These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Revisional bariatric surgery for failed restrictive procedures.
    Author: Coakley BA, Deveney CW, Spight DH, Thompson SK, Le D, Jobe BA, Wolfe BM, McConnell DB, O'Rourke RW.
    Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis; 2008; 4(5):581-6. PubMed ID: 18065290.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Revisional bariatric surgery is increasing in frequency, but the morbidity and efficacy have not been well defined. The primary aim of this study was to determine the clinical efficacy with respect to weight loss, and associated morbidity, of revisional bariatric surgery in an academic university hospital bariatric surgery program. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent revisional bariatric surgery for failed primary restrictive procedures, including gastroplasty and gastric bypass, but not including gastric banding or malabsorptive procedures, during a 10-year period at a single university hospital was performed. The perioperative morbidity and long-term weight loss and clinical results were determined from the medical charts. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients met the inclusion criteria. The primary bariatric procedures included vertical banded gastroplasty in 20 and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in 21. The indications for revisional surgery included poor weight loss, weight regain, and various technical problems, including anastomotic stenosis and ulcer. The major morbidity rate was 17%. No patients died. The weight loss results varied depending on the indication for the revisional surgery and reoperative solution applied. The resolution of technical problems was achieved in all patients. CONCLUSION: Revisional bariatric surgery can be performed with minimal mortality, albeit significant morbidity. The efficacy with respect to weight loss appeared acceptable, although the results were not as good as those after primary bariatric surgery. The analysis of patient subsets stratified by surgical history and revisional strategy provided important insights into the mechanisms of failure and efficacy of different revisional strategies.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]