BACKGROUND: The long-term durability of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) remains ill-defined in the American population secondary to poor follow-up after bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the population lost to follow-up to better define the long-term durability of RYGB for weight loss and co-morbidity amelioration. METHODS: All patients (n = 1087) undergoing RYGB at a single institution between 1985 and 2004 were evaluated. Univariate differences in preoperative co-morbidities, postoperative complications, annual weight loss, and 10-year co-morbidities were analyzed to compare outcomes between patients with routine follow-up and those without. Using electronic medical record review for all encounters at our academic medical center and telephone survey, we obtained data for patients lost to follow-up. RESULTS: Among 1087 RYGB patients, 151 (14%) had consistent 10-year follow-up in our prospectively collected database, with yearly clinic visits beyond 2 years postoperatively. Electronic medical record review and telephone survey data were collected on an additional 500 (46%) patients, resulting in 60% of patients having 10-year follow-up after RYGB. There was no statistical difference in any preoperative or postoperative variables between the 2 groups. We found no difference in co-morbidity prevalence preoperatively or at 10 years between groups. Examination of percent excess body mass index lost at yearly intervals revealed no difference between the groups at each interval up to 10 years (P = .36). CONCLUSION: We found no difference in 10-year outcomes, including weight loss and co-morbidity reduction, between patients with routine clinic visits and those lost to follow-up. These 10-year data address the gap in knowledge resulting from poor long-term follow-up after bariatric surgery.
BACKGROUND: The long-term durability of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) remains ill-defined in the American population secondary to poor follow-up after bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the population lost to follow-up to better define the long-term durability of RYGB for weight loss and co-morbidity amelioration. METHODS: All patients (n = 1087) undergoing RYGB at a single institution between 1985 and 2004 were evaluated. Univariate differences in preoperative co-morbidities, postoperative complications, annual weight loss, and 10-year co-morbidities were analyzed to compare outcomes between patients with routine follow-up and those without. Using electronic medical record review for all encounters at our academic medical center and telephone survey, we obtained data for patients lost to follow-up. RESULTS: Among 1087 RYGB patients, 151 (14%) had consistent 10-year follow-up in our prospectively collected database, with yearly clinic visits beyond 2 years postoperatively. Electronic medical record review and telephone survey data were collected on an additional 500 (46%) patients, resulting in 60% of patients having 10-year follow-up after RYGB. There was no statistical difference in any preoperative or postoperative variables between the 2 groups. We found no difference in co-morbidity prevalence preoperatively or at 10 years between groups. Examination of percent excess body mass index lost at yearly intervals revealed no difference between the groups at each interval up to 10 years (P = .36). CONCLUSION: We found no difference in 10-year outcomes, including weight loss and co-morbidity reduction, between patients with routine clinic visits and those lost to follow-up. These 10-year data address the gap in knowledge resulting from poor long-term follow-up after bariatric surgery.
Authors: Lars Sjöström; Markku Peltonen; Peter Jacobson; C David Sjöström; Kristjan Karason; Hans Wedel; Sofie Ahlin; Åsa Anveden; Calle Bengtsson; Gerd Bergmark; Claude Bouchard; Björn Carlsson; Sven Dahlgren; Jan Karlsson; Anna-Karin Lindroos; Hans Lönroth; Kristina Narbro; Ingmar Näslund; Torsten Olbers; Per-Arne Svensson; Lena M S Carlsson Journal: JAMA Date: 2012-01-04 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Matthew M Hutter; Bruce D Schirmer; Daniel B Jones; Clifford Y Ko; Mark E Cohen; Ryan P Merkow; Ninh T Nguyen Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: J Hunter Mehaffey; Damien J LaPar; Kathleen C Clement; Florence E Turrentine; Michael S Miller; Peter T Hallowell; Bruce D Schirmer Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Lars Sjöström; Markku Peltonen; Peter Jacobson; Sofie Ahlin; Johanna Andersson-Assarsson; Åsa Anveden; Claude Bouchard; Björn Carlsson; Kristjan Karason; Hans Lönroth; Ingmar Näslund; Elisabeth Sjöström; Magdalena Taube; Hans Wedel; Per-Arne Svensson; Kajsa Sjöholm; Lena M S Carlsson Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-06-11 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Sangeeta R Kashyap; Deepak L Bhatt; Kathy Wolski; Richard M Watanabe; Muhammad Abdul-Ghani; Beth Abood; Claire E Pothier; Stacy Brethauer; Steven Nissen; Manjula Gupta; John P Kirwan; Philip R Schauer Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2013-02-25 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Austin Cottam; Daniel Cottam; Hinali Zaveri; Samuel Cottam; Amit Surve; Walter Medlin; Christina Richards Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2018-09 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Max Meneveau; J Hunter Mehaffey; Peter D Adams; Florence E Turrentine; Bruce Schirmer; Peter T Hallowell Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2019-06 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Robert B Hawkins; J Hunter Mehaffey; Timothy L McMurry; Jennifer Kirby; Steven K Malin; Bruce Schirmer; Peter T Hallowell Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2017-08-09 Impact factor: 4.734
Authors: Florence E Turrentine; James H Mehaffey; Rachel L Mehaffey; Matthew G Mullen; Bruce D Schirmer; Peter T Hallowell Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2017-09 Impact factor: 4.129