles. Linear and logistic regression models were used to derive unstandardized (B) coefficients and odds ratios (OR), with dietary pattern scores serving as both a continuous and a binary variable (higher vs. lower adherence groups based on median).

Results

Two predominant dietary patterns were retained. Each 1-unit increase in the first dietary pattern score characterized by high intakes of fast foods, soft drinks, processed meats, sugar confectionary, salty snacks, grains, and organ meats was associated with higher %FFML (B = 1.99; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34, 3.66), lower %FML (B = − 1.84; 95% CI − 3.49, − 0.20), and higher odds of excessive FFM loss (OR = 1.84; 95% CI 1.09, 3.11). Participants with higher adherence to the first dietary pattern had lower %TWL, and greater odds of suboptimal clinical response and excessive FFM loss than those with lower adherence. Each 1-unit increase in score for the second dietary pattern characterized by a high intake of fruits, dairy, vegetables, legumes, eggs, nuts, red meats, poultry, and fish was associated with lower odds of suboptimal clinical response (OR = 0.51; 95% CI 0.31, 0.86).

Conclusion

Patients should be encouraged to modify their diet by reducing the consumption of ultra-processed foods and increasing their intake of high-quality protein sources, fruits, and vegetables to achieve the best postoperative outcome.

Introduction

Bariatric surgery is currently recognized as one of the most effective treatment options for severe obesity. Numerous studies have demonstrated that it leads to significant weight loss, including both fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM) loss, as well as substantial improvements in obesity-related comorbidities [1, 2]. However, the effectiveness of bariatric surgery varies among patients. Unfortunately, the weight loss obtained by some patients is less than anticipated, or there may be excessive FFM loss relative to weight loss, which can reduce the effectiveness of obesity surgery [2, 3]. Studies have indicated that the lifestyle adopted after surgery (i.e., diet, physical activity, and eating behaviors) potentially plays a crucial role in achieving sustainable weight loss and preventing excessive FFM loss in the long term postoperatively [4]. Although differences in surgical outcomes may be explained by several factors, postoperative diet appears to be a key determinant [5].

Studies about food intake after bariatric surgery have indicated that frequent consumption of high-fat or sugary snacks at least 1 year postoperatively can lead to excessive energy intake and may decrease the chances of maintaining weight loss. Additionally, limiting the consumption of soft drinks or carbonated beverages is effective in maintaining weight stability after 2 years since the surgery [6]. The study by Freire et al. showed that the consumption of snacks and sweets, as well as fats and high-fat foods, was significantly higher among those who experienced weight regain [7]. However, it is not possible to draw a definitive conclusion regarding the associations between dietary macronutrients or food groups’ intakes and weight outcomes after bariatric surgery due to heterogeneity in study designs and findings [8, 9]. A few studies have also investigated the association between diet as a combination of food groups, weight, and body composition outcomes following bariatric surgery using the healthy eating index (HEI), a measurement for diet quality. In a study a higher HEI score was associated with lower odds of weight regain [10], whereas two other studies found no significant association between HEI, the odds of weight regain, and different weight outcome parameters after bariatric surgery [11, 12]. In addition, one study found no significant associations between HEI and postoperative FM and FFM loss [12]. To our knowledge, no study has determined the major dietary patterns of patients undergoing bariatric surgery and the association between these dietary patterns and weight loss and weight loss composition after the surgery. Therefore, we employed principal component analysis (PCA) to determine the major dietary patterns of patients with sleeve gastrectomy (SG) 2–4 years after surgery. We then examined the associations between these dietary patterns and percentage total weight loss (%TWL), proportion of fat mass loss relative to TWL (%FML), and fat-free mass loss relative to TWL (%FFML) at this time.

Methods

Participants

Participants in this cross-sectional study were recruited from patients in the Tehran Obesity Treatment Study (TOTS). TOTS is a study on an Iranian population with severe obesity who have been referred to the Tehran Obesity Treatment Center to consult for bariatric surgery [13]. Participants undergoing SG between September 18, 2017, and March 16, 2021 and who were at least 18 years old were called for this study. A total of 200 patients agreed to participate in this study, of whom 16 were excluded due to psychiatric and musculoskeletal disorders, cancer, and inadequate cooperation in completing questionnaires. Also, 38 more patients with a time since surgery of less than 2 and more than 4 years were excluded to minimize the potential impact of time since surgery on weight loss and dietary modifications. Ultimately, 146 individuals were selected to participate in the present investigation.

