Tien-Chou Soong1,2,3, Ming-Hsien Lee4, Wei-Jei Lee5,6, Owaid M Almalki7, Jung-Chien Chen4,8, Chun-Chi Wu8, Shu-Chun Chen8. 1. Department of Weight Loss and Health Management Center, E-DA Dachang Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 2. Department of Asia Obesity Medical Research Center, E-DA Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 3. College of Medicine, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. 4. Metabolic & Bariatric Surgical Department, Taichung Tzu Chi Hospital, Buddhist Tzu Chi Medical Foundation, Taichung City, Taiwan. 5. Department of Asia Obesity Medical Research Center, E-DA Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. wjlee_obessurg_tw@yahoo.com.tw. 6. Department of Surgery, Min-Sheng General Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan. wjlee_obessurg_tw@yahoo.com.tw. 7. Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia. 8. Department of Surgery, Min-Sheng General Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The most appropriate procedure for the treatment of super obesity (BMI > 50 kg/m2) is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the safety, long-term (> 5 years) weight loss, and adverse events between three commonly performed procedures, sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) in super-obese patients. METHODS: Between January 2002 and December 2015, 498 successive patients with super morbid obesity (BMI > 50), who underwent SG or RYGB or OAGB, were recruited. Surgical outcome, weight loss, resolution of co-morbidities, and late complications were followed and compared between the 3 groups. All data derived from a prospective bariatric database and a retrospective analysis was conducted. RESULTS: The average patient age was 32.1 ± 10.4 years, with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 56.0 ± 6.7 kg/m2. Of them, 190 (38.9%) underwent SG, 62 (12.4%) RYGB, and 246 (49.4%) OAGB. There was no difference in basic characters between the 3 groups except SG had fewer diabetic patients. RYGB group had higher intraoperative blood loss, longer operating time, and hospital stay than the other 2 groups. RYGB had a higher 30-days post-operative major complication rate (4.8%) than SG (0.5%) and OAGB (0.8%). The follow-up rate at 1 and 5 years was 89.4% and 52.0%. At post-operative 5 years, OAGB had a higher total weight loss (40.8%) than SG (35.1%), but not RYGB (37.2%). SG had a lower remission rate in dyslipidemia comparing to OAGB and RYGB, but T2DM remission rate was no different between the groups. The overall revision rate is 5.4% (27/498) of the whole group, and SG had a lower revision rate (2.6%) than RYGB (8.1%) and OAGB (6.9%). CONCLUSION: SG is an effective and durable primary bariatric procedure for the treatment of super obesity and metabolic disorders. OAGB had a similar operation risk to SG but resulted in a better weight loss than SG.
BACKGROUND: The most appropriate procedure for the treatment of super obesity (BMI > 50 kg/m2) is unknown. We aimed to evaluate the safety, long-term (> 5 years) weight loss, and adverse events between three commonly performed procedures, sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) in super-obese patients. METHODS: Between January 2002 and December 2015, 498 successive patients with super morbid obesity (BMI > 50), who underwent SG or RYGB or OAGB, were recruited. Surgical outcome, weight loss, resolution of co-morbidities, and late complications were followed and compared between the 3 groups. All data derived from a prospective bariatric database and a retrospective analysis was conducted. RESULTS: The average patient age was 32.1 ± 10.4 years, with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 56.0 ± 6.7 kg/m2. Of them, 190 (38.9%) underwent SG, 62 (12.4%) RYGB, and 246 (49.4%) OAGB. There was no difference in basic characters between the 3 groups except SG had fewer diabetic patients. RYGB group had higher intraoperative blood loss, longer operating time, and hospital stay than the other 2 groups. RYGB had a higher 30-days post-operative major complication rate (4.8%) than SG (0.5%) and OAGB (0.8%). The follow-up rate at 1 and 5 years was 89.4% and 52.0%. At post-operative 5 years, OAGB had a higher total weight loss (40.8%) than SG (35.1%), but not RYGB (37.2%). SG had a lower remission rate in dyslipidemia comparing to OAGB and RYGB, but T2DM remission rate was no different between the groups. The overall revision rate is 5.4% (27/498) of the whole group, and SG had a lower revision rate (2.6%) than RYGB (8.1%) and OAGB (6.9%). CONCLUSION: SG is an effective and durable primary bariatric procedure for the treatment of super obesity and metabolic disorders. OAGB had a similar operation risk to SG but resulted in a better weight loss than SG.
Keywords:
Bariatric surgery; Co-morbidities; Complications; Long term; One anastomosis gastric bypass; RYGB; Sleeve gastrectomy; Super obesity; Weight loss
Authors: K Hope Wilkinson; Melissa Helm; Kathleen Lak; Rana M Higgins; Jon C Gould; Tammy L Kindel Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Daniel Moritz Felsenreich; Ronald Kefurt; Martin Schermann; Philipp Beckerhinn; Ivan Kristo; Michael Krebs; Gerhard Prager; Felix B Langer Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Ralph P M Gadiot; L Ulas Biter; Stefanie van Mil; Hans F Zengerink; J Apers; Guido H H Mannaerts Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Luigi Angrisani; A Santonicola; P Iovino; A Vitiello; K Higa; J Himpens; H Buchwald; N Scopinaro Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 4.129
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