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: Disappointing mid-term results after laparoscopic gastric banding in young patients.
    Author: Lanthaler M, Sieb M, Strasser S, Weiss H, Aigner F, Nehoda H.
    Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis; 2009; 5(2):218-23. PubMed ID: 18849198.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: When gastric banding was introduced as a bariatric operation about 12 years previously, its early results were promising, with a low complication rate. Only a few long-term studies on this subject have been published. This study was performed to assess our results with laparoscopic gastric banding in young patients after<or=10 years of follow-up. METHODS: From January 1996 to December 2000, a total of 41 patients (83% female, 17% male)<25 years old underwent laparoscopic gastric banding at our institution. The patient data were derived from the electronic patient data system, paper charts, and a telephone interview. Psychosocial changes were analyzed using the Moorehead-Ardelt/Bariatric Analysis and Reporting Outcome System questionnaire. RESULTS: The mean preoperative body mass index was 44.26+/-6.53 kg/m2, with a mean excess weight of 65.22+/-20.48 kg. The body mass index after 1, 5, and 7 years was 31.50+/-7.38 kg/m2, 31.12+/-7.10 kg/m2, and 32.88+/-5.68 kg/m2, respectively. The mean excess weight loss after 1 year was 60.07%+/-25.33%, and after 5 and 7 years, it was 64.84%+/-27.45% and 57.48%+/-28.07%, respectively. An improvement in obesity-related co-morbidities was observed in nearly all patients. Of our patients, 52% had complications requiring reoperation (27% pouch dilation, 10% band leakage, 5% intragastral band migration, 5% perforation of either the esophagus or the stomach, and 5% port disconnection). According to Bariatric Analysis and Reporting Outcome System, the long-term outcome was regarded as a failure in 40%, fair in 4%, good in 28%, very good in 20%, and excellent in 8% of patients. CONCLUSION: Our mid-term results were disappointing, with a high complication rate and many dissatisfied patients.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]