D B Jones1, D A Provost, E J DeMaria, C D Smith, L Morgenstern, B Schirmer. 1. Harvard Medical School, Section of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Bariatric Program, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA. Djones1@bidmc.harvard.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Obesity is a growing health problem that contributes to numerous life-threatening or disabling disorders, including coronary artery disease, hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, degenerative joint disease, and obstructive sleep apnea. Significant weight reduction in the morbidly obese improves or reverses associated illness and benefits well-being. The purpose of the SAGES Appropriateness Conference was to summarize the state of the art for open and laparoscopic operations for the morbidly obese. METHODS: The English literature comparing bariatric procedures was reviewed and grouped by level of evidence by three surgeons (BS, LV, and CC). From more than 1,500 articles, all conference participants were provided with reprints and table summaries of no less than 50 selected manuscripts. Ten experts were requested to present reviews and make evidence-based arguments for and against the open and laparoscopic approaches in written format. An expert panel of six surgeons, including an ethicist and patient, commented on implications of data presented. The finalized statement was e-mailed to all participants for approval and comment. RESULTS: Consensus statements were achieved on various aspects of morbid obesity, including indications for surgery, resolution of comorbid illnesses with significant weight loss, and the importance of committed bariatric program. Our panel of experts agreed, in general, to the advantages of laparoscopic approaches compared to open operations in skilled hands. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) affords improved short-term recovery compared to open gastric bypass. Laparoscopic adjustable banding can be performed with lower average mortality than either RYGB or any of the malabsorptive operations, and it produces variable degrees of short-term weight loss. Prospective randomized trials are needed to compare gastric bypass, malabsorptive, and restrictive procedures.
BACKGROUND:Obesity is a growing health problem that contributes to numerous life-threatening or disabling disorders, including coronary artery disease, hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, degenerative joint disease, and obstructive sleep apnea. Significant weight reduction in the morbidly obese improves or reverses associated illness and benefits well-being. The purpose of the SAGES Appropriateness Conference was to summarize the state of the art for open and laparoscopic operations for the morbidly obese. METHODS: The English literature comparing bariatric procedures was reviewed and grouped by level of evidence by three surgeons (BS, LV, and CC). From more than 1,500 articles, all conference participants were provided with reprints and table summaries of no less than 50 selected manuscripts. Ten experts were requested to present reviews and make evidence-based arguments for and against the open and laparoscopic approaches in written format. An expert panel of six surgeons, including an ethicist and patient, commented on implications of data presented. The finalized statement was e-mailed to all participants for approval and comment. RESULTS: Consensus statements were achieved on various aspects of morbid obesity, including indications for surgery, resolution of comorbid illnesses with significant weight loss, and the importance of committed bariatric program. Our panel of experts agreed, in general, to the advantages of laparoscopic approaches compared to open operations in skilled hands. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) affords improved short-term recovery compared to open gastric bypass. Laparoscopic adjustable banding can be performed with lower average mortality than either RYGB or any of the malabsorptive operations, and it produces variable degrees of short-term weight loss. Prospective randomized trials are needed to compare gastric bypass, malabsorptive, and restrictive procedures.
Authors: P A Tataranni; G Mingrone; C A Raguso; A De Gaetano; R M Tacchino; M Castagneto; A V Greco Journal: Nutrition Date: 1996-04 Impact factor: 4.008
Authors: N Scopinaro; G F Adami; G M Marinari; E Gianetta; E Traverso; D Friedman; G Camerini; G Baschieri; A Simonelli Journal: World J Surg Date: 1998-09 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Bruce D Schirmer; Philip R Schauer; David R Flum; James Ellsmere; Daniel B Jones Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Martin Fried; Vojtech Hainer; Arnaud Basdevant; Henry Buchwald; Mervyn Deitel; Nicholas Finer; Jan Willem M Greve; Fritz Horber; Elisabeth Mathus-Vliegen; Nicola Scopinaro; Rudolf Steffen; Constantine Tsigos; Rudolf Weiner; Kurt Widhalm Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: U Parini; M Fabozzi; R Brachet Contul; P Millo; A Loffredo; R Allieta; M Nardi; E Lale-Murix Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Urs Zingg; Alexander McQuinn; Dennis DiValentino; Steven Kinsey-Trotman; Philip Game; David Watson Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Markus K Müller; Josef Guber; Stefan Wildi; Ivo Guber; Pierre-Alain Clavien; Markus Weber Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2007-07 Impact factor: 4.129