Seda Sancak1, Özgen Çeler2, Elif Çırak3, Aziz Bora Karip4, M Tumiçin Aydın4, Nuriye Esen Bulut4, M Mahir Fersahoğlu4, Hasan Altun4,5, Kemal Memişoğlu4. 1. Fatih Sultan Mehmet Education and Research Hospital, Endocrinology and Metabolism Disorders, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Health Sciences, Atasehir, 34752, İstanbul, Turkey. drsedasancak@gmail.com. 2. Fatih Sultan Mehmet Education and Research Hospital, Endocrinology and Metabolism Disorders, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Health Sciences, Atasehir, 34752, İstanbul, Turkey. 3. Fatih Sultan Mehmet Education and Research Hospital, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Health Sciences, Atasehir, İstanbul, Turkey. 4. General Surgery Clinic, Fatih Sultan Mehmet Education and Research Hospital, University of Health Sciences, Atasehir, Istanbul, Turkey. 5. General Surgery Clinic, Liv Hospital, Ulus, Istanbul, Turkey.
Abstract
AIM: We aimed to evaluate the effect of pregnancy timing after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) on maternal and fetal outcomes. METHODS: Women with LSG were stratified into two groups with surgery-to-conception intervals of ≤ 18 months (early group) or > 18 months (late group). Only the first delivery after LSG was included in this study. We compared maternal characteristics, pregnancy, and neonatal outcomes and adherence to the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) recommendations for gestational weight gain (GWG) in the two groups. RESULTS: Fifteen patients conceived ≤ 18 months after surgery, with a mean surgery-to-conception interval of 5.6 ± 4.12 months, and 29 women conceived > 18 months following LSG, with a mean surgery-to-conception interval of 32.31 ± 11.38 months, p < 0.05. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding birth weight, gestational age, cesarean deliveries (CD), preterm birth, whether their child was small or large for their gestational age, or in the need of neonatal intensive care. There was no correlation between mean weight loss from operation till conception, mean weight gain during pregnancy, and mean body mass index (BMI) at conception between birth weight in either study group. Inadequate and normal GWG was significantly higher in the early group, whereas excessive GWG was significantly higher in the late group (X2, 20.780; p = < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The interval between LSG and conception did not impact maternal and neonatal outcomes. Pregnancy after LSG was overall safe and well-tolerated.
AIM: We aimed to evaluate the effect of pregnancy timing after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) on maternal and fetal outcomes. METHODS:Women with LSG were stratified into two groups with surgery-to-conception intervals of ≤ 18 months (early group) or > 18 months (late group). Only the first delivery after LSG was included in this study. We compared maternal characteristics, pregnancy, and neonatal outcomes and adherence to the Institute of Medicine's (IOM) recommendations for gestational weight gain (GWG) in the two groups. RESULTS: Fifteen patients conceived ≤ 18 months after surgery, with a mean surgery-to-conception interval of 5.6 ± 4.12 months, and 29 women conceived > 18 months following LSG, with a mean surgery-to-conception interval of 32.31 ± 11.38 months, p < 0.05. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding birth weight, gestational age, cesarean deliveries (CD), preterm birth, whether their child was small or large for their gestational age, or in the need of neonatal intensive care. There was no correlation between mean weight loss from operation till conception, mean weight gain during pregnancy, and mean body mass index (BMI) at conception between birth weight in either study group. Inadequate and normal GWG was significantly higher in the early group, whereas excessive GWG was significantly higher in the late group (X2, 20.780; p = < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The interval between LSG and conception did not impact maternal and neonatal outcomes. Pregnancy after LSG was overall safe and well-tolerated.
Authors: Irene González; Miguel A Rubio; Fernando Cordido; Irene Bretón; María J Morales; Nuria Vilarrasa; Susana Monereo; Albert Lecube; Assumptas Caixàs; Irene Vinagre; Albert Goday; Pedro P García-Luna Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2015-03 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Lone Nikoline Nørgaard; Anne Cathrine Roslev Gjerris; Ida Kirkegaard; Janne Foss Berlac; Ann Tabor Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-03-21 Impact factor: 3.240