It is thought that patients' effects on food intakes and, consequently, energy intakes will become more evident one to two years after bariatric surgery as opposed to the early postoperative period, when gastrointestinal changes and planned postoperative follow-up visits predominantly influence food intakes [14, 15]. Moreover, weight maintenance challenges typically begin at this time point [16]. Therefore, we recruited patients at least 2 years after the surgery. We conducted the recruitment of participants and data collection for the current study from April to August 2022. Consistent with the Declaration of Helsinki, the investigation was carried out. Each participant provided informed, written consent prior to the study. The Research Ethics Committees of the National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, approved this investigation (approval number: IR.SBMU.NNFTRI.REC.1401.004).

Weight and body composition

Postoperative weight and body composition (FM and FFM) were evaluated using a bioelectrical impedance body composition analyzer (InBody 370S, BioSpace America, Inc.). The body mass index (BMI) was calculated by dividing weight (kg) by height (m2). Preoperative measurements (weight, FM, and FFM) were obtained from the patient's electronic medical record. The outcomes after surgery were calculated using the following formulas:

$$\% {\text{TWL}} = \left[ {\left( {{\text{preoperative weight}}{-}{\text{postoperative weight}}} \right)/{\text{preoperative weight}}} \right] \times {1}00$$
$$\% {\text{FML}} = \left[ {\left( {{\text{preoperative FM}} - {\text{postoperative FM}}} \right)/\left( {{\text{preoperative weight}} - {\text{postoperative weight}}} \right)} \right] \times {1}00.$$
$$\% {\text{FFML}} = \left[ {\left( {{\text{preoperative FFM}} - {\text{postoperative FFM}}} \right)/\left( {{\text{preoperative weight}} - {\text{postoperative weight}}} \right)} \right] \times {1}00.$$

Suboptimal clinical response (insufficient weight loss) was defined as TWL less than 25% [17, 18]. Individuals were classified into tertiles according to %FML and %FFML. The highest tertile, with a value greater than 28% of weight loss for FFML and more than 77.9% of weight loss for FML, was defined as excess FFM and high FM loss, respectively.

Dietary intake

Two trained dietitians administered a valid 147-item food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) [19] to evaluate the participants' dietary intake. Based on the frequency and quantity reported by the participants, the daily consumption of each food item over the past year was determined. To derive dietary patterns, we categorized food items into 19 food groups, which included grains, legumes, nuts, vegetables, fruits, dairy, eggs, red meats, poultry and fish, organ meats, processed meats, vegetable oil, animal fat, fast foods, salty snacks, sugar confectionary, sauce, soft drinks, and tea and coffee, to derive dietary patterns. Details on the food grouping are provided in Supplementary Table 1.

Demographic and physical activity variables

Data on age, education, smoking status, marital status, occupation, medical history, and vitamin or mineral supplementation were collected using a questionnaire.

Physical activity was measured in metabolic equivalent task (MET) minutes per week using the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ) short form ref. [20]. Participants were classified into three groups based on their physical activity levels: low (< 600 MET-min/week), moderate (600–3000 MET-min/week), and high (> 3000 MET-min/week).

Statistical analysis

PCA was used to generate dietary patterns based on the 19 food categories. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin value was 0.72, and Bartlett's sphericity test was statistically significant, indicating that the correlation matrix is factorable. We extracted components using an orthogonal rotation of Varimax. The PCA suggested six components with eigenvalues greater than 1. Based on the screeplot and the Monte Carlo PCA, we decided to retain the first two components for further investigation. Using the regression method, dietary pattern scores were calculated.

Participants based on the median of each score were divided into two groups: higher (≥ median value) and lower (< median) adherence groups. The characteristics of the participants were compared between the two groups with an independent sample t-test for non-skewed continuous variables, a Mann–Whitney U test for skewed variables, and a chi-squared test for categorical variables. The associations between dietary patterns and %TWL, %FFML, and %FML were analyzed using linear regression, and the results were expressed as unstandardized (B) coefficients (95% confidence interval (CI)). The odds of suboptimal clinical response, excessive FFM loss, and high FM loss according to the dietary patterns were also determined using logistic regression, and results were reported as odds ratio (OR) and 95% CI. The results of regression analyses were estimated based on the standard deviation (SD) of each score (as continuous variables) as well as the higher compared with the lower adherence group (binary categorical variables). Age (continuous), sex, preoperative weight (continuous), time since surgery (continuous), occupation (full-time job / without full-time job), smoking (yes/no), marital status (single, married, and divorced/widowed), education (primary, diploma, and academic), physical activity (continuous), B-vitamin supplementation (yes/no), vitamin D/calcium supplementation (yes/no), and energy intake (continuous) were selected as potential confounders based on a literature review. Using linear regression, we investigated the univariate associations between these variables and each outcome. Only variables with a p-value of less than 0.1 in the univariate association made it into the statistical analyses. Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS (version 20; IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA), and P ≤ 0.05 were deemed significant.

