Claudio Fiorillo1,2, Giuseppe Quero3,4, Michel Vix5, Ludovica Guerriero1, Margherita Pizzicannella1, Alfonso Lapergola1, Antonio D'Urso1, Lee Swanstrom1, Didier Mutter1,5,6, Bernard Dallemagne1,6, Silvana Perretta1,5,6. 1. Institute of image-guided surgery (IHU),1 place de l'Hôpital, 67091, Strasbourg, France. 2. Digestive Surgery Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 8 Largo A. Gemelli, 00166, Rome, Italy. 3. Institute of image-guided surgery (IHU),1 place de l'Hôpital, 67091, Strasbourg, France. giuseppequero@yahoo.it. 4. Digestive Surgery Unit, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, 8 Largo A. Gemelli, 00166, Rome, Italy. giuseppequero@yahoo.it. 5. Department of Digestive and Endocrine Surgery, University Hospital of Strasbourg, 1 place de l'Hôpital, 67091, Strasbourg, France. 6. IRCAD, Research Institute against Cancer of the Digestive System, Strasbourg, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is currently the most commonly performed bariatric procedure. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a promising new bariatric technique which is less invasive in its approach. To date no study has compared quality of life (QoL) outcomes between LSG and ESG. The aim of this study is to compare QoL after ESG and LSG using a propensity score analysis. METHODS: QoL was evaluated by means of Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) questionnaire before and 6 months after the procedure. Patients were matched for age, sex, preoperative weight, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Propensity score matching resulted in 23 pairs of patients homogeneous for age (p = 0.3), preoperative BMI (p = 0.3), sex (p = 0.74), and comorbidities (p = 0.9). Post-ESG patients, despite a less important %EWL (39.9 (17.5-58.9)vs 54.9 (46.2-65); p = 0.01) and %TWL (13.4 (7.8-20.9) vs 18.8 (17.6-21.8); p = 0.03), presented better QoL (14 [3-24] vs 13 (- 1-23) ΔGIQLI score; p = 0.79) with clear advantage for the gastrointestinal symptoms subdomain (66.5 (61-70.5) vs 59 (55-63); p = 0.001), while post-LSG patients presented a worsening of GERD symptoms (30.7% vs 0%) and an increased use of PPI therapy (p = 0.004). Resolution or improvement of comorbidities was similar (ESG 53% vs LSG 45.8%; p = 0.79) in both groups. CONCLUSION: LSG may significantly affect QoL and results in worsening of gastrointestinal symptoms including GERD. ESG is a promising less invasive bariatric endoscopic procedure that demonstrated a positive impact on both QoL and comorbidities, which could lead to greater patient acceptance earlier in their disease or at a younger age.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is currently the most commonly performed bariatric procedure. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a promising new bariatric technique which is less invasive in its approach. To date no study has compared quality of life (QoL) outcomes between LSG and ESG. The aim of this study is to compare QoL after ESG and LSG using a propensity score analysis. METHODS: QoL was evaluated by means of Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) questionnaire before and 6 months after the procedure. Patients were matched for age, sex, preoperative weight, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Propensity score matching resulted in 23 pairs of patients homogeneous for age (p = 0.3), preoperative BMI (p = 0.3), sex (p = 0.74), and comorbidities (p = 0.9). Post-ESG patients, despite a less important %EWL (39.9 (17.5-58.9)vs 54.9 (46.2-65); p = 0.01) and %TWL (13.4 (7.8-20.9) vs 18.8 (17.6-21.8); p = 0.03), presented better QoL (14 [3-24] vs 13 (- 1-23) ΔGIQLI score; p = 0.79) with clear advantage for the gastrointestinal symptoms subdomain (66.5 (61-70.5) vs 59 (55-63); p = 0.001), while post-LSG patients presented a worsening of GERD symptoms (30.7% vs 0%) and an increased use of PPI therapy (p = 0.004). Resolution or improvement of comorbidities was similar (ESG 53% vs LSG 45.8%; p = 0.79) in both groups. CONCLUSION: LSG may significantly affect QoL and results in worsening of gastrointestinal symptoms including GERD. ESG is a promising less invasive bariatric endoscopic procedure that demonstrated a positive impact on both QoL and comorbidities, which could lead to greater patient acceptance earlier in their disease or at a younger age.
Authors: Geltrude Mingrone; Simona Panunzi; Andrea De Gaetano; Caterina Guidone; Amerigo Iaconelli; Laura Leccesi; Giuseppe Nanni; Alfons Pomp; Marco Castagneto; Giovanni Ghirlanda; Francesco Rubino Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-03-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: S Tanaka; A Takahashi; K Onoda; K Kawashima; S Nakaura; S Nagao; Y Ohno; T Kawanishi; Y Nakaji; K Kobayashi Journal: Yakugaku Zasshi Date: 1986-08 Impact factor: 0.302
Authors: V Abilés; S Rodríguez-Ruiz; J Abilés; C Mellado; A García; A Pérez de la Cruz; M C Fernández-Santaella Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2008-10-29 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Farima Dalaei; Claire E E de Vries; Lotte Poulsen; Manraj N Kaur; André Pfob; Danny Mou; Amalie L Jacobsen; Jussi P Repo; Rosa Salzillo; Jakub Opyrchal; Anne F Klassen; Jens Ahm Sørensen; Andrea L Pusic Journal: Clin Obes Date: 2022-05-25
Authors: Ravishankar Asokkumar; Chin Hong Lim; Ai Shan Tan; Phong Ching Lee; Alvin Eng; Jeremy Tan; Gontrand Lopez-Nava; Sonali Ganguly; Jason Chang; Christopher Khor Journal: JGH Open Date: 2021-12-03