• Surgery · Mar 2019

    Heterogeneity of weight loss after gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy, and adjustable gastric banding.

    • Dan Azagury, Tara E Mokhtari, Luis Garcia, Ulysses S Rosas, Trit Garg, Homero Rivas, and John Morton.
    • Section of Bariatric and Minimally Invasive Surgery Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA.
    • Surgery. 2019 Mar 1; 165 (3): 565-570.

    BackgroundLaparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding all lead to substantial weight loss in obese patients. Long-term weight loss can be highly variable beyond 1-year postsurgery. This study examines and compares the frequency distribution of weight loss and lack of treatment effect rates after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding.MethodsA total of 1,331 consecutive patients at a single academic institution were reviewed from a prospectively collected database. Preoperative data collected included demographics, body mass index, and percent excess weight loss. Postoperative BMI and %EWL were collected at 12, 24, and 36 months. Percent excess weight loss was analyzed by the percentiles of excess weight lost, and the distribution of percent excess weight loss was evaluated in 10% increments. Lack of a successful treatment effect was defined as <25% excess weight loss.ResultsOf the 1,331 patients, 72.4% (963) underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, 18.3% (243) laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, and 9.4%(125) laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding. Mean percent excess weight loss was greatest for laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, followed by laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, and then by laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding at every time point: at 2 years mean percent excess weight loss was 77.9± 24.4 for laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, 50.8 ± 25.8 for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, and 40.8± 25.9 for laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (P < .0001). The rates of a successful treatment effect s for laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding were 0.9%, 5.2%, and 24.3% at 1 year; 0.3%, 11.1%, and 26.0% at 2 years; and 1.0%, 25.3%, and 30.2% at 3 years. At 1 year, the odds ratio of lack of a successful treatment effect of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was 6.305 (2.125-19.08; P = .0004), the odds ratio for laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was 36.552 (15.64-95.71; P < .0001), and the odds ratio for laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy was 5.791 (2.519-14.599; P < .0001). At 2 years, the odds ratio for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass increased to 70.7 (9.4-531.7; P < .0001), the odds ratio for laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass increased to 128.1 (16.8-974.3; P < .0001), and the odds ratio for laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy decreased to 1.8 (0.9-3.6; P = .09).ConclusionThis study emphasizes the existing variability in weight loss across bariatric procedures as well as in the lack of a treatment effect for each procedure. Although laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding has the greatest rate of a lack of a successful treatment effect, the rate remained stable over 3 years postoperatively. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy showed a doubling in the rate of a lack of a successful treatment effect every year reaching 25% at year 3. The rates for lack of a successful treatment effect for laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass remained stable at about 1% for the first 3 years postoperatively.Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…