BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have established the effectiveness of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for weight loss and co-morbidity amelioration. However, its safety and efficacy in elderly patients remains controversial. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcomes in patients aged ≥60 years who underwent RYGB compared with nonsurgical controls with the hypothesis that RYGB provides weight loss benefits without differences in survival. SETTING: University-affiliated tertiary center. METHODS: All patients who underwent RYGB from 1985 to 2015 were identified and divided into elderly (age ≥60) and nonelderly (age <60) groups. A nonsurgical elderly control population was identified using a clinical data repository of outpatient visits to propensity match elderly patients 4:1 on demographic characteristics, co-morbidities, and relevant preoperative substance/medication use. Unpaired appropriate univariate analyses compared each stratified group. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were fitted based on social security death data. RESULTS: A total of 2306 patients underwent RYGB. The 107 elderly patients had lower median body mass index (47.0 versus 49.9; P = .007) and higher rates of co-morbidities. Rates of complications did not differ between elderly and nonelderly patients. Elderly surgical patients were propensity matched 4:1 (10,044 controls) yielding 428 well-matched nonsurgical controls. The elderly group demonstrated significant percent reduction in excess body mass index compared with the control group (81.8% versus 10.3%; P < .001). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with log-rank test demonstrated no difference in midterm survival (P = .63). CONCLUSIONS: A significant weight reduction benefit was identified after RYGB in elderly patients without a difference in midterm survival compared with propensity-matched controls, suggesting RYGB is a safe and efficacious weight loss strategy in the elderly.
BACKGROUND: Numerous studies have established the effectiveness of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for weight loss and co-morbidity amelioration. However, its safety and efficacy in elderly patients remains controversial. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcomes in patients aged ≥60 years who underwent RYGB compared with nonsurgical controls with the hypothesis that RYGB provides weight loss benefits without differences in survival. SETTING: University-affiliated tertiary center. METHODS: All patients who underwent RYGB from 1985 to 2015 were identified and divided into elderly (age ≥60) and nonelderly (age <60) groups. A nonsurgical elderly control population was identified using a clinical data repository of outpatient visits to propensity match elderly patients 4:1 on demographic characteristics, co-morbidities, and relevant preoperative substance/medication use. Unpaired appropriate univariate analyses compared each stratified group. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were fitted based on social security death data. RESULTS: A total of 2306 patients underwent RYGB. The 107 elderly patients had lower median body mass index (47.0 versus 49.9; P = .007) and higher rates of co-morbidities. Rates of complications did not differ between elderly and nonelderly patients. Elderly surgical patients were propensity matched 4:1 (10,044 controls) yielding 428 well-matched nonsurgical controls. The elderly group demonstrated significant percent reduction in excess body mass index compared with the control group (81.8% versus 10.3%; P < .001). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with log-rank test demonstrated no difference in midterm survival (P = .63). CONCLUSIONS: A significant weight reduction benefit was identified after RYGB in elderly patients without a difference in midterm survival compared with propensity-matched controls, suggesting RYGB is a safe and efficacious weight loss strategy in the elderly.
Authors: Jennifer Reoch; Salvatore Mottillo; Avi Shimony; Kristian B Filion; Nicolas V Christou; Lawrence Joseph; Paul Poirier; Mark J Eisenberg Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2011-11
Authors: J Hunter Mehaffey; Mathew G Mullen; Rachel L Mehaffey; Florence E Turrentine; Steven K Malin; Jennifer L Kirby; Bruce Schirmer; Peter T Hallowell Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-05-13 Impact factor: 4.584