Gustavo A Arman1, Jacques Himpens2, Jeroen Dhaenens3, Thierry Ballet4, Ramon Vilallonga3, Guido Leman3. 1. Division of Bariatric Surgery, AZ St-Blasius, Dendermonde, Belgium; Cavell Obesity Center, CHIREC, Brussels, Belgium. Electronic address: gusarman@hotmail.com. 2. Division of Bariatric Surgery, AZ St-Blasius, Dendermonde, Belgium; Cavell Obesity Center, CHIREC, Brussels, Belgium. 3. Division of Bariatric Surgery, AZ St-Blasius, Dendermonde, Belgium. 4. Cavell Obesity Center, CHIREC, Brussels, Belgium.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: More than 10 years of outcomes for sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) have not yet been documented. OBJECTIVES: Analysis of>11 years of outcomes of isolated LSG in terms of progression of weight, patient satisfaction, and evolution of co-morbidities and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) treatment. SETTING: Two European private hospitals. METHODS: Chart review and personal interview in consecutive patients who underwent primary isolated LSG (2001-2003). RESULTS: Of the 110 consecutive patients, complete follow-up data was available in 65 (59.1%). Mean follow-up was 11.7±.4 years. Two patients had died of non-procedure-related causes. Twenty (31.7%) patients required 21 reoperations: 14 conversions (10 duodenal switch (DS), 4 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and 3 resleeve procedures) for weight issues and 2 conversions (RYGB), and 2 hiatoplasties for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). For the 47 (74.6%) individuals who thus kept the simple sleeve construction, percentage of excess body mass index loss (%EBMIL) at 11+years was 62.5%, versus 81.7% (P = .015) for the 16 patients who underwent conversion to another construction. Mean %EBMIL for the entire cohort was 67.4%. At 11+years postoperatively, 30 patients versus 28 preoperatively required treatment for co-morbidities. None of the 7 patients preoperatively suffering from GERD were cured by the LSG procedure. Nine additional patients developed de novo GERD. Overall satisfaction rate was 8 (interquartile range 2) on a scale of 0-10. CONCLUSION: Isolated LSG provides a long-term %EBMIL of 62.5%. Conversion to another construction, required in 25% of the cases, provides a %EBMIL of 81.7% (P = .015). Patient satisfaction score remains good despite unfavorable GERD outcomes.
BACKGROUND: More than 10 years of outcomes for sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) have not yet been documented. OBJECTIVES: Analysis of>11 years of outcomes of isolated LSG in terms of progression of weight, patient satisfaction, and evolution of co-morbidities and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) treatment. SETTING: Two European private hospitals. METHODS: Chart review and personal interview in consecutive patients who underwent primary isolated LSG (2001-2003). RESULTS: Of the 110 consecutive patients, complete follow-up data was available in 65 (59.1%). Mean follow-up was 11.7±.4 years. Two patients had died of non-procedure-related causes. Twenty (31.7%) patients required 21 reoperations: 14 conversions (10 duodenal switch (DS), 4 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and 3 resleeve procedures) for weight issues and 2 conversions (RYGB), and 2 hiatoplasties for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). For the 47 (74.6%) individuals who thus kept the simple sleeve construction, percentage of excess body mass index loss (%EBMIL) at 11+years was 62.5%, versus 81.7% (P = .015) for the 16 patients who underwent conversion to another construction. Mean %EBMIL for the entire cohort was 67.4%. At 11+years postoperatively, 30 patients versus 28 preoperatively required treatment for co-morbidities. None of the 7 patients preoperatively suffering from GERD were cured by the LSG procedure. Nine additional patients developed de novo GERD. Overall satisfaction rate was 8 (interquartile range 2) on a scale of 0-10. CONCLUSION: Isolated LSG provides a long-term %EBMIL of 62.5%. Conversion to another construction, required in 25% of the cases, provides a %EBMIL of 81.7% (P = .015). Patient satisfaction score remains good despite unfavorable GERD outcomes.
Authors: Attila Csendes; Ana María Burgos; Gustavo Martinez; Manuel Figueroa; Jaime Castillo; Juan Carlos Díaz Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Pål André Hegland; Anny Aasprang; Ronette L Kolotkin; Grethe S Tell; John Roger Andersen Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Ramon Vilallonga; José Manuel Moreno Villares; Diego Yeste Fernández; Raquel Sánchez Santos; Felipe Casanueva Freijo; Francisco Santolaya Ochando; Nuria Leal Hernando; Albert Lecube Torelló; Luis Antonio Castaño González; Albert Feliu; Gontrand Lopez-Nava; Dolores Frutos; Felipe de la Cruz Vigo; Antonio J Torres Garcia; Juan Carlos Ruiz de Adana Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Mario Musella; Antonio Susa; Emilio Manno; Maurizio De Luca; Francesco Greco; Marco Raffaelli; Stefano Cristiano; Marco Milone; Paolo Bianco; Antonio Vilardi; Ivana Damiano; Gianni Segato; Laura Pedretti; Piero Giustacchini; Domenico Fico; Gastone Veroux; Luigi Piazza Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Austin Cottam; Daniel Cottam; Dana Portenier; Hinali Zaveri; Amit Surve; Samuel Cottam; Legrand Belnap; Walter Medlin; Christina Richards Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 4.129