• Surgical endoscopy · Oct 2002

    Comparative Study

    Hand-assisted laparoscopic gastric bypass does not improve outcome and increases costs when compared to open gastric bypass for the surgical treatment of obesity.

    • E J DeMaria, M A Schweitzer, J M Kellum, J Meador, L Wolfe, and H J Sugerman.
    • Department of Surgery, Center for Minimally Invasive Surgery, Medical College of Virginia Campus of Virginia Commonwealth University, MCV Box 980519, 1200 Broad Street, Richmond, VA 23298, USA. edemaria@hsc.vcu.edu
    • Surg Endosc. 2002 Oct 1; 16 (10): 1452-5.

    BackgroundHand-assisted laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (Hand-Lap GB) has been adopted by some surgeons to treat morbid obesity because it is easier to perform than the total laparoscopic procedure, but to date no study has compared the outcomes of patients undergoing the Hand-Lap GB to those obtained with the open procedure (Open GB). We hypothesized that patients undergoing Hand-Lap GB would lose a similar amount of weight when compared to Open GB patients, while experiencing no increase in complications, a shorter hospital stay, and lower overall costs of care, in part as a result of fewer incisional hernias requiring subsequent surgery.MethodsNonrandomized, prospective data were collected on all patients undergoing proximal GB via Hand-Lap or open approaches between May 1998 and July 1999. Our first 25 Hand-Lap GB procedures, performed in selected patients (with no extensive previous abdominal surgery) referred to two of us (E.J.D, M.A.S), were compared to all other (n = 62) concurrent open proximal GB performed by the group during this period of time in patients with body mass index (BMI) <50 kg/m2.ResultsPreoperatively, Hand-Lap GB patients did not differ from Open GB patients in age (40 +/- 11 vs 43 +/- 11 years), gender (92% female vs 81% female), incidence or type of preoperative comorbid conditions, preoperative weight (282 +/- 33 vs 280 +/- 37 lb), or BMI (45.5 +/- 5.4 vs 44.1 +/- 3.3 kg/m2). (Data given as mean +/- standard deviation). Although length of hospital stay did not differ between groups (3.6 +/- 1.3 vs 4.2 +/- 4.6 days), total hospital costs were significantly higher for Hand-Lap GB ($14,725 +/- 3089 vs. $10,281 +/- 3687, p <0.01 ANOVA). One patient in the Open GB group developed an anastomotic leak from the gastrojejunostomy. Follow-up revealed that Hand-Lap GB patients had a similar risk of postoperative complications as the Open GB group, including marginal ulcer (16% vs 14.5%), stomal stenosis (24% vs 23%), and, most notably, incisional hernia (20% vs 27%). There were no major wound infections or deaths in either group. One patient in each group developed a postoperative small bowel obstruction. Loss of excess weight in Hand-Lap GB patients at 12 months postoperatively was 66 +/- 14% vs 77 +/- 14% in the Open GB group.ConclusionsThe Hand-Lap GB yielded good weight reduction in a population of morbidly obese patients, but at a higher cost for hospital care than Open GB. There was no decrease in the incidence of incisional hernias with the Hand-Lap GB procedure. Although Hand-Lap GB appears to be safe and effective, its failure to provide a decrease in hospital stay or risk of incisional hernia requiring subsequent surgical repair is significant. The primary role for the Hand-Lap GB procedure should therefore be to aid surgeons in developing skills to climb the steep learning curve for total laparoscopic gastric bypass, since Hand-Lap GB does not improve patient outcome and increases cost in comparison to the open GB procedure.

      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…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.