BACKGROUND: There are growing numbers of patients who require revisional bariatric surgery due to the undesirable results of their primary procedures. The aim of this study was to review our experience with bariatric patients undergoing revisional surgery. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis to review the indications for revisional bariatric procedures and assess their postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: From 04/04 to 01/11, 2,918 patients underwent bariatric surgery at our institution. A total of 154 patients (5.3%) of these cases were coded as revisional procedures. The mean age at revision was 49.1 ± 11.3 and the mean BMI was 44.0 ± 13.7 kg/m2. Revisional surgery was performed laparoscopically in 121 patients (78.6%). Laparoscopic revisions had less blood loss, shorter length of hospital stay, and fewer complications compared to open revisions. Two groups (A and B) were defined by the indication for revision: patients with unsuccessful weight loss (group A, n = 106) and patients with complications of their primary procedures (group B, n = 48). In group A, 74.5% of the patients were revised to a bypass procedure and 25.5% to a restrictive procedure. Mean excess weight loss was 53.7 ± 29.3% after revision of primary restrictive procedures and 37.6 ± 35.1% after revision of bypass procedures at >1-year follow-up (p < 0.05). In group B, the complications prompting revision were effectively treated by revisional surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Revisional bariatric surgery effectively treated the undesirable results from primary bariatric surgery. Laparoscopic revisional surgery can be performed after both failed open and laparoscopic bariatric procedures without a prohibitive complication rate. Carefully selected patients undergoing revision for weight regain have satisfactory additional weight loss.
BACKGROUND: There are growing numbers of patients who require revisional bariatric surgery due to the undesirable results of their primary procedures. The aim of this study was to review our experience with bariatric patients undergoing revisional surgery. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis to review the indications for revisional bariatric procedures and assess their postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: From 04/04 to 01/11, 2,918 patients underwent bariatric surgery at our institution. A total of 154 patients (5.3%) of these cases were coded as revisional procedures. The mean age at revision was 49.1 ± 11.3 and the mean BMI was 44.0 ± 13.7 kg/m2. Revisional surgery was performed laparoscopically in 121 patients (78.6%). Laparoscopic revisions had less blood loss, shorter length of hospital stay, and fewer complications compared to open revisions. Two groups (A and B) were defined by the indication for revision: patients with unsuccessful weight loss (group A, n = 106) and patients with complications of their primary procedures (group B, n = 48). In group A, 74.5% of the patients were revised to a bypass procedure and 25.5% to a restrictive procedure. Mean excess weight loss was 53.7 ± 29.3% after revision of primary restrictive procedures and 37.6 ± 35.1% after revision of bypass procedures at >1-year follow-up (p < 0.05). In group B, the complications prompting revision were effectively treated by revisional surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Revisional bariatric surgery effectively treated the undesirable results from primary bariatric surgery. Laparoscopic revisional surgery can be performed after both failed open and laparoscopic bariatric procedures without a prohibitive complication rate. Carefully selected patients undergoing revision for weight regain have satisfactory additional weight loss.
Authors: Tarja Martikainen; Elina Pirinen; Esko Alhava; Eero Poikolainen; Matti Pääkkönen; Matti Uusitupa; Helena Gylling Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Mario P Morales; Andrew A Wheeler; Archana Ramaswamy; J Stephen Scott; Roger A de la Torre Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2010-01-01 Impact factor: 4.734
Authors: Ruben Schouten; Dorothee C Wiryasaputra; Francois M H van Dielen; Wim G van Gemert; Jan Willem M Greve Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Kamal K Mahawar; Yitka Graham; William R J Carr; Neil Jennings; Norbert Schroeder; Shlok Balupuri; Peter K Small Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 4.129