Cargando…
Comparing Patient Selection and 30-day Outcomes Between Single Anastomosis Gastric Bypass and Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Retrospective Cohort Study of 47,384 Patients
PURPOSE: Single anastomosis gastric bypass (SAGB) offers a novel bariatric procedure with increasing popularity. However, its adoption, patient selection, and short-term safety remain poorly characterized. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 2020 Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer US
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9628415/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36322343 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11695-022-06353-w |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: Single anastomosis gastric bypass (SAGB) offers a novel bariatric procedure with increasing popularity. However, its adoption, patient selection, and short-term safety remain poorly characterized. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The 2020 Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) was analyzed comparing SAGB to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Bivariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression models compared difference between groups and factors associated with 30-day serious complications and mortality. RESULTS: Overall, 47,384 patients were evaluated, with 1344 (2.8%) undergoing SAGB. SAGB patients had a higher BMI (45.2 ± 7.6 kg/m(2) vs 44.6 ± 7.9 kg/m(2), p = 0.006) and younger age (44.3 ± 12.1 years vs. 45.4 ± 11.5 years, p = 0.0008) than RYGB patients respectively. SAGB patients were less likely to have GERD (42.6% SAGB vs. 45.7% RYGB, p = 0.02), sleep apnea (37.8% SAGB vs. 41.1% RYGB, p = 0.02), and chronic steroid use (1.3% SAGB vs. 2.2% RYGB, p = 0.04). There were no significant difference in diabetes, hypertension, or dyslipidemia rates. Operative length for SAGB was significantly less than for RYGB (101 ± 53.7 min SAGB vs. 131.5 ± 63.3 min RYGB, p < 0.0001). SAGB was independently associated with decreased serious complications (4.7% vs. 8.4%, p < 0.0001) within 30 days compared to RYGB. Additionally, SAGB patients were less likely to experience reoperation (1.6% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.03), and readmission (2.2 vs. 5.8%, p < 0.0001) compared to RYGB respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to RYGB, patients undergoing SAGB were younger with marginally higher BMI. After adjusting for comorbidities, SAGB was associated with decreased odds of serious complications. Ongoing prospective studies analyzing long-term outcomes following SAGB remain needed. GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT: [Image: see text] |
---|