André Pereira1,2, André Costa Pinho3,4, Hugo Santos Sousa3,4, Eduardo Lima da Costa4, Sara Rodrigues5,3, Elisabete Barbosa5,3, John Preto4. 1. General Surgery Department, São João University Medical Center, Porto, Portugal. andre.d.a.pereira@gmail.com. 2. Faculty of Medicine of University of Porto, São João University Medical Center, Porto, Portugal. andre.d.a.pereira@gmail.com. 3. Faculty of Medicine of University of Porto, São João University Medical Center, Porto, Portugal. 4. Obesity Integrated Responsibility Unit (CRI-O), São João University Medical Center, Porto, Portugal. 5. General Surgery Department, São João University Medical Center, Porto, Portugal.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Bariatric surgery has proven its effectiveness in the treatment of obesity and related comorbidities. However, several procedures may be required to treat this chronic disease and/or complications after bariatric surgery. The most frequent revisional surgeries performed after failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (AGB) have been Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The aim of this study is to compare medium-term outcomes of primary and revisional bariatric procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Single institution, matched case-control study of obese patients submitted to bariatric surgery, divided into four groups of 50 patients: (A) primary RYGB; (B) primary SG; (C) revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (rRYGB) after failed laparoscopic AGB; (D) revisional sleeve gastrectomy (rSG) after failed laparoscopic AGB. Demographic variables, surgical procedures characteristics and complications, weight loss outcomes and resolution of comorbidities were compared. RESULTS: Mortality and morbidity were comparable between primary and revisional procedures. Weight loss outcomes were inferior in patients submitted to rRYGB when compared to those submitted to RYGB, with no significant differences found when comparing the other groups. Regarding comorbidities' outcomes, only patients submitted to rSG had lower odds of comorbidities' improvement. Patients submitted to rRYGB had an odd 7 times higher of comorbidities' improvement than those submitted to rSG, independent of weight loss outcomes. CONCLUSION: Revisional surgeries are safe procedures with adequate weight loss outcomes in this difficult set of patients. The choice of revisional procedure may not influence weight loss outcomes, but rRYGB seems to be a better option regarding comorbidities' resolution.
PURPOSE: Bariatric surgery has proven its effectiveness in the treatment of obesity and related comorbidities. However, several procedures may be required to treat this chronic disease and/or complications after bariatric surgery. The most frequent revisional surgeries performed after failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (AGB) have been Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The aim of this study is to compare medium-term outcomes of primary and revisional bariatric procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Single institution, matched case-control study of obesepatients submitted to bariatric surgery, divided into four groups of 50 patients: (A) primary RYGB; (B) primary SG; (C) revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (rRYGB) after failed laparoscopic AGB; (D) revisional sleeve gastrectomy (rSG) after failed laparoscopic AGB. Demographic variables, surgical procedures characteristics and complications, weight loss outcomes and resolution of comorbidities were compared. RESULTS:Mortality and morbidity were comparable between primary and revisional procedures. Weight loss outcomes were inferior in patients submitted to rRYGB when compared to those submitted to RYGB, with no significant differences found when comparing the other groups. Regarding comorbidities' outcomes, only patients submitted to rSG had lower odds of comorbidities' improvement. Patients submitted to rRYGB had an odd 7 times higher of comorbidities' improvement than those submitted to rSG, independent of weight loss outcomes. CONCLUSION: Revisional surgeries are safe procedures with adequate weight loss outcomes in this difficult set of patients. The choice of revisional procedure may not influence weight loss outcomes, but rRYGB seems to be a better option regarding comorbidities' resolution.
Authors: Philip R Schauer; Deepak L Bhatt; John P Kirwan; Kathy Wolski; Ali Aminian; Stacy A Brethauer; Sankar D Navaneethan; Rishi P Singh; Claire E Pothier; Steven E Nissen; Sangeeta R Kashyap Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-02-16 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kamal K Mahawar; Yitka Graham; William R J Carr; Neil Jennings; Norbert Schroeder; Shlok Balupuri; Peter K Small Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Matthew M Hutter; Bruce D Schirmer; Daniel B Jones; Clifford Y Ko; Mark E Cohen; Ryan P Merkow; Ninh T Nguyen Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Philip R Schauer; Deepak L Bhatt; John P Kirwan; Kathy Wolski; Stacy A Brethauer; Sankar D Navaneethan; Ali Aminian; Claire E Pothier; Esther S H Kim; Steven E Nissen; Sangeeta R Kashyap Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-03-31 Impact factor: 91.245
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