Cass K, Leggett A, Gibson DG. Diagnostic dilemma of avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder after bariatric surgery: A case report and review of literature. World J Clin Cases 2025; 13(24): 106941 [PMID: 40862203 DOI: 10.12998/wjcc.v13.i24.106941]
Reader's ID:
03560591
Submitted on:
June 24, 2025, 07:55
Reader Expertise:
Reader’s expertise on the topic of the manuscript
Conflicts-of-Interest Statement:
Does the reader have a conflict of interest?
Reader Comment Standards for Published Articles:
1 Title
Does the title reflect the main subject/hypothesis of the manuscript?
2 Abstract
Does the abstract summarize and reflect the work described in the manuscript?
3 Key Words
Do the key words reflect the focus of the manuscript?
4 Background
Does the manuscript adequately describe the background, present status and significance of the study?
5 Methods
Does the manuscript describe methods (e.g., experiments, data analysis, surveys, and clinical trials, etc.) in adequate detail?
6 Results
Are the research objectives achieved by the experiments used in this study?
Has the study made meaningful contributions towards research progress in this field?
7 Discussion
Does the manuscript interpret the findings adequately and appropriately, highlighting the key points concisely, clearly and logically?
Are the findings and their applicability/relevance to the literature stated in a clear and definite manner?
Is the Discussion accurate and does it discuss the paper’s scientific significance and/or relevance to clinical practice sufficiently?
8 Illustrations and Tables
Are the figures, diagrams and tables sufficient, good quality and appropriately illustrative of the paper contents?
Do figures require labeling with arrows, asterisks, etc., or better legends?
9 Biostatistics
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of biostatistics?
10 Units
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of use of SI units?
11 References
Does the manuscript appropriately cite the latest, important and authoritative references in the Introduction and Discussion sections?
Does the author self-cite, omit, incorrectly cite and/or over-cite references?
12 Quality of manuscript organization and presentation
Is the manuscript concisely and coherently organized and presented?
Are the style, language and grammar accurate and appropriate?
13 Ethics statements
For all manuscripts involving human studies and/or animal experiments, author(s) must submit the related formal ethics documents that were reviewed and approved by their local ethical review committee. Did the manuscript meet the requirements of ethics?
Scientific Quality:
The overall quality of the manuscript, based on the above-listed criteria, should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories
Language Quality:
Language quality (style, grammar, and spelling) should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories.
Reader Comments:
The manuscript by Camille Kass and co-authors focuses on the issue of eating disorders following bariatric surgery that may be associated with physical and physiological changes, as well as various psychological phenomena related to the effects of the surgery and dietary modifications. Diagnosis and treatment of these disorders require appropriate categorization within disease classification systems, particularly the DSM-5. However, creating such a classification with the inclusion of new categories in the existing list or expanding the diagnostic criteria requires a requires the accumulation of a sufficiently large database. The presented article describes a case of eating disorder after bariatric surgery with a detailed description of symptoms and their dynamics in the course of complex therapy. Based on the data obtained and the results of literature analysis, the authors conclude that the observed disorder is the closest to avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder according to DSM-5. At the same time, the results of the patient's follow-up confirm the opinions expressed by other authors about the need to include body dysmorphia, and the loss of personal identity associated with severe weight loss, in the diagnostic criteria for ARFID. The presented article has some relevance for the development of a diagnostic system for eating disorders. However, it should be noted that the authors did not practically consider the possible influence of the patient's premorbid background (generalized anxiety disorder) and its interaction with the effects of bariatric surgery on the observed eating disorders. In general, it seems reasonable and interesting to conduct such an analysis using author’s own results and data from the literature.
Reply from the Editorial Office:
First, thank you very much for your professional comments on the article published in World Journal of Clinical Cases.
Second, we read your comments with great interest. You are welcome to format your valuable comments into a Letter to the Editor and submit it online to World Journal of Clinical Cases at https://www.f6publishing.com. There are no restrictions on the number of words, figures (color, B/W) or authors for a Letter to the Editor. In addition, the article processing charge will be exempted for this Letter to the Editor. As with all articles published by the Baishideng Publishing Group, the Letter to the Editor will be published online after completing peer review. The guidelines for a Letter to the Editor can be found at: https://www.wjgnet.com/bpg/GerInfo/219.
Finally, we look forward to receiving your high-quality Letter to the Editor, which will promote academic communication and lead the development of this discipline.
Reader's ID:
08215565
Submitted on:
June 16, 2025, 14:48
Reader Expertise:
Reader’s expertise on the topic of the manuscript
Conflicts-of-Interest Statement:
Does the reader have a conflict of interest?
