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: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a case-control study and 3 years of follow-up.
    Author: Boza C, Gamboa C, Salinas J, Achurra P, Vega A, Pérez G.
    Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis; 2012; 8(3):243-9. PubMed ID: 22285881.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become a popular surgical procedure among bariatric surgeons. Few studies have compared the efficacy of the procedure to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). We performed a case-control study to assess the surgical results, weight progression, and remission of co-morbid conditions. METHODS: From January 2006 to September 2009, we selected 811 patients undergoing LSG as a primary procedure. These patients were matched by age, body mass index, and gender to 786 patients undergoing LRYGB. The complication rate, mortality, and percentage of excess weight loss after 1, 2, and 3 years were analyzed. RESULTS: The mean age for the LRYGB and LSG groups was 37.0 ± 10.3 and 36.4 ± 11.7 years, respectively (P = .120). Most of the patients were women (LRYGB 76.6% versus LSG 76.2%; P = .855). The preoperative body mass index before surgery was similar in both groups (LRYGB 38.0 ± 3.2 versus LSG 37.9 ± 4.6 kg/m(2); P = .617). The mean operative time was longer for LRYGB (106.2 ± 33.2 versus 76.6 ± 28.0 min; P <.001), and the hospital stay was longer for LRYGB (3.4 ± 4.4 versus 2.8 ± .8 for LSG; P <.001). The early complication rate was 7.1% for LRYGB and 2.9% for LSG (P <.001), and the suture leak rate was .7% for LRYGB and .5% for LSG (P = NS). The percentage of excess weight loss for LRYGB versus LSG at 1, 2, and 3 years was 97.2% ± 24.3% versus 86.4% ± 26.4% (P <.001), 94.6% ± 30.2% versus 84.1% ± 28.3% (P <.001), and 93.1% ± 25.0% versus 86.8% ± 27.1% (P = .082), respectively. The total cholesterol level at 1 year for LRYGB versus LSG was 169.0 ± 32.9 versus 193.6 ± 38.7 mg/dL, respectively (P <.001), and the rate of diabetes remission was similar in both groups (LRYGB 86.6% versus LSG 90.9%). CONCLUSION: LSG has become an acceptable primary bariatric procedure for obesity, with results comparable to LRYGB in this population.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]