| Literature DB >> 28250984 |
Guillaume Philouze1, Eglantine Voitellier1, Laurence Lacaze1, Emmanuel Huet1, Antoine Gancel2, Gaëtan Prévost2, Michael Bubenheim3, Michel Scotté1.
Abstract
Introduction. Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG) is considered as successful if the percentage of Excess Body Mass Index Loss (% EBMIL) remains constant over 50% with long-term follow-up. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether early % EBMIL was predictive of success after SG. Methods. This retrospective study included patients who had SG with two years of follow-up. Patients had follow-up appointments at 3 (M3), 6, 12, and 24 months (M24). Data as weight and Body Mass Index (BMI) were collected systematically. We estimated the % EBMIL necessary to establish a correlation between M3 and M24 compared to % EBMIL speeds and calculated a limit value of % EBMIL predictive of success. Results. Data at operative time, M3, and M24 were available for 128 patients. Pearson test showed a correlation between % EBMIL at M3 and that at M24 (r = 0.74; p < 0.0001). % EBMIL speed between surgery and M3 (p = 0.0011) was significant but not between M3 and M24. A linear regression analysis proved that % EBMIL over 20.1% at M3 (p < 0.0001) predicted a final % EBMIL over 50%. Conclusions. % EBMIL at M3 after SG is correlated with % EBMIL in the long term. % EBMIL speed was significant in the first 3 months. % EBMIL over 20.1% at M3 leads to the success of SG.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28250984 PMCID: PMC5303591 DOI: 10.1155/2017/2107157
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Obes ISSN: 2090-0708
Patients' characteristics at baseline.
| Variable |
|
|---|---|
| Age (years ± SD) | 39.9 ± 11.0 |
| Sex (female : male %) | 78.9 : 21.1 |
| BMI (kg/m2, mean ± SD) | 49.3 ± 7.4 |
| Sleep apnea (%) | 26.6 |
| Hypertension (%) | 19.5 |
| T2DM (%) | 16.4 |
| Dyslipidemia (%) | 5.5 |
| Preoperative weight (mean ± SD) | 133.7 ± 21.0 |
| Ideal weight (mean ± SD) | 59.6 ± 6.2 |
BMI: Body Mass Index; T2DM: type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Figure 1Evolution in weight parameters during 24 months of follow-up. M3: at 3 months; M6: at 6 months; M12: at 12 months; M24: at 24 months. (a) Weight Loss Curve before and after SG: preoperative and at M3, M6, M12, and M24. (b) % EWL curve before and after SG: preoperative and at M3, M6, M12, and M24. (c) % TWL curve before and after SG: preoperative and at M3, M6, M12, and M24. (d) % EBMIL curve before and after SG: preoperative and at M3, M6, M12, and M24.
Figure 2Excess Body Mass Index Loss (% EBMIL) correlation test between M3 and M24. EBMIL: Excess BMI Loss; M3: at 3 months; M24: at 24 months.
Figure 3Comparison of Excess Body Mass Index Loss (% EBMIL) speeds between operative time-M3 and operative time-M24. EBMIL: Excess BMI Loss; OP-M3: time interval between operative time and 3rd month; OP-M24: time interval between operative time and 24th month; M3-M24: time interval between 3rd month and 24th month. EBMIL speeds are compared using the paired t-test.
Figure 4Determination of the success of predictive Excess Body Mass Index Loss (% EBMIL) at M3 (linear regression analysis). EBMIL: Excess BMI Loss; M3: at 3 months; M24: at 24 months.
Figure 5Evolution of comorbidities. (a) Evolution of comorbidities in preoperative time and three months and two years after surgery. SA: sleep apnea; HTA: hypertension; M3: at 3 months; M24: at 24 months. (b) Resolution of comorbidities at M3 and M24 for all comorbidities of 54 patients presenting with at least one preoperative comorbidity. M3: at 3 months; M24: at 24 months. (c) Relationship between Excess Body Mass Index Loss (% EBMIL) and resolution of comorbidities. M3: at 3 months.