BACKGROUND: Recent studies document excess weight loss (EWL) of more than 50% with the laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LGB). This study reviews the LGB experience at an urban academic center in terms of complications, reoperative rates, and comorbidities. METHODS: In this study, 144 consecutive patients undergoing LGB were prospectively reviewed. Data were collected including weight, body mass index (BMI), excess weight loss (EWL), comorbidities, and complications. Demographics were analyzed using a t-test. Linear regression was used to analyze the relationship of BMI, race, and age to EWL at 12 months. RESULTS: The study participants were 130 women with a mean age of 43 ± 11 years, a mean weight of 127.1 kg ± 20.5 kg, and a mean BMI of 45.6 ± 6.1. The mean follow-up period was 16 months. The mean EWL was 20% ± 14% at 6 months (n = 118), 26% ± 16% at 12 months (n = 106), 30% ± 20% at 18 months (n = 68), and 34% ± 23% at 24 months (n = 43). Patients with a BMI higher than 50 kg/m(2) had a lower EWL at 12 months than patients with a BMI lower than 50 kg/m(2) (P = 0.00005). The mean EWL at 12 months was significantly less for African Americans than for Caucasians (P = 0.0046; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3-15%). Patients older than 50 years had a lower EWL, but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.07). Complete and partial resolution of comorbidities occurred for 10% and 4% of the patients, respectively. Removal of the band with revision to a sleeve gastrectomy for inadequate EWL was required for 14 patients (11.5%). Complications occurred for 8% of the patients (n = 15) including port flipping, stoma obstruction, tube disconnection, port infections, dysphagia, and band slippage. Overall, 16.7% of the patients (n = 24) required reoperation. CONCLUSION: After LGB, a majority of the patients failed to achieve a 50% EWL, and 16.7% required reoperation. Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding may not be the optimal bariatric procedure for patients older than 50 years, patients with a BMI higher than 50 kg/m(2), or African Americans.
BACKGROUND: Recent studies document excess weight loss (EWL) of more than 50% with the laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LGB). This study reviews the LGB experience at an urban academic center in terms of complications, reoperative rates, and comorbidities. METHODS: In this study, 144 consecutive patients undergoing LGB were prospectively reviewed. Data were collected including weight, body mass index (BMI), excess weight loss (EWL), comorbidities, and complications. Demographics were analyzed using a t-test. Linear regression was used to analyze the relationship of BMI, race, and age to EWL at 12 months. RESULTS: The study participants were 130 women with a mean age of 43 ± 11 years, a mean weight of 127.1 kg ± 20.5 kg, and a mean BMI of 45.6 ± 6.1. The mean follow-up period was 16 months. The mean EWL was 20% ± 14% at 6 months (n = 118), 26% ± 16% at 12 months (n = 106), 30% ± 20% at 18 months (n = 68), and 34% ± 23% at 24 months (n = 43). Patients with a BMI higher than 50 kg/m(2) had a lower EWL at 12 months than patients with a BMI lower than 50 kg/m(2) (P = 0.00005). The mean EWL at 12 months was significantly less for African Americans than for Caucasians (P = 0.0046; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3-15%). Patients older than 50 years had a lower EWL, but the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.07). Complete and partial resolution of comorbidities occurred for 10% and 4% of the patients, respectively. Removal of the band with revision to a sleeve gastrectomy for inadequate EWL was required for 14 patients (11.5%). Complications occurred for 8% of the patients (n = 15) including port flipping, stoma obstruction, tube disconnection, port infections, dysphagia, and band slippage. Overall, 16.7% of the patients (n = 24) required reoperation. CONCLUSION: After LGB, a majority of the patients failed to achieve a 50% EWL, and 16.7% required reoperation. Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding may not be the optimal bariatric procedure for patients older than 50 years, patients with a BMI higher than 50 kg/m(2), or African Americans.
Authors: Wim Ceelen; Jean Walder; Anne Cardon; Katrien Van Renterghem; Uwe Hesse; Mohamed El Malt; Piet Pattyn Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Andrew E Chapman; George Kiroff; Philip Game; Bruce Foster; Paul O'Brien; John Ham; Guy J Maddern Journal: Surgery Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Laurent Biertho; Rudolf Steffen; Ruth Branson; Natascha Potoczna; Thomas Ricklin; Grazyna Piec; Fritz F Horber Journal: Surgery Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Cynthia L Ogden; Margaret D Carroll; Lester R Curtin; Margaret A McDowell; Carolyn J Tabak; Katherine M Flegal Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-04-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Nicolas V Christou; John S Sampalis; Moishe Liberman; Didier Look; Stephane Auger; Alexander P H McLean; Lloyd D MacLean Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: T Horbach; G Meyer; S Morales-Conde; I Alarcón; F Favretti; M Anselmino; G M Rovera; J Dargent; C Stroh; M Susewind; A J Torres Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2016-09-16 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Nikolaus P Zuegel; Reinhold A Lang; Thomas P Hüttl; Marc Gleis; Marguerite Ketfi-Jungen; Isabelle Rasquin; Martin Kox Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2012-03-20 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Pasquale Tammaro; Boris Hansel; Andrea Police; Marina Kousouri; Christophe Magnan; Jean Pierre Marmuse; Konstantinos Arapis Journal: World J Surg Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: A Alhamdani; M Wilson; T Jones; L Taqvi; P Gonsalves; M Boyle; K Mahawar; S Balupuri; P K Small Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Matthew G Browning; Nancy G Baugh; Luke G Wolfe; John K Kellum; James W Maher; Ronald K Evans Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 4.129