Kelly G H van de Pas1,2,3, Daniëlle S Bonouvrie4,5, Loes Janssen4, Marleen M Romeijn4,5, Arijan A P M Luijten4, Wouter K G Leclercq4, François M H van Dielen4. 1. Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Center, De Run 4600, 5504 DB, Veldhoven, The Netherlands. Bariatrics.resurge@mmc.nl. 2. Department of Pediatrics, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Bariatrics.resurge@mmc.nl. 3. NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands. Bariatrics.resurge@mmc.nl. 4. Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Center, De Run 4600, 5504 DB, Veldhoven, The Netherlands. 5. NUTRIM School of Nutrition and Translational Research in Metabolism, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The most commonly performed bariatric procedures worldwide are Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG), yet outcomes following these procedures in young adults are limited. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare weight loss outcomes between RYGB and SG in young adults. METHODS: This is a nationwide retrospective cohort study of young adults, aged 18-25 years, who underwent RYGB or SG between 2015 and 2019, with data from the Dutch Audit Treatment of Obesity (DATO). The primary outcome was weight loss expressed as percentage total weight loss (%TWL) in a period of 3 years after surgery. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of complications (< 30 days) and progression of obesity-related comorbidities. RESULTS: In total, 2313 patients were included, 1246 in the RYGB group and 1067 in the SG group. Percentage TWL was significantly higher in the RYGB group compared to the SG group at 1, 2, and 3 years after surgery (respectively 2.4%, 2.9%, and 3.3% higher, p < 0.001). RYGB was associated with an on-average 2.75 higher %TWL compared to SG in females (p < 0.001), although this was not seen in males (β = 0.63, p = 0.514). No differences were found in the incidence of complications, nor the progression of obesity-related comorbidities except for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). There was more improvement or resolution of GERD in the RYGB group (95.2% vs. 56.3%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Similar numbers of RYGB and SG were performed in young adults, whereas RYGB was associated with greater weight loss in the short- and midterm, particularly in females.
BACKGROUND: The most commonly performed bariatric procedures worldwide are Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG), yet outcomes following these procedures in young adults are limited. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare weight loss outcomes between RYGB and SG in young adults. METHODS: This is a nationwide retrospective cohort study of young adults, aged 18-25 years, who underwent RYGB or SG between 2015 and 2019, with data from the Dutch Audit Treatment of Obesity (DATO). The primary outcome was weight loss expressed as percentage total weight loss (%TWL) in a period of 3 years after surgery. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of complications (< 30 days) and progression of obesity-related comorbidities. RESULTS: In total, 2313 patients were included, 1246 in the RYGB group and 1067 in the SG group. Percentage TWL was significantly higher in the RYGB group compared to the SG group at 1, 2, and 3 years after surgery (respectively 2.4%, 2.9%, and 3.3% higher, p < 0.001). RYGB was associated with an on-average 2.75 higher %TWL compared to SG in females (p < 0.001), although this was not seen in males (β = 0.63, p = 0.514). No differences were found in the incidence of complications, nor the progression of obesity-related comorbidities except for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). There was more improvement or resolution of GERD in the RYGB group (95.2% vs. 56.3%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Similar numbers of RYGB and SG were performed in young adults, whereas RYGB was associated with greater weight loss in the short- and midterm, particularly in females.
