| 1. |
- Abdulrazzaq, Sama, et al.
(författare)
-
Is Revisional Gastric Bypass as Effective as Primary Gastric Bypass for Weight Loss and Improvement of Comorbidities?
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Obesity Surgery. - : Springer. - 0960-8923 .- 1708-0428. ; 30, s. 1219-1229
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Revisional gastric bypass (R-RYGB) surgery is utilized for the management of inadequate weight loss or weight regain observed after some cases of bariatric surgeries. Data on the mid-term effectiveness of primary gastric bypass (P-RYGB) compared to R-RYGB (e.g., post sleeve gastrectomy or gastric banding) are controversial. Methods: Retrospective chart review of all patients who received P-RYGB and R-RYGB (January 2011 - June 2015) at our center. One hundred and twenty patients who underwent P-RYGB and 34 R-RYGB who completed 18 months follow-up were included. We compared the effectiveness of P-RYGB with R-RYGB by assessing four anthropometric, two glycemic, and four lipid parameters, as well as the control of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), hypertension and dyslipidemia in terms of remission, improvement, persistence, relapse and de novo. The current study also assessed mortality and complications rates. Results: There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics of patients who received P-RYGB with those who received R-RYGB in terms of age, gender and preoperative BMI. However, at 18 months: a) Patients who received P-RYGB had lower mean weight (P = 0.001) and BMI (P <0.001), reflected by a higher mean delta BMI (P = 0.02), TWL%(P <0.0001) and EWL%(P < 0.0001); b) No differences were observed between the two patients groups in terms of glycemic parameters, lipid profiles, and control of T2DM, hypertension, and dyslipidemia; and, c) No deaths were reported among both patients groups, and complication rates were comparable. Conclusion: Although R-RYGB effectively addressed inadequate weight loss, weight regain and recurrence of comorbidities after restrictive bariatric surgery, R-RYGB resulted in inferior weight loss compared to P-RYGB. There were no significant differences between the two procedures in terms of their clinical control of T2DM, hypertension and dyslipidemia. Both procedures exhibited comparable complication rates.
|
|
