BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) achieve similar type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remission rates. Since a great variability exists in defining T2DM remission, an expert panel proposed partial and complete remission criteria that include the maintenance of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and glycosylated hemoglobin (A1c) objectives for at least 1 year. The 2-year T2DM remission rate and time needed to reach it after LSG or LRYGB were compared using different remission criteria. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of 55 T2DM subjects operated on with LSG (n = 21) or LRYGB (n = 34). Four models for defining remission were used: Buchwald criteria (FPG <100 mg/dl or A1c <6 %), American Diabetes Association (ADA) complete (FPG <100 mg/dl plus A1c <6 % maintained for at least 1 year), ADA partial (FPG <125 mg/dl with A1c <6.5 % maintained for at least 1 year), and ADA complete without time requirement. RESULTS: Both groups were comparable, except for higher A1c levels in the LSG group. The remission rate ranged from 43.6 % using ADA complete remission to 92.7 % with Buchwald criteria, with no differences between surgical procedures. Differences were found in the time to achieve remission only when ADA complete remission criteria (5.1 ± 2.9 months LRYGB and 9.0 ± 3.8 months LSG, p = 0.014) and ADA without time requirement criteria (4.9 ± 2.7 months LRYGB and 8.4 ± 3.9 months LSG, p = 0.005) were used. CONCLUSIONS: T2DM remission rate varies widely depending on the criteria used for its definition. Remission occurred sooner after LRYGB when the strictest criteria to define remission were used.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) achieve similar type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remission rates. Since a great variability exists in defining T2DM remission, an expert panel proposed partial and complete remission criteria that include the maintenance of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and glycosylated hemoglobin (A1c) objectives for at least 1 year. The 2-year T2DM remission rate and time needed to reach it after LSG or LRYGB were compared using different remission criteria. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of 55 T2DM subjects operated on with LSG (n = 21) or LRYGB (n = 34). Four models for defining remission were used: Buchwald criteria (FPG <100 mg/dl or A1c <6 %), American Diabetes Association (ADA) complete (FPG <100 mg/dl plus A1c <6 % maintained for at least 1 year), ADA partial (FPG <125 mg/dl with A1c <6.5 % maintained for at least 1 year), and ADA complete without time requirement. RESULTS: Both groups were comparable, except for higher A1c levels in the LSG group. The remission rate ranged from 43.6 % using ADA complete remission to 92.7 % with Buchwald criteria, with no differences between surgical procedures. Differences were found in the time to achieve remission only when ADA complete remission criteria (5.1 ± 2.9 months LRYGB and 9.0 ± 3.8 months LSG, p = 0.014) and ADA without time requirement criteria (4.9 ± 2.7 months LRYGB and 8.4 ± 3.9 months LSG, p = 0.005) were used. CONCLUSIONS: T2DM remission rate varies widely depending on the criteria used for its definition. Remission occurred sooner after LRYGB when the strictest criteria to define remission were used.
Authors: Elizabeth Selvin; Michael W Steffes; Hong Zhu; Kunihiro Matsushita; Lynne Wagenknecht; James Pankow; Josef Coresh; Frederick L Brancati Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-03-04 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Rena R Wing; Paula Bolin; Frederick L Brancati; George A Bray; Jeanne M Clark; Mace Coday; Richard S Crow; Jeffrey M Curtis; Caitlin M Egan; Mark A Espeland; Mary Evans; John P Foreyt; Siran Ghazarian; Edward W Gregg; Barbara Harrison; Helen P Hazuda; James O Hill; Edward S Horton; Van S Hubbard; John M Jakicic; Robert W Jeffery; Karen C Johnson; Steven E Kahn; Abbas E Kitabchi; William C Knowler; Cora E Lewis; Barbara J Maschak-Carey; Maria G Montez; Anne Murillo; David M Nathan; Jennifer Patricio; Anne Peters; Xavier Pi-Sunyer; Henry Pownall; David Reboussin; Judith G Regensteiner; Amy D Rickman; Donna H Ryan; Monika Safford; Thomas A Wadden; Lynne E Wagenknecht; Delia S West; David F Williamson; Susan Z Yanovski Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-06-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: John B Buse; Sonia Caprio; William T Cefalu; Antonio Ceriello; Stefano Del Prato; Silvio E Inzucchi; Sue McLaughlin; Gordon L Phillips; R Paul Robertson; Francesco Rubino; Richard Kahn; M Sue Kirkman Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Ana M Ramos-Levi; Lucio Cabrerizo; Pilar Matía; Andrés Sánchez-Pernaute; Antonio J Torres; Miguel A Rubio Journal: BMC Surg Date: 2013-03-28 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Zhamak Khorgami; Saeed Shoar; Alan A Saber; C Anthony Howard; Goodarz Danaei; Guido M Sclabas Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2019-03 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Peter Vasas; Waleed Al-Khyatt; Iskandar Idris; Paul C Leeder; Altaf K Awan; Sherif Awad; Javed Ahmed Journal: World J Surg Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Ana Carolina Junqueira Vasques; José Carlos Pareja; Maria da Saúde de Oliveira; Fernanda Satake Novaes; Marcelo Miranda Oliveira Lima; Élinton A Chaim; Francesca Piccinini; Chiara Dalla Man; Claudio Cobelli; Bruno Geloneze Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: María R Alhambra-Expósito; María J Molina-Puerta; María I Prior-Sánchez; Gregorio Manzano-García; Alfonso Calañas-Continente; María A Gálvez-Moreno Journal: BMC Endocr Disord Date: 2017-08-15 Impact factor: 2.763
Authors: Daniel Coelho; Eudes Paiva de Godoy; Igor Marreiros; Vinicius Fernando da Luz; Antônio Manuel Gouveia de Oliveira; Josemberg Marins Campos; Silvio da Silva Caldas-Neto; Mirella Patrícia Cruz de Freitas Journal: Arq Bras Cir Dig Date: 2018-03-01