We have located links that may give you full text access.
Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding After Failed Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass.
Obesity Surgery 2017 Februrary
BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is associated with approximately 25 % weight loss failure, resulting in insufficient weight loss or weight regain. Strategies of revisional surgery focus on alteration of limb length, pouch or stoma size. Altering pouch size and outlet by adding laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) might initiate further weight loss. The goal of this study is to review the safety and efficacy of LAGB after failed RYGB in a retrospective cohort of patients in our institute.
METHODS: Patients with secondary LAGB (n = 44) were studied between May 2012 and January 2015. Demographics, effects on weight loss and complications were analysed.
RESULTS: Mean age and body mass index (BMI) at time of LAGB was 45.8 ± 8.2 years and 37.2 ± 5.4 kg/m2 , respectively. Mean interval between RYGB and LAGB was 2.6 ± 1.3 years. Mean follow-up was 14 ± 7.9 months, with 25 % loss to follow-up at 12 months. Due to LAGB, patients lost an additional 17.6 % ± 28.3 % excess weight. Patients with weight regain after initial weight loss success showed more excess weight loss (EWL) compared to patients whom never reached 50% EWL after RYGB. Overall complication and reoperation rates were 30 and 21 %, respectively, with 16 % band removal. One fatality due to septic shock following band erosion was observed.
CONCLUSION: In this largest published cohort, secondary banding of failed RYGB provides only limited additional weight loss. Furthermore, this technique is associated with high morbidity and reoperation rates. A significant difference in effect was found between patients with weight loss failure and weight regain. Larger prospective series are necessary to evaluate if the modest benefits are worth the risks of secondary LAGB.
METHODS: Patients with secondary LAGB (n = 44) were studied between May 2012 and January 2015. Demographics, effects on weight loss and complications were analysed.
RESULTS: Mean age and body mass index (BMI) at time of LAGB was 45.8 ± 8.2 years and 37.2 ± 5.4 kg/m2 , respectively. Mean interval between RYGB and LAGB was 2.6 ± 1.3 years. Mean follow-up was 14 ± 7.9 months, with 25 % loss to follow-up at 12 months. Due to LAGB, patients lost an additional 17.6 % ± 28.3 % excess weight. Patients with weight regain after initial weight loss success showed more excess weight loss (EWL) compared to patients whom never reached 50% EWL after RYGB. Overall complication and reoperation rates were 30 and 21 %, respectively, with 16 % band removal. One fatality due to septic shock following band erosion was observed.
CONCLUSION: In this largest published cohort, secondary banding of failed RYGB provides only limited additional weight loss. Furthermore, this technique is associated with high morbidity and reoperation rates. A significant difference in effect was found between patients with weight loss failure and weight regain. Larger prospective series are necessary to evaluate if the modest benefits are worth the risks of secondary LAGB.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app