Sami Doğan1, Attila Önmez2, Mehmet Fuat Çetin1, İsmet Özaydın1, Mevlüt Pehlivan1. 1. Department of General Surgery, Duzce University, Medical Faculty, Duzce, Turkey. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, Duzce University, Medical Faculty, Duzce, Turkey. attilaonmez@gmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become a popular procedure for treating obesity. Excessive residual gastric volume (RGV) may be one cause of insufficient weight loss following this surgery. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between weight loss and the RGV measured during surgery over a 2-year follow-up period. METHODS: All patients undergoing LSG at our university surgery department were included in this prospective observational study. During the operation, the pylorus was grasped with a laparoscopic clamp, and saline solution dyed with methylene blue was introduced using an intraluminal glass-tipped injector when the residual stomach became fully visible. The amount of fluid given when the remaining gastric tissue ceased expanding was noted. The patients were divided into three groups depending on the volume of the residual gastric tissue. Percentages of excess weight loss (EWL%) were also evaluated 6, 12, and 24 months after the LSG. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients (50 females and 12 males) with a mean age of 36 (17-56) years were included in the study. There was no significant difference between the preoperative and postoperative body mass index values (p = 0.407 and p = 0.337, respectively) or between the preoperative and postoperative weight (p = 0.081 and p = 0.517, respectively) among the groups. A comparison of the participants' weight losses and EWL% values after 6, 12, and 24 months of follow-up revealed no significant difference among the groups at any time point (p > 0.005). CONCLUSION: Greater weight loss was observed as the RGV decreased over the 24-month follow-up period. However, that weight loss was not statistically significant.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become a popular procedure for treating obesity. Excessive residual gastric volume (RGV) may be one cause of insufficient weight loss following this surgery. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between weight loss and the RGV measured during surgery over a 2-year follow-up period. METHODS: All patients undergoing LSG at our university surgery department were included in this prospective observational study. During the operation, the pylorus was grasped with a laparoscopic clamp, and saline solution dyed with methylene blue was introduced using an intraluminal glass-tipped injector when the residual stomach became fully visible. The amount of fluid given when the remaining gastric tissue ceased expanding was noted. The patients were divided into three groups depending on the volume of the residual gastric tissue. Percentages of excess weight loss (EWL%) were also evaluated 6, 12, and 24 months after the LSG. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients (50 females and 12 males) with a mean age of 36 (17-56) years were included in the study. There was no significant difference between the preoperative and postoperative body mass index values (p = 0.407 and p = 0.337, respectively) or between the preoperative and postoperative weight (p = 0.081 and p = 0.517, respectively) among the groups. A comparison of the participants' weight losses and EWL% values after 6, 12, and 24 months of follow-up revealed no significant difference among the groups at any time point (p > 0.005). CONCLUSION: Greater weight loss was observed as the RGV decreased over the 24-month follow-up period. However, that weight loss was not statistically significant.
Authors: Paul Poirier; Marc-André Cornier; Theodore Mazzone; Sasha Stiles; Susan Cummings; Samuel Klein; Peter A McCullough; Christine Ren Fielding; Barry A Franklin Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-03-14 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: David Nocca; Marcelo Loureiro; El Mehdi Skalli; Marius Nedelcu; Audrey Jaussent; Melanie Deloze; Patrick Lefebvre; Jean Michel Fabre Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2016-12-23 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Richard Welbourn; Dimitri J Pournaras; John Dixon; Kelvin Higa; Robin Kinsman; Johan Ottosson; Almino Ramos; Bart van Wagensveld; Peter Walton; Rudolf Weiner; Natan Zundel Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 4.129
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: Lars Sjöström; Kristina Narbro; C David Sjöström; Kristjan Karason; Bo Larsson; Hans Wedel; Ted Lystig; Marianne Sullivan; Claude Bouchard; Björn Carlsson; Calle Bengtsson; Sven Dahlgren; Anders Gummesson; Peter Jacobson; Jan Karlsson; Anna-Karin Lindroos; Hans Lönroth; Ingmar Näslund; Torsten Olbers; Kaj Stenlöf; Jarl Torgerson; Göran Agren; Lena M S Carlsson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-08-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Małgorzata Deręgowska-Cylke; Piotr Palczewski; Marcin Błaż; Radosław Cylke; Paweł Ziemiański; Wojciech Szeszkowski; Wojciech Lisik; Marek Gołębiowski Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2021-11-19 Impact factor: 3.479