Results

Table 1 shows characteristics of total participants and based on adherence to the dietary patterns. The mean ± SD for age and time since surgery of the participants were 43.6 ± 12.1 years and 30.8 ± 6.5 months, respectively, and 77.4% were women.

Table 1 Characteristics of the participants

A combined 32.4% of the variance in food consumption was accounted for by the two dietary patterns, with pattern 1 accounting for 20.3% and pattern 2 contributing 12.1%. The dietary pattern 1 was characterized by high intakes of fast foods, sauce, soft drinks, processed meats, sugar confectionery, salty snacks, grains, organ meats, poultry and fish, animal fat, and vegetable oil (factor loading > 0.3). The second pattern featured high consumption of fruits, dairy, vegetables, legumes, eggs, nuts, red meats, and poultry and fish (Supplementary Table 1).

Participants' characteristics based on adherence to dietary patterns were compared, showing that those with a higher score for pattern 1 were younger and had higher preoperative and postoperative FFM than those with a lower score for the pattern. Those with higher adherence to pattern 1 were also more likely to have an academic education, a full-time job, to be smokers, and to be single. Daily energy intake and proportion of fat were significantly lower, while proportion of carbohydrate was higher in those with a lower score in pattern 1 than those with a higher score. Those with higher adherence to the second pattern were more likely to have academic education and engage in moderate physical activity (600–3000 Met-min/week), but less likely to be smokers. Daily dietary energy intake and proportion of protein were significantly lower, but proportion of fat was higher in participants who obtained a lower score in pattern 2 compared to those with a higher score (Table 1).

Table 2 represents the association of the first dietary pattern with %TWL, %FFML, and %FML. Dietary pattern 1 as a continuous variable was not related to the %TWL, but those with higher adherence to the dietary pattern had a 3.1% lower TWL (B = − 3.08; 95% CI − 5.75, − 0.40) compared to those with lower adherence after adjusting for all potential covariates. Moreover, one SD of the first pattern was linked to 2% (B = 1.99; 95% CI 0.34, 3.66) more FFML and 1.8% (B = − 1.84; 95% CI − 3.49, − 0.20) less FML.

Table 2 Associations of the first dietary pattern with total weight loss, fat-free mass loss, and fat mass loss after sleeve gastrectomy

Table 3 represents the association between dietary pattern 1 and the odds of suboptimal clinical response, excessive FFM loss, and high FM loss. In the adjusted model, higher adherence to the first dietary pattern was related to higher odds of excessive FFM loss (OR = 1.84, 95% CI 1.09, 3.11). In addition, the odds of suboptimal clinical response (OR = 2.75, 95% CI 1.11, 6.83) and excessive FFM loss (OR = 2.51, 95% CI 1.02, 6.16) were significantly higher in those with higher adherence to the pattern than those with low adherence in the adjusted model.

Table 3 Associations of the first dietary pattern with suboptimal clinical response, excessive fat-free mass loss, and high fat mass loss after sleeve gastrectomy

Table 4 represents the association of the second dietary pattern with %TWL, %FFML, and %FML. The second pattern as a continuous variable showed a negative association with %FFML and a positive association with %FML in the unadjusted model, but the association was no longer significant after covariates were accounted for.

Table 4 Associations of the second dietary pattern derived with total weight loss, fat-free mass loss, and fat mass loss after sleeve gastrectomy

Table 5 represents the association between dietary pattern 2 and the odds of suboptimal clinical response, excessive FFM loss, and high FM loss. The odds of suboptimal clinical response was lower per one SD of the second dietary pattern; the inverse association remained significant in the adjusted model (OR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.31, 0.86). Lower odds of excessive FFM loss and higher odds of high FM loss were observed per SD of the second dietary pattern, but the association was not statistically significant after controlling for potential confounding factors. No significant association was observed when the second pattern was treated as a binary categorical variable.