Reader Comment Standards for Published Articles:
1 Title
Does the title reflect the main subject/hypothesis of the manuscript?
2 Abstract
Does the abstract summarize and reflect the work described in the manuscript?
3 Key Words
Do the key words reflect the focus of the manuscript?
4 Background
Does the manuscript adequately describe the background, present status and significance of the study?
5 Methods
Does the manuscript describe methods (e.g., experiments, data analysis, surveys, and clinical trials, etc.) in adequate detail?
6 Results
Are the research objectives achieved by the experiments used in this study?
Has the study made meaningful contributions towards research progress in this field?
7 Discussion
Does the manuscript interpret the findings adequately and appropriately, highlighting the key points concisely, clearly and logically?
Are the findings and their applicability/relevance to the literature stated in a clear and definite manner?
Is the Discussion accurate and does it discuss the paper’s scientific significance and/or relevance to clinical practice sufficiently?
8 Illustrations and Tables
Are the figures, diagrams and tables sufficient, good quality and appropriately illustrative of the paper contents?
Do figures require labeling with arrows, asterisks, etc., or better legends?
9 Biostatistics
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of biostatistics?
10 Units
Does the manuscript meet the requirements of use of SI units?
11 References
Does the manuscript appropriately cite the latest, important and authoritative references in the Introduction and Discussion sections?
Does the author self-cite, omit, incorrectly cite and/or over-cite references?
12 Quality of manuscript organization and presentation
Is the manuscript concisely and coherently organized and presented?
Are the style, language and grammar accurate and appropriate?
13 Ethics statements
For all manuscripts involving human studies and/or animal experiments, author(s) must submit the related formal ethics documents that were reviewed and approved by their local ethical review committee. Did the manuscript meet the requirements of ethics?
Scientific Quality:
The overall quality of the manuscript, based on the above-listed criteria, should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories
Language Quality:
Language quality (style, grammar, and spelling) should be evaluated and classified according to the following five categories.
Reader Comments:
Cass K et al.'s report of the first documented case of avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) surgery highlights critical diagnostic gaps in post-bariatric eating pathology assessment. This instance illustrates how ARFID, marked by the avoidance of food due to fear of adverse outcomes such as nausea, can arise independently after surgery, differing from body-image-centered disorders like anorexia nervosa. The likely reason for previous underreporting is diagnostic overshadowing, where symptoms are mistakenly attributed to expected surgical side effects, and limitations in the DSM-5-TR, which excludes patients experiencing weight-loss-related body dysmorphia but not driven by fat phobia.
The patient's significant weight loss of 52.3 kg in just six months highlights the role of extreme weight suppression in inducing physiological stress, such as metabolic adaptation and hepatitis, which may exacerbate aversion to food. Additionally, voluntary vomiting, often reported by post-bariatric patients as a means of relieving discomfort rather than controlling weight, remains a challenging diagnostic issue. The current DSM-5-TR inaccurately categorizes this behavior as anorexia nervosa (AN) or bulimia, indicating a need for revised criteria for ARFID. Furthermore, body image disturbance in this population frequently stems from loose skin or identity disruption, rather than a fear of weight gain, emphasizing the importance of distinguishing this condition from AN to prevent ineffective treatments.
Prospective studies are necessary for future endeavors to ascertain the prevalence of ARFID, refine the DSM criteria to differentiate behavioral motivations (such as vomiting intent), and establish integrated multidisciplinary care models. Given the widespread increase in bariatric surgeries, it is urgent to develop surgery-specific diagnostic frameworks. Clinicians must screen for ARFID in post-bariatric patients who avoid food due to fear of aversive outcomes, regardless of any concurrent body image issues or intentional vomiting.
Reply from the Editorial Office:
First, thank you very much for your professional comments on the article published in World Journal of Clinical Cases.
Second, we read your comments with great interest. You are welcome to format your valuable comments into a Letter to the Editor and submit it online to World Journal of Clinical Cases at https://www.f6publishing.com. There are no restrictions on the number of words, figures (color, B/W) or authors for a Letter to the Editor. In addition, the article processing charge will be exempted for this Letter to the Editor. As with all articles published by the Baishideng Publishing Group, the Letter to the Editor will be published online after completing peer review. The guidelines for a Letter to the Editor can be found at: https://www.wjgnet.com/bpg/GerInfo/219.
Finally, we look forward to receiving your high-quality Letter to the Editor, which will promote academic communication and lead the development of this discipline.