BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of studies comparing risk reduction of the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and Framingham-body mass index (BMI) Coronary Heart risk score after a laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and few studies have assessed the efficacy of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in reducing cardiovascular risk. OBJECTIVE: Our goal in this study was to compare the impact of SG and RYGB on cardiovascular risk reduction. SETTING: U.S. university hospital. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of all SG or RYGB cases at our institution between 2010 and 2015. Patients who met the criteria for calculating the ASCVD 10-year and Framingham-BMI score were included in the study. Propensity score matching was used to match SG and RYGB on demographic characteristics and co-morbidities. RESULTS: Of the 1330 bariatric patients reviewed in the study period, 219 (19.3%) patients met the criteria for risk score calculation. SG was the most prevalent surgery in 72.6% (N = 159) of cases compared with RYGB in 27.4% (N = 60) of cases. At 12-month follow-up, ASCVD 10-year score had an absolute risk reduction of 3.9 ± 6.5% in SG patients and 2.9 ± 5.8% in RYGB patients (P = .3). Framingham-BMI score absolute risk reduction was 11.0 ± 12.0% in SG and 9.0 ± 11.0% in RYGB patients (P = .4), and the decrease in estimated heart age was 12.1 ± 15.6 years in SG versus 9.2 ± 9.6 years in RYGB (P = .1). The percentage of estimated BMI loss at 1 year was 68.1 ± 23.3% in SG versus 74.2 ± 24.8% in RYGB (P = .1). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that SG and RYGB are equally effective in improving cardiovascular risk and decreasing the estimated vascular/heart age at 12-month follow-up.
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of studies comparing risk reduction of the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and Framingham-body mass index (BMI) Coronary Heart risk score after a laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and few studies have assessed the efficacy of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in reducing cardiovascular risk. OBJECTIVE: Our goal in this study was to compare the impact of SG and RYGB on cardiovascular risk reduction. SETTING: U.S. university hospital. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of all SG or RYGB cases at our institution between 2010 and 2015. Patients who met the criteria for calculating the ASCVD 10-year and Framingham-BMI score were included in the study. Propensity score matching was used to match SG and RYGB on demographic characteristics and co-morbidities. RESULTS: Of the 1330 bariatric patients reviewed in the study period, 219 (19.3%) patients met the criteria for risk score calculation. SG was the most prevalent surgery in 72.6% (N = 159) of cases compared with RYGB in 27.4% (N = 60) of cases. At 12-month follow-up, ASCVD 10-year score had an absolute risk reduction of 3.9 ± 6.5% in SG patients and 2.9 ± 5.8% in RYGB patients (P = .3). Framingham-BMI score absolute risk reduction was 11.0 ± 12.0% in SG and 9.0 ± 11.0% in RYGB patients (P = .4), and the decrease in estimated heart age was 12.1 ± 15.6 years in SG versus 9.2 ± 9.6 years in RYGB (P = .1). The percentage of estimated BMI loss at 1 year was 68.1 ± 23.3% in SG versus 74.2 ± 24.8% in RYGB (P = .1). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that SG and RYGB are equally effective in improving cardiovascular risk and decreasing the estimated vascular/heart age at 12-month follow-up.
Authors: Andreas Oberbach; Nadine Schlichting; Yvonne Kullnick; Marco Heinrich; Stefanie Lehmann; Ulf Retschlag; Maik Friedrich; Lea Fayad; Arne Dietrich; Mouen A Khashab; Anthony N Kalloo; Vivek Kumbhari Journal: Endosc Int Open Date: 2019-11-25