INTRODUCTION: Bariatric surgeries are the only effective long-term treatment in obese patients. The innovation of laparoscopic gastric plication (LGP) raised some questions about its effectiveness compared to traditionally used techniques such as laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). We tried to answer some of these questions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We investigated 70 patients in a randomized clinical trial (IRCT2013123012294N5) from 2012 to 2015. Thirty-five patients were randomly assigned to each LSG or LGP group, using sealed envelope method. The body mass index (BMI) reduction and the percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) along with %total body weight loss (%TWL) were primary endpoint and were assessed at follow-up periods. We recorded postoperative complications, as well. RESULTS: Two-year follow-up rate was 100%. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in means of preoperative BMI. Also, postoperative follow-ups were not suggestive for a significant difference in BMI (all p values > 0.05). The mean %EWL at follow-ups showed no significant difference at any point, except for 3 and 6 months after surgery (p value = 0.002 and 0.017, respectively). This finding was confirmed by %TWL trend in 12 months after surgery. LSG patients were readmitted more than LGP patients (seven cases vs one case, p value = 0.024). Postoperative complications such as nausea and vomiting, hair loss, iron deficiency, vitamin D deficiency, and cholelithiasis were not different between the two groups. There was one death in the LGP group due to pulmonary thromboembolism. CONCLUSIONS:LGP showed to be efficient regarding %EWL and %TWL reduction in short-term follow-ups with comparable postoperative complications to LSG.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: Bariatric surgeries are the only effective long-term treatment in obesepatients. The innovation of laparoscopic gastric plication (LGP) raised some questions about its effectiveness compared to traditionally used techniques such as laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). We tried to answer some of these questions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We investigated 70 patients in a randomized clinical trial (IRCT2013123012294N5) from 2012 to 2015. Thirty-five patients were randomly assigned to each LSG or LGP group, using sealed envelope method. The body mass index (BMI) reduction and the percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) along with %total body weight loss (%TWL) were primary endpoint and were assessed at follow-up periods. We recorded postoperative complications, as well. RESULTS: Two-year follow-up rate was 100%. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in means of preoperative BMI. Also, postoperative follow-ups were not suggestive for a significant difference in BMI (all p values > 0.05). The mean %EWL at follow-ups showed no significant difference at any point, except for 3 and 6 months after surgery (p value = 0.002 and 0.017, respectively). This finding was confirmed by %TWL trend in 12 months after surgery. LSG patients were readmitted more than LGP patients (seven cases vs one case, p value = 0.024). Postoperative complications such as nausea and vomiting, hair loss, iron deficiency, vitamin D deficiency, and cholelithiasis were not different between the two groups. There was one death in the LGP group due to pulmonary thromboembolism. CONCLUSIONS: LGP showed to be efficient regarding %EWL and %TWL reduction in short-term follow-ups with comparable postoperative complications to LSG.
Authors: Melinda A Maggard; Lisa R Shugarman; Marika Suttorp; Margaret Maglione; Harvey J Sugerman; Harvey J Sugarman; Edward H Livingston; Ninh T Nguyen; Zhaoping Li; Walter A Mojica; Lara Hilton; Shannon Rhodes; Sally C Morton; Paul G Shekelle Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2005-04-05 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: J Picot; J Jones; J L Colquitt; E Gospodarevskaya; E Loveman; L Baxter; A J Clegg Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2009-09 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Toni El Soueidy; Radwan Kassir; Mary Nakhoul; Axel Balian; Marco Nunziante; Maissa Safieddine; Gabriel Perlemuter; Panagiotis Lainas; Ibrahim Dagher Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2020-11-19 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Francesco M Carrano; Angelo Iossa; Nicola Di Lorenzo; Gianfranco Silecchia; Katerina-Maria Kontouli; Dimitris Mavridis; Isaias Alarçon; Daniel M Felsenreich; Sergi Sanchez-Cordero; Angelo Di Vincenzo; M Carmen Balagué-Ponz; Rachel L Batterham; Nicole Bouvy; Catalin Copaescu; Dror Dicker; Martin Fried; Daniela Godoroja; David Goitein; Jason C G Halford; Marina Kalogridaki; Maurizio De Luca; Salvador Morales-Conde; Gerhard Prager; Andrea Pucci; Ramon Vilallonga; Iris Zani; Per Olav Vandvik; Stavros A Antoniou Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2022-01-20 Impact factor: 4.584