Authors: Lars Sjöström; Anna-Karin Lindroos; Markku Peltonen; Jarl Torgerson; Claude Bouchard; Björn Carlsson; Sven Dahlgren; Bo Larsson; Kristina Narbro; Carl David Sjöström; Marianne Sullivan; Hans Wedel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-12-23 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Thomas H Inge; Anita P Courcoulas; Todd M Jenkins; Marc P Michalsky; Michael A Helmrath; Mary L Brandt; Carroll M Harmon; Meg H Zeller; Mike K Chen; Stavra A Xanthakos; Mary Horlick; C Ralph Buncher Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-11-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Yung Lee; Aristithes G Doumouras; James Yu; Ishan Aditya; Scott Gmora; Mehran Anvari; Dennis Hong Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2021-01-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Mariel M Finucane; Gretchen A Stevens; Melanie J Cowan; Goodarz Danaei; John K Lin; Christopher J Paciorek; Gitanjali M Singh; Hialy R Gutierrez; Yuan Lu; Adil N Bahalim; Farshad Farzadfar; Leanne M Riley; Majid Ezzati Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-02-03 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Torsten Olbers; Andrew J Beamish; Eva Gronowitz; Carl-Erik Flodmark; Jovanna Dahlgren; Gustaf Bruze; Kerstin Ekbom; Peter Friberg; Gunnar Göthberg; Kajsa Järvholm; Jan Karlsson; Staffan Mårild; Martin Neovius; Markku Peltonen; Claude Marcus Journal: Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol Date: 2017-01-06 Impact factor: 32.069
Authors: Marie Ng; Tom Fleming; Margaret Robinson; Blake Thomson; Nicholas Graetz; Christopher Margono; Erin C Mullany; Stan Biryukov; Cristiana Abbafati; Semaw Ferede Abera; Jerry P Abraham; Niveen M E Abu-Rmeileh; Tom Achoki; Fadia S AlBuhairan; Zewdie A Alemu; Rafael Alfonso; Mohammed K Ali; Raghib Ali; Nelson Alvis Guzman; Walid Ammar; Palwasha Anwari; Amitava Banerjee; Simon Barquera; Sanjay Basu; Derrick A Bennett; Zulfiqar Bhutta; Jed Blore; Norberto Cabral; Ismael Campos Nonato; Jung-Chen Chang; Rajiv Chowdhury; Karen J Courville; Michael H Criqui; David K Cundiff; Kaustubh C Dabhadkar; Lalit Dandona; Adrian Davis; Anand Dayama; Samath D Dharmaratne; Eric L Ding; Adnan M Durrani; Alireza Esteghamati; Farshad Farzadfar; Derek F J Fay; Valery L Feigin; Abraham Flaxman; Mohammad H Forouzanfar; Atsushi Goto; Mark A Green; Rajeev Gupta; Nima Hafezi-Nejad; Graeme J Hankey; Heather C Harewood; Rasmus Havmoeller; Simon Hay; Lucia Hernandez; Abdullatif Husseini; Bulat T Idrisov; Nayu Ikeda; Farhad Islami; Eiman Jahangir; Simerjot K Jassal; Sun Ha Jee; Mona Jeffreys; Jost B Jonas; Edmond K Kabagambe; Shams Eldin Ali Hassan Khalifa; Andre Pascal Kengne; Yousef Saleh Khader; Young-Ho Khang; Daniel Kim; Ruth W Kimokoti; Jonas M Kinge; Yoshihiro Kokubo; Soewarta Kosen; Gene Kwan; Taavi Lai; Mall Leinsalu; Yichong Li; Xiaofeng Liang; Shiwei Liu; Giancarlo Logroscino; Paulo A Lotufo; Yuan Lu; Jixiang Ma; Nana Kwaku Mainoo; George A Mensah; Tony R Merriman; Ali H Mokdad; Joanna Moschandreas; Mohsen Naghavi; Aliya Naheed; Devina Nand; K M Venkat Narayan; Erica Leigh Nelson; Marian L Neuhouser; Muhammad Imran Nisar; Takayoshi Ohkubo; Samuel O Oti; Andrea Pedroza; Dorairaj Prabhakaran; Nobhojit Roy; Uchechukwu Sampson; Hyeyoung Seo; Sadaf G Sepanlou; Kenji Shibuya; Rahman Shiri; Ivy Shiue; Gitanjali M Singh; Jasvinder A Singh; Vegard Skirbekk; Nicolas J C Stapelberg; Lela Sturua; Bryan L Sykes; Martin Tobias; Bach X Tran; Leonardo Trasande; Hideaki Toyoshima; Steven van de Vijver; Tommi J Vasankari; J Lennert Veerman; Gustavo Velasquez-Melendez; Vasiliy Victorovich Vlassov; Stein Emil Vollset; Theo Vos; Claire Wang; XiaoRong Wang; Elisabete Weiderpass; Andrea Werdecker; Jonathan L Wright; Y Claire Yang; Hiroshi Yatsuya; Jihyun Yoon; Seok-Jun Yoon; Yong Zhao; Maigeng Zhou; Shankuan Zhu; Alan D Lopez; Christopher J L Murray; Emmanuela Gakidou Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-05-29 Impact factor: 79.321