Table 5 Associations of the second dietary pattern with suboptimal clinical response, excessive fat-free mass loss, and high fat mass loss after sleeve gastrectomy

Discussion

We identified two predominant dietary patterns in patients 2–4 years after SG. The first dietary pattern that maximally explained the variation in food groups in these patients was characterized by high intakes of fast foods, sauce, soft drinks, processed meats, sugar confectionery, salty snacks, grains, organ meats, poultry and fish, animal fat, and vegetable oil. After adjusting for potential covariates, those with greater adherence to dietary pattern 1 had significantly lower %TWL and greater odds of suboptimal clinical response. Moreover, a higher score in this pattern was related to lower %FML, higher %FFML, and higher odds of excessive FFM loss. A second dietary pattern, characterized by high intakes of fruits, dairy, vegetables, legumes, eggs, nuts, red meats, and poultry and fish, was associated with lower odds of suboptimal clinical response. The associations of dietary patterns with weight loss and weight loss composition were independent of energy intake.

The observed associations may account for the main characteristics of the first pattern, which include low nutrient density, high-fat foods, high-refined carbohydrates, and overall low nutritional quality. A cross-sectional study assessing the dietary intakes of 100 patients at different postsurgical times of < 2 years, 2–5 years, and more than 5 years after bariatric surgery found that the intakes of snacks and sweets were higher than recommended at all times. Furthermore, those who regained weight consumed significantly more snacks and sweets, as well as oils and fatty foods, than those who did not [7]. The energy density of the meal and the relative quantity of energy ingested from high-fat, low-fat, sweet, and savory foods did not change significantly after bariatric surgery, according to a study that directly examined what people ate at an ad libitum buffet, despite the reductions in total energy consumption and eating rate after the surgery. In that study, a higher reduction in high-fat foods from pre-surgery to 6 months after the surgery was significantly related to a higher TWL 18 months after the surgery [21]. Using the HEI, it has also been demonstrated that the majority of patients undergoing bariatric surgery have inadequate diet quality [10,11,12].

We demonstrated that a higher score in the first dietary pattern was associated with a lower %FML and a greater %FFML. The odds of excessive FFM loss were also significantly higher with a higher dietary pattern score. Excessive FFM loss after bariatric surgery, like other weight loss programs, is undesirable because of its multiple physiological functions. Despite this, the prevalence of excessive FFM loss after bariatric surgery has been high, indicating that more robust approaches are required to mitigate FFM loss [2, 22]. This excessive FFM loss could potentially contribute to weight regain, the recurrence of obesity-related comorbidities, and an increased risk of sarcopenia and osteoporosis [2]. The ultra-processed foods, such as processed meats, salty snacks, sugar confectionary, soft drinks, and sauce, were highly loaded in the pattern. Previous studies have demonstrated the adverse associations between ultra-processed foods and body composition, such as higher body fat and lower lean mass [23, 24]. Researchers have proposed various mechanisms to explain the negative associations, such as reduced protein intake, increased energy, and refined sugar due to an unbalanced diet composition, increased consumption of advanced glycated end-products, alterations in the intestinal microbiome, and changes in gut-brain signaling of satiety [23].

The second pattern mostly consists of high-nutrient-dense foods and is generally considered a healthy dietary pattern. The odds of suboptimal clinical response approximately 2 years after SG were significantly lower with higher adherance to the pattern. Fruits, vegetables, legumes, and nuts in the second pattern encompass a broad spectrum of vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and fiber. Adopting the dietary pattern may result in decreased gastric emptying, decreased postprandial blood glucose levels, decreased insulin secretion, and an effect on satiety and energy balance via the production of short-chain fatty acids [25,26,27]. These factors may potentially lead to greater TWL and reduce the odds of a suboptimal clinical response. High-quality protein sources, such as dairy, eggs, and animal meats, also make it easier to meet the necessary postoperative protein requirements within this dietary pattern, lowering the risk of inadequate protein intake. Changes in the macronutrient composition of the diet in favor of increasing protein intake early after bariatric surgery (≤ 0.5 years) have been linked to greater weight loss in previous research [21, 28].

Prior research on the relationship between post-operative dietary patterns and weight and body composition outcomes after bariatric surgery was limited to HEI [10,11,12]. PCA is an exploratory technique that identifies common food consumption patterns based on the correlations between food groups [29]. Our review of the literature indicates that no previous study has examined the major dietary patterns following bariatric surgery and their associations with weight loss and variations in body composition. The study's strengths include taking into consideration both %TWL and FM and FFM loss relative to weight loss as outcomes, as well as multiple confounding factors for each outcome. The study's limitations should also be discussed. First, the study's cross-sectional design cannot establish a cause-and-effect relationship. Second, misreporting dietary data is a concern due to recall bias and social desirability bias [30]. Individuals with suboptimal clinical responses may be more likely to report inaccurate information. Third, the lack of a standard definition for suboptimal clinical response or excessive FFM increases the likelihood of misclassifying participants. However, we used the 25% TWL cutoff for suboptimal clinical response based on findings of the more recent studies suggesting that the cut-off is more efficient to assess clinical response to bariatric surgery than the other criteria [17, 18, 31]. Fourth, even though our analyses account for a large number of covariates, residual confounding remains a possibility.

