Sonja Chiappetta1, Christine Stier2, Oliver Scheffel3, Simone Squillante4, Rudolf A Weiner3. 1. Department of Obesity and Metabolic Surgery, Sana Klinikum Offenbach, 63069, Offenbach am Main, Germany. sonja1002@gmx.de. 2. Adipositaszentrum, University Hospital of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany. 3. Department of Obesity and Metabolic Surgery, Sana Klinikum Offenbach, 63069, Offenbach am Main, Germany. 4. Department of General Surgery, Ospedale del Mare, Naples, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Whether one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is a better revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is still under debate. The aim is to compare short-term outcomes of RYGB and OAGB as a RBS after SG, pertaining to their effects on weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, and complications. METHODS: We performed a single-center analysis of 55 patients (n = 34 OAGB, n = 21 RYGB). Indications for revisional surgery included weight regain/loss failure (67%) and intractable gastroesophageal reflux disease (33%). Data were collected up to 1-year follow-up (FU) and included time of revisional surgery, operation time, weight, body mass index, excess weight loss, and total weight loss (TWL), both in percent, complications and resolution of comorbidities. RESULTS: Operation time was 79 ± 36 (OAGB-MGB) and 98 ± 24 min (RYGB) (p = 0.03). In the first 30 postoperative days, three patients in the RYGB group, and no patient in the OAGB group, had postoperative complications. FU was 100%. Minor complication rates at 12 months were 33.3% (RYGB) and 35.3% (OAGB). At 12 months, mean % TWL was 10.3 ± 7.6% (RYGB) and 15.8 ± 7.8% (OAGB) (p = 0.0132). CONCLUSIONS: OAGB after failed SG was found to be a quicker procedure with less perioperative complications. At 1-year FU, no significant differences were seen between RYGB and OAGB regarding readmission and minor complications. Still long-term FU including the risk of malnutrition is needed to have a complete evaluation of OAGB as a RBS for the future.
BACKGROUND: Whether one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is a better revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is still under debate. The aim is to compare short-term outcomes of RYGB and OAGB as a RBS after SG, pertaining to their effects on weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, and complications. METHODS: We performed a single-center analysis of 55 patients (n = 34 OAGB, n = 21 RYGB). Indications for revisional surgery included weight regain/loss failure (67%) and intractable gastroesophageal reflux disease (33%). Data were collected up to 1-year follow-up (FU) and included time of revisional surgery, operation time, weight, body mass index, excess weight loss, and total weight loss (TWL), both in percent, complications and resolution of comorbidities. RESULTS: Operation time was 79 ± 36 (OAGB-MGB) and 98 ± 24 min (RYGB) (p = 0.03). In the first 30 postoperative days, three patients in the RYGB group, and no patient in the OAGB group, had postoperative complications. FU was 100%. Minor complication rates at 12 months were 33.3% (RYGB) and 35.3% (OAGB). At 12 months, mean % TWL was 10.3 ± 7.6% (RYGB) and 15.8 ± 7.8% (OAGB) (p = 0.0132). CONCLUSIONS: OAGB after failed SG was found to be a quicker procedure with less perioperative complications. At 1-year FU, no significant differences were seen between RYGB and OAGB regarding readmission and minor complications. Still long-term FU including the risk of malnutrition is needed to have a complete evaluation of OAGB as a RBS for the future.
Authors: Robert A Casillas; Scott S Um; Jorge L Zelada Getty; Samantha Sachs; Benjamin B Kim Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2016-10-04 Impact factor: 4.734
Authors: Jens Homan; Bark Betzel; Edo O Aarts; Kees J H M van Laarhoven; Ignace M C Janssen; Frits J Berends Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2014-10-14 Impact factor: 4.734
Authors: Arthur Bohdjalian; Felix B Langer; Soheila Shakeri-Leidenmühler; Lisa Gfrerer; Bernhard Ludvik; Johannes Zacherl; Gerhard Prager Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2010-01-22 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Guy H Slater; Christine J Ren; Niccole Siegel; Trudy Williams; Di Barr; Barrie Wolfe; Kevin Dolan; George A Fielding Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Maurizio De Luca; Giacomo Piatto; Giovanni Merola; Jacques Himpens; Jean-Marc Chevallier; Miguel-A Carbajo; Kamal Mahawar; Alberto Sartori; Nicola Clemente; Miguel Herrera; Kelvin Higa; Wendy A Brown; Scott Shikora Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2021-05-03 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Mohammad Kermansaravi; Amir Hossein DavarpanahJazi; Shahab ShahabiShahmiri; Miguel Carbajo; Antonio Vitiello; Chetan D Parmar; Mario Musella Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2021-02-17 Impact factor: 4.129