BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is a commonly performed bariatric procedure. LAGB is frequently complicated by slippage. Possible treatment for slippage is rebanding, but long-term effects are unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate whether rebanding after gastric band slippage is associated with weight loss failure. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of a prospectively collected database of 627 consecutive LAGB patients. Rebanding for slippage was performed in 81 patients. The effect of rebanding on weight loss was evaluated by three analyses: (1) in 81 rebanded patients, weight loss was compared before and after rebanding, separately for patients in whom primary LAGB was successful or unsuccessful; (2) 81 rebanded patients were matched to 81 patients without slippage for prognostic variables and compared for weight loss after rebanding; (3) multivariate logistic regression was performed whether rebanding was independently associated with weight loss failure. RESULTS: The chance of a fair result of rebanding for patients following primary successful (n = 34) and unsuccessful LAGB (n = 22) was 62 and 27 % after median follow-up of 113 and 97 months, respectively. There was no difference in weight loss failure between 81 rebanded patients and 81 matched patients: 54 vs 59 % (P = 0.43). In multivariate analysis, rebanding was not significantly associated with weight loss failure: adjusted odds ratio 1.42; 95 % confidence interval 0.85-2.38; P = 0.18. CONCLUSION: In general, rebanding after LAGB has no negative effect on weight loss. However, patients in whom LAGB was unsuccessful prior to rebanding have poor long-term weight loss results.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is a commonly performed bariatric procedure. LAGB is frequently complicated by slippage. Possible treatment for slippage is rebanding, but long-term effects are unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate whether rebanding after gastric band slippage is associated with weight loss failure. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of a prospectively collected database of 627 consecutive LAGB patients. Rebanding for slippage was performed in 81 patients. The effect of rebanding on weight loss was evaluated by three analyses: (1) in 81 rebanded patients, weight loss was compared before and after rebanding, separately for patients in whom primary LAGB was successful or unsuccessful; (2) 81 rebanded patients were matched to 81 patients without slippage for prognostic variables and compared for weight loss after rebanding; (3) multivariate logistic regression was performed whether rebanding was independently associated with weight loss failure. RESULTS: The chance of a fair result of rebanding for patients following primary successful (n = 34) and unsuccessful LAGB (n = 22) was 62 and 27 % after median follow-up of 113 and 97 months, respectively. There was no difference in weight loss failure between 81 rebanded patients and 81 matched patients: 54 vs 59 % (P = 0.43). In multivariate analysis, rebanding was not significantly associated with weight loss failure: adjusted odds ratio 1.42; 95 % confidence interval 0.85-2.38; P = 0.18. CONCLUSION: In general, rebanding after LAGB has no negative effect on weight loss. However, patients in whom LAGB was unsuccessful prior to rebanding have poor long-term weight loss results.
Authors: Richard John Egan; Simon J W Monkhouse; Hayley E Meredith; Sharon E Bates; Justin D T Morgan; Sally A Norton Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2011-08 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Roshani Vijaykumar Patel; Patrick Woodburn; James R A Skipworth; William James Buchanan Smellie Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: K Arapis; P Tammaro; L Ribeiro Parenti; A L Pelletier; D Chosidow; M Kousouri; C Magnan; B Hansel; J P Marmuse Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 4.129