Conclusion

This exploratory dietary analysis revealed increased odds of suboptimal clinical response and excessive FFM loss in patients who more adhered to a diet high in fast foods, soft drinks, processed meats, sugar confectionary, salty snacks, grains, and organ meats at midterm after bariatric surgery. In contrast, more adherence to a diet characterized by a high intake of fruits, dairy, vegetables, legumes, eggs, nuts, red meats, poultry, and fish was associated with lower odds of suboptimal clinical response. The associations were observed independent of energy intake. The findings of this study highlight the importance of post-surgery diet on the outcomes of bariatric surgery in terms of %TWL and the proportion of weight loss as FM and FFM. To achieve the best postoperative outcome, the study recommends encouraging patients undergoing bariatric surgery to modify their dietary habits by reducing their intake of ultra-processed foods and increasing their consumption of high-quality protein sources, fruits, and vegetables.

Availability of data and materials

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Abbreviations

%FFML:

Percentage fat-free mass loss relative to total weight loss

FFQ:

Food frequency questionnaire

%FML:

Percentage fat mass loss relative to total weight loss

HEI:

The healthy eating index

IPAQ:

International Physical Activity Questionnaire

PCA:

Principal component analysis

SG:

Sleeve gastrectomy

TOTS:

Tehran Obesity Treatment Study

TWL:

