BACKGROUND: Few studies about long-term glucose homeostasis in bariatric patients are available. In a prospective protocol that included retrospective information, outcome of patients with both impaired and normal fasting blood glucose (FBG) was monitored to assess frequencies and correlates. METHODS: Patients submitted to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass were classified as group I, elevated FBG, and group II, normal controls. Those in group I with improvement in FBG were defined as responsive and the others as refractory. Group II participants progressing to new-onset diabetes (NOD) or prediabetes represented NOD cases; the remaining were listed as stable controls. FBG was the main endpoint, but HbA1c results were considered, along with diet composition and general biochemical profile. RESULTS: Among 97 selected patients, 51 belonged to group I (52.4 ± 10.5 years, 29.6 % males, initial body mass index (BMI) 58.4 ± 13.4, current BMI 35.1 ± 8.4 kg/m(2)) and 46 to group II (48.2 ± 10.5 years, 19.6 % males, initial BMI 55.5 ± 8.8, current BMI 33.9 ± 6.9 kg/m(2)). Follow-up was 7-9 years, and 31.4 % (16/51) of group I were classified as refractory, whereas 15.2 % (7/46) of the controls converted to NOD. Multivariate analysis pointed out higher current BMI, older age, consumption of antidiabetic drugs, and male gender as features of refractory cases, whereas NOD participants were not significantly different from non-progressing controls. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first investigation, to the best of our knowledge, to underscore the correlates of refractory and NOD within the bariatric context. Further studies are recommended as such information could be valuable for patient selection, prognostic scoring, and outcome monitoring.
BACKGROUND: Few studies about long-term glucose homeostasis in bariatric patients are available. In a prospective protocol that included retrospective information, outcome of patients with both impaired and normal fasting blood glucose (FBG) was monitored to assess frequencies and correlates. METHODS:Patients submitted to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass were classified as group I, elevated FBG, and group II, normal controls. Those in group I with improvement in FBG were defined as responsive and the others as refractory. Group II participants progressing to new-onset diabetes (NOD) or prediabetes represented NOD cases; the remaining were listed as stable controls. FBG was the main endpoint, but HbA1c results were considered, along with diet composition and general biochemical profile. RESULTS: Among 97 selected patients, 51 belonged to group I (52.4 ± 10.5 years, 29.6 % males, initial body mass index (BMI) 58.4 ± 13.4, current BMI 35.1 ± 8.4 kg/m(2)) and 46 to group II (48.2 ± 10.5 years, 19.6 % males, initial BMI 55.5 ± 8.8, current BMI 33.9 ± 6.9 kg/m(2)). Follow-up was 7-9 years, and 31.4 % (16/51) of group I were classified as refractory, whereas 15.2 % (7/46) of the controls converted to NOD. Multivariate analysis pointed out higher current BMI, older age, consumption of antidiabetic drugs, and male gender as features of refractory cases, whereas NODparticipants were not significantly different from non-progressing controls. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first investigation, to the best of our knowledge, to underscore the correlates of refractory and NOD within the bariatric context. Further studies are recommended as such information could be valuable for patient selection, prognostic scoring, and outcome monitoring.
Authors: Lars Sjöström; Anna-Karin Lindroos; Markku Peltonen; Jarl Torgerson; Claude Bouchard; Björn Carlsson; Sven Dahlgren; Bo Larsson; Kristina Narbro; Carl David Sjöström; Marianne Sullivan; Hans Wedel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-12-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Robson K Ishida; Joel Faintuch; Ana M R Paula; Christiane A Risttori; Sabrina N Silva; Elaine S Gomes; Rejane Mattar; Rogerio Kuga; Adriana S Ribeiro; Paulo Sakai; Hermes V Barbeiro; Denise F Barbeiro; Francisco G Soriano; Ivan Cecconello Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: E Papakonstantinou; D Triantafillidou; D B Panagiotakos; A Koutsovasilis; M Saliaris; A Manolis; A Melidonis; A Zampelas Journal: Eur J Clin Nutr Date: 2010-03-10 Impact factor: 4.016
Authors: Klaus Günther; Jörg Vollmuth; Rafael Weissbach; Werner Hohenberger; Bernhard Husemann; Thomas Horbach Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: W J Pories; M S Swanson; K G MacDonald; S B Long; P G Morris; B M Brown; H A Barakat; R A deRamon; G Israel; J M Dolezal Journal: Ann Surg Date: 1995-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: S D Long; K O'Brien; K G MacDonald; N Leggett-Frazier; M S Swanson; W J Pories; J F Caro Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 1994-05 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Maria Carolina G Dias; Angela G Ribeiro; Veruska M Scabim; Joel Faintuch; Bruno Zilberstein; Joaquim José Gama-Rodrigues Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) Date: 2006-04-25 Impact factor: 2.365
Authors: Joel Faintuch; Silvia Y Hayashi; Sergio C Nahas; Osmar K Yagi; Salomao Faintuch; Ivan Cecconello Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-11-01 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: K Dogan; B Betzel; J Homan; E O Aarts; N Ploeger; H de Boer; Th J Aufenacker; C J H M van Laarhoven; I M C Janssen; F J Berends Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Stephen W Davies; Jimmy T Efird; Christopher A Guidry; Rachel I Penn; Robert G Sawyer; Bruce D Schirmer; Peter T Hallowell Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2014-01-29 Impact factor: 2.192