-
Surg Obes Relat Dis · Aug 2020
Observational StudySleeve gastrectomy as a rescue of failed gastric banding: comparison of 1- and 2-step approaches.
- Marion Demouron, Lionel Rebibo, Amir Hossein Davarpanah Jazi, Konstantinos Arapis, Boris Hansel, Abdennaceur Dhahri, Jean-Marc Regimbeau, and Simon Msika.
- Department of Digestive Surgery, Amiens University Medical Center, Amiens, France.
- Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2020 Aug 1; 16 (8): 1045-1051.
BackgroundSeries comparing gastric banding (GB) removal and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) when procedures are performed as a 1- or a 2-step approach are contradictory in their outcomes. No series comparing these approaches with midterm weight loss is available.ObjectivesCompare the outcomes and weight loss of SG performed as 1- and 2-step approaches as a revisional procedure for GB failure.SettingUniversity Hospital, France, public practice.MethodsBetween February 2006 and January 2017, all patients undergoing SG with a previous history of implementation of GB (n = 358) were included in this 2-center, retrospective, observational study. Revisional surgery was proposed in patients with insufficient excess weight loss (excess weight loss ≤50%) or weight regain after GB. A 1-step (1-step group, n = 270) or 2-step (2-step group, n = 88) approach was decided depending on patient's choice and/or surgeon's preference. The primary efficacy endpoint was the comparison of weight loss in the 1- and 2-step groups at the 2-year follow-up. The secondary efficacy endpoints were short-term outcomes (overall mortality and morbidity at postoperative day 30, specific morbidity, reoperation, length of hospital stay, and readmission).ResultsIn the 1-step group, the mean preoperative body mass index before SG was 40.5 kg/m2 (27.0-69.0), while in the 2-step group, the mean preoperative body mass index was 43.5 kg/m2 (31.5-61.7). Mean operating time was 109 minutes (50-240) in the 1-step group and 78.7 minutes (40-175) in the 2-step group (P = .22). In the 1-step group, 6 conversions to laparotomy occurred, while in the 2-step group, 2 conversions to laparotomy occurred (P = .75). One death (.2%, in the 2-step group) and 39 complications (30 in the 1-step group [11.1%] and 9 in the 2-step group [10.2%]) also occurred. The mean length of hospital stay was 6.2 days in the 1-step group and 4.1 days in the 2-step group. At 2-year follow-up, mean body mass index was 32.4 kg/m2 in the 1-step group and 33.2 kg/m2 in the 2-step group (P = .15), representing excess weight losses of 61.9 and 50.1 (P = .05), respectively. The rates of revisional surgery were .7% and 2.2%, respectively.ConclusionsSG after previous GB is efficient with similar outcomes depending on the 1- or 2-step approach. The 1-step approach seems to have increased weight loss compared with the 2-step approach.Copyright © 2020 American Society for Bariatric Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?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.
.