Total weight loss

References

  1. Angrisani L, Santonicola A, Iovino P, et al. Bariatric surgery worldwide 2013. Obes Surg. 2015;25:1822–32.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Nuijten MA, Eijsvogels TM, Monpellier VM, et al. The magnitude and progress of lean body mass, fat-free mass, and skeletal muscle mass loss following bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Rev. 2022;23: e13370.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. El Ansari W, Elhag W. Weight regain and insufficient weight loss after bariatric surgery: definitions, prevalence, mechanisms, predictors, prevention and management strategies, and knowledge gaps—a scoping review. Obes Surg. 2021;31:1755–66.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Gils Contreras A, Bonada Sanjaume A, Becerra-Tomás N, et al. Adherence to Mediterranean diet or physical activity after bariatric surgery and its effects on weight loss, quality of life, and food tolerance. Obes Surg. 2020;30:687–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kaouk L, Hsu AT, Tanuseputro P, et al. Modifiable factors associated with weight regain after bariatric surgery: a scoping review. F1000Research. 2019;8:615.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cornejo-Pareja I, Molina-Vega M, Gómez-Pérez AM, et al. Factors related to weight loss maintenance in the medium–long term after bariatric surgery: a review. J Clin Med. 2021;10:1739.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Freire RH, Borges MC, Alvarez-Leite JI, et al. Food quality, physical activity, and nutritional follow-up as determinant of weight regain after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Nutrition. 2012;28:53–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Moslehi N, Kamali Z, Golzarand M, et al. Association between energy and macronutrient intakes and weight change after bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Surg. 2023;33:938–49.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cheung H, Strodl E, Musial J, et al. Associations between diet composition, dietary pattern, and weight outcomes after bariatric surgery: a systematic review. Int J Obes. 2023;47:764–90.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. da Silva FBL, Gomes DL, de Carvalho KMB. Poor diet quality and postoperative time are independent risk factors for weight regain after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Nutrition. 2016;32:1250–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jabbour J, Awada D, Naim N, et al. Impact of bariatric surgery on the healthy eating index, binge eating behavior and food craving in a middle eastern population: a Lebanese experience. Healthcare. 2021;9:1416.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Hosseini-Esfahani F, Kazemi-Aliakbar M, Koochakpoor G, et al. Diet quality and anthropometric indices of patients undergone bariatric surgery: the prospective Tehran obesity treatment study. BMC Surg. 2023;23:125.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Barzin M, Hosseinpanah F, Motamedi MA, et al. Bariatric surgery for morbid obesity: Tehran Obesity Treatment Study (TOTS) rationale and study design. JMIR Res Protoc. 2016;5: e5214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sarwer DB, Dilks RJ, West-Smith L. Dietary intake and eating behavior after bariatric surgery: threats to weight loss maintenance and strategies for success. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2011;7:644–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bryant EJ, Malik M, Whitford-Bartle T, et al. The effects of bariatric surgery on psychological aspects of eating behaviour and food intake in humans. Appetite. 2020;150:104575.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Almasi MH, Barzin M, Mahdavi M, et al. Prevalence and predictors of weight recurrence following bariatric surgery: a longitudinal prospective cohort study from Tehran Obesity Treatment Study (TOTS). Obes Res Clin Pract. 2024;18:43–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. van de Laar AW, van Rijswijk AS, Kakar H, et al. Sensitivity and specificity of 50% excess weight loss (50%EWL) and twelve other bariatric criteria for weight loss success. Obes Surg. 2018;28:2297–304.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tu Y, Pan Y, Han J, et al. A total weight loss of 25% shows better predictivity in evaluating the efficiency of bariatric surgery. Int J Obes. 2021;45:396–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Esfahani FH, Asghari G, Mirmiran P, et al. Reproducibility and relative validity of food group intake in a food frequency questionnaire developed for the Tehran Lipid and Glucose Study. J Epidemiol. 2010;20:150–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjöström M, et al. International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2003;35:1381–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Søndergaard Nielsen M, Rasmussen S, Just Christensen B, et al. Bariatric surgery does not affect food preferences, but individual changes in food preferences may predict weight loss. Obesity. 2018;26:1879–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Nuijten MAH, Monpellier VM, Eijsvogels TMH, et al. Rate and determinants of excessive fat-free mass loss after bariatric surgery. Obes Surg. 2020;30:3119–26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Rudakoff LCS, Magalhães E, Viola P, et al. Ultra-processed food consumption is associated with increase in fat mass and decrease in lean mass in Brazilian women: a cohort study. Front Nutr. 2022;9:1006018.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Monteles Nascimento L, de Carvalho Lavôr LC, Mendes Rodrigues BG, et al. Association between Consumption of ultra-processed food and body composition of adults in a capital city of a Brazilian Region. Nutrients. 2023;15:3157.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Williams PG, Grafenauer SJ, O’Shea JE. Cereal grains, legumes, and weight management: a comprehensive review of the scientific evidence. Nutr Rev. 2008;66:171–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Rebello CJ, Greenway FL, Finley JW. A review of the nutritional value of legumes and their effects on obesity and its related co-morbidities. Obes Rev. 2014;15:392–407.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Yu ZM, DeClercq V, Cui Y, et al. Fruit and vegetable intake and body adiposity among populations in Eastern Canada: The Atlantic Partnership for Tomorrow’s Health Study. BMJ Open. 2018;8: e018060.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Kanerva N, Larsson I, Peltonen M, et al. Changes in total energy intake and macronutrient composition after bariatric surgery predict long-term weight outcome: findings from the Swedish Obese Subjects (SOS) study. Am J Clin Nutr. 2017;106:136–45.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Thorpe MG, Milte CM, Crawford D, et al. A comparison of the dietary patterns derived by principal component analysis and cluster analysis in older Australians. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2016;13:1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Althubaiti A. Information bias in health research: definition, pitfalls, and adjustment methods. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2016;9:211–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Lu G, Dong Z, Huang B, et al. Determination of weight loss effectiveness evaluation indexes and establishment of a nomogram for forecasting the probability of effectiveness of weight loss in bariatric surgery: a retrospective cohort. Int J Surg. 2023;109:850–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This article has been extracted from the M.Sc. thesis of Ms. Zahra Kamali. The authors would like to thank the hospital staff, study assistants, and coordinators who participated in this research. Also, special thanks to Mohammadreza Golsibi for his assistance and support of the electronic data collection system.

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Conceived and designed the study: NM, ZK, PM, MB; Data collection: ZK; Helped in data collection: NM, MB, AK; analyzed and interpreted the data: NM, ZK; Wrote the first draft of the manuscript: NM, ZK. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Nazanin Moslehi or Parvin Mirmiran.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The Research Ethics Committees of the National Nutrition and Food Technology Research Institute, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, approved this investigation (approval number: IR.SBMU.NNFTRI.REC.1401.004).

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moslehi, N., Kamali, Z., Barzin, M. et al. Major dietary patterns and their associations with total weight loss and weight loss composition 2–4 years after sleeve gastrectomy. Eur J Med Res 29, 417 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-024-02009-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-024-02009-w

Keywords