Cargando…

Safety of Single Stage Revision Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Compared to Laparoscopic Roux-Y Gastric Bypass after Failed Gastric Banding

BACKGROUND: Reoperation, after failed gastric banding, is a controversial topic. A common approach is band removal with conversion to laparoscopic Roux-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in a single-step procedure. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the safety of re...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Janik, Michał, Ibikunle, Christopher, Khan, Ahad, Aryaie, Amir H.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7847865/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32946032
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11695-020-04975-6
_version_ 1783645010120409088
author Janik, Michał
Ibikunle, Christopher
Khan, Ahad
Aryaie, Amir H.
author_facet Janik, Michał
Ibikunle, Christopher
Khan, Ahad
Aryaie, Amir H.
author_sort Janik, Michał
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Reoperation, after failed gastric banding, is a controversial topic. A common approach is band removal with conversion to laparoscopic Roux-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in a single-step procedure. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the safety of revisional surgery to LSG compared to LRYGB after failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) based on MBSAQIP Participant User File from 2015 to 2018. METHODS: Patients who underwent a one-stage conversion of LAGB to LSG (Conv-LSG) or LRYGB (Conv-LRYGB) were identified in the MBSAQIP PUF from 2015 to 2017. Conv-LRYGB cases were matched (1:1) with Conv-LSG patients using propensity scoring to control for potential confounding. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 9974 patients (4987 matched pairs) were included in the study. Conv-LRYGB, as compared with conv-SG, was associated with a similar risk of mortality (0.02% vs. 0.06%; relative risk [RR], 0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03 to 3.20, p = 0.32). Conversion to LRYGB increased the risk for readmission (6.16% vs. 3.77%; RR, 1.63; 95%CI, 1.37 to 1.94, p < 0.01); reoperation (2.15% vs. 1.36%; RR, 1.57; 95%CI, 1.17 to 2.12, p = <0.01); leak (1.76% vs. 1.02%; RR, 1.57; 95%CI, 1.72 to 2.42, p < 0.01); and bleeding (1.66% vs. 1.00%; RR, 1.66; 95%CI, 1.7 to 2.34, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that single-stage LRYGB and LSG as revisional surgery after gastric banding, are safe in the 30-day observation with an acceptable complication rate and low mortality. However, conversion to LRYGB increased the risk of perioperative complications.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7847865
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78478652021-02-08 Safety of Single Stage Revision Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Compared to Laparoscopic Roux-Y Gastric Bypass after Failed Gastric Banding Janik, Michał Ibikunle, Christopher Khan, Ahad Aryaie, Amir H. Obes Surg Original Contributions BACKGROUND: Reoperation, after failed gastric banding, is a controversial topic. A common approach is band removal with conversion to laparoscopic Roux-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in a single-step procedure. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the safety of revisional surgery to LSG compared to LRYGB after failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) based on MBSAQIP Participant User File from 2015 to 2018. METHODS: Patients who underwent a one-stage conversion of LAGB to LSG (Conv-LSG) or LRYGB (Conv-LRYGB) were identified in the MBSAQIP PUF from 2015 to 2017. Conv-LRYGB cases were matched (1:1) with Conv-LSG patients using propensity scoring to control for potential confounding. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 9974 patients (4987 matched pairs) were included in the study. Conv-LRYGB, as compared with conv-SG, was associated with a similar risk of mortality (0.02% vs. 0.06%; relative risk [RR], 0.33; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03 to 3.20, p = 0.32). Conversion to LRYGB increased the risk for readmission (6.16% vs. 3.77%; RR, 1.63; 95%CI, 1.37 to 1.94, p < 0.01); reoperation (2.15% vs. 1.36%; RR, 1.57; 95%CI, 1.17 to 2.12, p = <0.01); leak (1.76% vs. 1.02%; RR, 1.57; 95%CI, 1.72 to 2.42, p < 0.01); and bleeding (1.66% vs. 1.00%; RR, 1.66; 95%CI, 1.7 to 2.34, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The study shows that single-stage LRYGB and LSG as revisional surgery after gastric banding, are safe in the 30-day observation with an acceptable complication rate and low mortality. However, conversion to LRYGB increased the risk of perioperative complications. Springer US 2020-09-18 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7847865/ /pubmed/32946032 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11695-020-04975-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 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/.
spellingShingle Original Contributions
Janik, Michał
Ibikunle, Christopher
Khan, Ahad
Aryaie, Amir H.
Safety of Single Stage Revision Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Compared to Laparoscopic Roux-Y Gastric Bypass after Failed Gastric Banding
title Safety of Single Stage Revision Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Compared to Laparoscopic Roux-Y Gastric Bypass after Failed Gastric Banding
title_full Safety of Single Stage Revision Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Compared to Laparoscopic Roux-Y Gastric Bypass after Failed Gastric Banding
title_fullStr Safety of Single Stage Revision Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Compared to Laparoscopic Roux-Y Gastric Bypass after Failed Gastric Banding
title_full_unstemmed Safety of Single Stage Revision Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Compared to Laparoscopic Roux-Y Gastric Bypass after Failed Gastric Banding
title_short Safety of Single Stage Revision Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Compared to Laparoscopic Roux-Y Gastric Bypass after Failed Gastric Banding
title_sort safety of single stage revision laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy compared to laparoscopic roux-y gastric bypass after failed gastric banding
topic Original Contributions
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7847865/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32946032
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11695-020-04975-6
work_keys_str_mv AT janikmichał safetyofsinglestagerevisionlaparoscopicsleevegastrectomycomparedtolaparoscopicrouxygastricbypassafterfailedgastricbanding
AT ibikunlechristopher safetyofsinglestagerevisionlaparoscopicsleevegastrectomycomparedtolaparoscopicrouxygastricbypassafterfailedgastricbanding
AT khanahad safetyofsinglestagerevisionlaparoscopicsleevegastrectomycomparedtolaparoscopicrouxygastricbypassafterfailedgastricbanding
AT aryaieamirh safetyofsinglestagerevisionlaparoscopicsleevegastrectomycomparedtolaparoscopicrouxygastricbypassafterfailedgastricbanding