Cargando…
Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy as a Revisional Procedure Following Adjustable Gastric Banding: Variations in Outcomes Based on Indication
BACKGROUND: Significant controversy exists regarding the indications and outcomes after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) conversions to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). AIM: To comprehensively determine the long-term outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy as a revisional procedure after...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687173/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37847457 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11695-023-06886-8 |
_version_ | 1785151925659893760 |
---|---|
author | Wickremasinghe, Anagi Leang, Yit Johari, Yazmin Chana, Prem Alderuccio, Megan Shaw, Kalai Laurie, Cheryl Nottle, Peter Brown, Wendy Burton, Paul |
author_facet | Wickremasinghe, Anagi Leang, Yit Johari, Yazmin Chana, Prem Alderuccio, Megan Shaw, Kalai Laurie, Cheryl Nottle, Peter Brown, Wendy Burton, Paul |
author_sort | Wickremasinghe, Anagi |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Significant controversy exists regarding the indications and outcomes after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) conversions to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). AIM: To comprehensively determine the long-term outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy as a revisional procedure after LAGB across a range of measures and determine predictors of outcomes. METHODS: Six hundred revision LSG (RLSG) and 1200 controls (primary LSG (PLSG)) were included. Patient demographics, complications, follow-up, and patient-completed questionnaires were collected. RESULTS: RLSG vs controls; females 87% vs 78.8%, age 45 ± 19.4 vs 40.6 ± 10.6 years, p = 0.561; baseline weight 119.7 ± 26.2 vs 120.6 ± 26.5 kg p = 0.961)(.) Follow-up was 87% vs 89.3%. Weight loss in RLSG at 5 years, 22.9% vs 29.6% TBWL, p = 0.001, 10 years: 19.5% vs 27% TBWL, p = 0.001. RLSG had more complications (4.8 vs 2.0% RR 2.4, p = 0.001), re-admissions (4.3 vs 2.4% RR 1.8, p = 0.012), staple line leaks (2.5 vs 0.9%, p = 0.003). Eroded bands and baseline weight were independent predictors of complications after RLSG. Long-term re-operation rate was 7.3% for RLSG compared to 3.2% in controls. Severe oesophageal dysmotility predicted poor weight loss. RLSG reported lower quality of life scores (SF-12 physical component scores 75.9 vs 88%, p = 0.001), satisfaction (69 vs 93%, p = 0.001) and more frequent regurgitation (58% vs 42%, p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: RLSG provides long-term weight loss, although peri-operative complications are significantly elevated compared to PLSG. Longer-term re-operation rates are elevated compared to PLSG. Four variables predicted worse outcomes: eroded band, multiple prior bands, severe oesophageal dysmotility and elevated baseline weight. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11695-023-06886-8. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10687173 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Springer US |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-106871732023-12-01 Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy as a Revisional Procedure Following Adjustable Gastric Banding: Variations in Outcomes Based on Indication Wickremasinghe, Anagi Leang, Yit Johari, Yazmin Chana, Prem Alderuccio, Megan Shaw, Kalai Laurie, Cheryl Nottle, Peter Brown, Wendy Burton, Paul Obes Surg Original Contributions BACKGROUND: Significant controversy exists regarding the indications and outcomes after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) conversions to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). AIM: To comprehensively determine the long-term outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy as a revisional procedure after LAGB across a range of measures and determine predictors of outcomes. METHODS: Six hundred revision LSG (RLSG) and 1200 controls (primary LSG (PLSG)) were included. Patient demographics, complications, follow-up, and patient-completed questionnaires were collected. RESULTS: RLSG vs controls; females 87% vs 78.8%, age 45 ± 19.4 vs 40.6 ± 10.6 years, p = 0.561; baseline weight 119.7 ± 26.2 vs 120.6 ± 26.5 kg p = 0.961)(.) Follow-up was 87% vs 89.3%. Weight loss in RLSG at 5 years, 22.9% vs 29.6% TBWL, p = 0.001, 10 years: 19.5% vs 27% TBWL, p = 0.001. RLSG had more complications (4.8 vs 2.0% RR 2.4, p = 0.001), re-admissions (4.3 vs 2.4% RR 1.8, p = 0.012), staple line leaks (2.5 vs 0.9%, p = 0.003). Eroded bands and baseline weight were independent predictors of complications after RLSG. Long-term re-operation rate was 7.3% for RLSG compared to 3.2% in controls. Severe oesophageal dysmotility predicted poor weight loss. RLSG reported lower quality of life scores (SF-12 physical component scores 75.9 vs 88%, p = 0.001), satisfaction (69 vs 93%, p = 0.001) and more frequent regurgitation (58% vs 42%, p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: RLSG provides long-term weight loss, although peri-operative complications are significantly elevated compared to PLSG. Longer-term re-operation rates are elevated compared to PLSG. Four variables predicted worse outcomes: eroded band, multiple prior bands, severe oesophageal dysmotility and elevated baseline weight. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11695-023-06886-8. Springer US 2023-10-17 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10687173/ /pubmed/37847457 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11695-023-06886-8 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 | Original Contributions Wickremasinghe, Anagi Leang, Yit Johari, Yazmin Chana, Prem Alderuccio, Megan Shaw, Kalai Laurie, Cheryl Nottle, Peter Brown, Wendy Burton, Paul Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy as a Revisional Procedure Following Adjustable Gastric Banding: Variations in Outcomes Based on Indication |
title | Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy as a Revisional Procedure Following Adjustable Gastric Banding: Variations in Outcomes Based on Indication |
title_full | Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy as a Revisional Procedure Following Adjustable Gastric Banding: Variations in Outcomes Based on Indication |
title_fullStr | Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy as a Revisional Procedure Following Adjustable Gastric Banding: Variations in Outcomes Based on Indication |
title_full_unstemmed | Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy as a Revisional Procedure Following Adjustable Gastric Banding: Variations in Outcomes Based on Indication |
title_short | Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy as a Revisional Procedure Following Adjustable Gastric Banding: Variations in Outcomes Based on Indication |
title_sort | long-term outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy as a revisional procedure following adjustable gastric banding: variations in outcomes based on indication |
topic | Original Contributions |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687173/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37847457 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11695-023-06886-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wickremasingheanagi longtermoutcomesoflaparoscopicsleevegastrectomyasarevisionalprocedurefollowingadjustablegastricbandingvariationsinoutcomesbasedonindication AT leangyit longtermoutcomesoflaparoscopicsleevegastrectomyasarevisionalprocedurefollowingadjustablegastricbandingvariationsinoutcomesbasedonindication AT johariyazmin longtermoutcomesoflaparoscopicsleevegastrectomyasarevisionalprocedurefollowingadjustablegastricbandingvariationsinoutcomesbasedonindication AT chanaprem longtermoutcomesoflaparoscopicsleevegastrectomyasarevisionalprocedurefollowingadjustablegastricbandingvariationsinoutcomesbasedonindication AT alderucciomegan longtermoutcomesoflaparoscopicsleevegastrectomyasarevisionalprocedurefollowingadjustablegastricbandingvariationsinoutcomesbasedonindication AT shawkalai longtermoutcomesoflaparoscopicsleevegastrectomyasarevisionalprocedurefollowingadjustablegastricbandingvariationsinoutcomesbasedonindication AT lauriecheryl longtermoutcomesoflaparoscopicsleevegastrectomyasarevisionalprocedurefollowingadjustablegastricbandingvariationsinoutcomesbasedonindication AT nottlepeter longtermoutcomesoflaparoscopicsleevegastrectomyasarevisionalprocedurefollowingadjustablegastricbandingvariationsinoutcomesbasedonindication AT brownwendy longtermoutcomesoflaparoscopicsleevegastrectomyasarevisionalprocedurefollowingadjustablegastricbandingvariationsinoutcomesbasedonindication AT burtonpaul longtermoutcomesoflaparoscopicsleevegastrectomyasarevisionalprocedurefollowingadjustablegastricbandingvariationsinoutcomesbasedonindication |