Reem Matar1, Nasser Monzer2, Veeravich Jaruvongvanich1, Rami Abusaleh1, Eric J Vargas1, Daniel B Maselli1, Azizullah Beran3, Todd Kellogg4, Omar Ghanem4, Barham K Abu Dayyeh5. 1. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, USA. 2. Department of Medicine, Royal College of Surgeons Ireland, Dublin, Ireland. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. 5. Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN, USA. AbuDayyeh.Barham@mayo.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most performed bariatric procedure. Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for SG-related complications such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), insufficient weight loss (ISWL), and weight regain (WR) is increasing. Our aim was to investigate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of conversion from SG to RYGB. METHODS: A literature search was performed from database inception to May 2020. Eligible studies must report indications for conversion, %total body weight loss (%TWL), and/or complications. The pooled mean or proportion were analyzed using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Seventeen unique studies (n = 556, 68.7% female, average age at time of conversion 42.6 ± 10.29 years) were included. The pooled conversion rate due to GERD was 30.4% (95% CI 23.5, 38.3%; I2 = 63.9%), compared to 52.0% (95% CI 37.0, 66.6%; I2 = 85.89%) due to ISWL/WR. The pooled baseline BMI at conversion was 38.5 kg/m2 (95% CI 36.49, 40.6 kg/m2; I2 = 92.1%) and after 1 year was 32.1 kg/m2 (95% CI 25.50, 38.7 kg/m2; I2 = 94.53%). The pooled %TWL after 1 year was 22.8% (95% CI 13.5, 32.1%; I2 = 98.05%). Complication rate within 30 days was 16.4% (95% CI 11.1, 23.6%; I2 = 57.17%), and after 30 days was 11.4% (95% CI 7.7, 16.7%; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis showed that conversion from SG to RYGB is an option for conversion at a bariatric care center that produces sufficient weight loss outcomes, and potential resolution of symptoms of GERD. Further indication-based studies are required to obtain a clearer consensus on the surgical management of patients seeking RYGB following SG.
PURPOSE: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most performed bariatric procedure. Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for SG-related complications such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), insufficient weight loss (ISWL), and weight regain (WR) is increasing. Our aim was to investigate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of conversion from SG to RYGB. METHODS: A literature search was performed from database inception to May 2020. Eligible studies must report indications for conversion, %total body weight loss (%TWL), and/or complications. The pooled mean or proportion were analyzed using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Seventeen unique studies (n = 556, 68.7% female, average age at time of conversion 42.6 ± 10.29 years) were included. The pooled conversion rate due to GERD was 30.4% (95% CI 23.5, 38.3%; I2 = 63.9%), compared to 52.0% (95% CI 37.0, 66.6%; I2 = 85.89%) due to ISWL/WR. The pooled baseline BMI at conversion was 38.5 kg/m2 (95% CI 36.49, 40.6 kg/m2; I2 = 92.1%) and after 1 year was 32.1 kg/m2 (95% CI 25.50, 38.7 kg/m2; I2 = 94.53%). The pooled %TWL after 1 year was 22.8% (95% CI 13.5, 32.1%; I2 = 98.05%). Complication rate within 30 days was 16.4% (95% CI 11.1, 23.6%; I2 = 57.17%), and after 30 days was 11.4% (95% CI 7.7, 16.7%; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis showed that conversion from SG to RYGB is an option for conversion at a bariatric care center that produces sufficient weight loss outcomes, and potential resolution of symptoms of GERD. Further indication-based studies are required to obtain a clearer consensus on the surgical management of patients seeking RYGB following SG.
Authors: Philip R Schauer; Sangeeta R Kashyap; Kathy Wolski; Stacy A Brethauer; John P Kirwan; Claire E Pothier; Susan Thomas; Beth Abood; Steven E Nissen; Deepak L Bhatt Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2012-03-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Nicolas V Christou; John S Sampalis; Moishe Liberman; Didier Look; Stephane Auger; Alexander P H McLean; Lloyd D MacLean Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Piotr K Kowalewski; Robert Olszewski; Maciej S Walędziak; Michał R Janik; Andrzej Kwiatkowski; Natalia Gałązka-Świderek; Krzysztof Cichoń; Jakub Brągoszewski; Krzysztof Paśnik Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Piotr Major; Piotr Zarzycki; Justyna Rymarowicz; Michał Wysocki; Michał Łabul; Hady Razak Hady; Paulina Głuszyńska; Piotr Myśliwiec; Grzegorz Kowalski; Michał Orłowski; Jacek Szeliga; Wojciech Kupczyk; Wiesław Tarnowski; Paweł Lech; Natalia Dowgiałło-Gornowicz; Monika Proczko-Stepaniak; Maciej Walędziak; Paweł Szymański; Tomasz Stefura; Michał Pędziwiatr Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne Date: 2022-03-16 Impact factor: 1.627
Authors: Donna Maria Abboud; Rebecca Yao; Babusai Rapaka; Rabih Ghazi; Omar M Ghanem; Barham K Abu Dayyeh Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2022-07-14 Impact factor: 6.055