Cargando…

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG): systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare weight loss and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remission after one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). METHODS: In PubMed, Embase, and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vitiello, Antonio, Berardi, Giovanna, Peltrini, Roberto, Calabrese, Pietro, Pilone, Vincenzo
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10657303/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37980292
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00423-023-03175-x
_version_ 1785148130690334720
author Vitiello, Antonio
Berardi, Giovanna
Peltrini, Roberto
Calabrese, Pietro
Pilone, Vincenzo
author_facet Vitiello, Antonio
Berardi, Giovanna
Peltrini, Roberto
Calabrese, Pietro
Pilone, Vincenzo
author_sort Vitiello, Antonio
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare weight loss and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remission after one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). METHODS: In PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, a search was performed using the terms “Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus one anastomosis gastric bypass,” “revisional surgery,” and “sleeve gastrectomy.” Only original articles in English language comparing OAGB and RYGB were included. No temporal interval was set. The primary outcome measure was weight loss (%TWL). The secondary endpoints were leak, bleeding, marginal ulcer, and GERD. PRISMA flowchart was used. Differences in continuous and dichotomous outcome variables were expressed as mean difference (MD) and risk difference (RD) with 95% CI, respectively. Heterogeneity was assessed by using I(2) statistic. RESULTS: Six retrospective comparative articles were included in the present meta-analysis. Weight loss analysis showed a MD = 5.70 (95% CI 4.84–6.57) in favor of the OAGB procedure with a statistical significance (p = 0.00001) and no significant statistical heterogeneity (I(2) = 0.00%). There was no significant RD for leak, bleeding, or marginal ulcer after the two revisional procedures. After conversion to OAGB, remission from GERD was 68.6% (81/118), and it was 80.6% (150/186) after conversion to RYGB with a RD = 0.10 (95% CI −0.04, 0.24), no statistical significance (p = 0.19), and high heterogeneity (I(2) = 96%). De novo GERD was 6.3% (16/255) after conversional OAGB, and it was 0.5% (1/180) after conversion to RYGB with a RD = −0.23 (95% CI −0.57, 0.11), no statistical significance (p = 0.16), and high heterogeneity (I(2) = 92%). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00423-023-03175-x.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10657303
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106573032023-11-18 One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG): systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies Vitiello, Antonio Berardi, Giovanna Peltrini, Roberto Calabrese, Pietro Pilone, Vincenzo Langenbecks Arch Surg Review INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare weight loss and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remission after one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). METHODS: In PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, a search was performed using the terms “Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus one anastomosis gastric bypass,” “revisional surgery,” and “sleeve gastrectomy.” Only original articles in English language comparing OAGB and RYGB were included. No temporal interval was set. The primary outcome measure was weight loss (%TWL). The secondary endpoints were leak, bleeding, marginal ulcer, and GERD. PRISMA flowchart was used. Differences in continuous and dichotomous outcome variables were expressed as mean difference (MD) and risk difference (RD) with 95% CI, respectively. Heterogeneity was assessed by using I(2) statistic. RESULTS: Six retrospective comparative articles were included in the present meta-analysis. Weight loss analysis showed a MD = 5.70 (95% CI 4.84–6.57) in favor of the OAGB procedure with a statistical significance (p = 0.00001) and no significant statistical heterogeneity (I(2) = 0.00%). There was no significant RD for leak, bleeding, or marginal ulcer after the two revisional procedures. After conversion to OAGB, remission from GERD was 68.6% (81/118), and it was 80.6% (150/186) after conversion to RYGB with a RD = 0.10 (95% CI −0.04, 0.24), no statistical significance (p = 0.19), and high heterogeneity (I(2) = 96%). De novo GERD was 6.3% (16/255) after conversional OAGB, and it was 0.5% (1/180) after conversion to RYGB with a RD = −0.23 (95% CI −0.57, 0.11), no statistical significance (p = 0.16), and high heterogeneity (I(2) = 92%). SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00423-023-03175-x. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023-11-18 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10657303/ /pubmed/37980292 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00423-023-03175-x Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Review
Vitiello, Antonio
Berardi, Giovanna
Peltrini, Roberto
Calabrese, Pietro
Pilone, Vincenzo
One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG): systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies
title One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG): systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies
title_full One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG): systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies
title_fullStr One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG): systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies
title_full_unstemmed One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG): systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies
title_short One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG): systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies
title_sort one-anastomosis gastric bypass (oagb) versus roux-en-y gastric bypass (rygb) as revisional procedures after failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (lsg): systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10657303/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37980292
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00423-023-03175-x
work_keys_str_mv AT vitielloantonio oneanastomosisgastricbypassoagbversusrouxenygastricbypassrygbasrevisionalproceduresafterfailedlaparoscopicsleevegastrectomylsgsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies
AT berardigiovanna oneanastomosisgastricbypassoagbversusrouxenygastricbypassrygbasrevisionalproceduresafterfailedlaparoscopicsleevegastrectomylsgsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies
AT peltriniroberto oneanastomosisgastricbypassoagbversusrouxenygastricbypassrygbasrevisionalproceduresafterfailedlaparoscopicsleevegastrectomylsgsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies
AT calabresepietro oneanastomosisgastricbypassoagbversusrouxenygastricbypassrygbasrevisionalproceduresafterfailedlaparoscopicsleevegastrectomylsgsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies
AT pilonevincenzo oneanastomosisgastricbypassoagbversusrouxenygastricbypassrygbasrevisionalproceduresafterfailedlaparoscopicsleevegastrectomylsgsystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcomparativestudies