Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Following Failed Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding—a Comparison Between One- and two-Stage Procedures, an Israeli National Database Study

Perry, Zvi H.; Romano-Zelekha, Orly; Sakran, Nasser; Avital, Itzhak; Atias, Shahar; Netz, Uri; Kirshtein, Boris

doi:10.1007/s11695-021-05312-1

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The longer follow-up of the same series, included in the present work, provides evidence that de novo, severe GERD manifests as a mid-term complication and often requires further revisional surgery. Similar findings were shown in non-revisional sleeve gastrectomy [ 18 , 19 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…In the future, the difference between the two groups in terms of “de novo” GERD incidence, despite the systematic hiatus exploration, may influence the revisional operation’s choice. The patients who required LSG’s revisions to RYGB did not show any postoperative complications in both groups, but other series’ rate is up to 25% [ 19 – 22 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Long-term outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy as a revisional procedure after failed gastric band: a multicenter cross-matched cohort study

Angelis¹,

Boru²,

Iossa³

et al. 2021

Updates Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) is the bariatric procedure most likely subject to revisional surgery. Both laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) represent viable options, but the long-term results are still lacking. In 2014, we published the 2-year follow-up of our multicenter cohort of revisional LSG after failed LAGB. Evaluate the long-term follow-up (median 9.3 years) of the same cohort of patients. University and primary-care hospitals, Italy. We retrospectively examined a prospectively maintained database of the previously published multicenter cohort of 56 patients who underwent LSG after failed LAGB between 2008–2011. The control group included cross-matched non-revisional LSGs. The primary endpoint was weight loss, secondary endpoints co-morbidities, and the need for further bariatric surgery. The study group included 44 patients and the control group 56. We found %EWL 53% Vs. 67% (p = .021), %EBMIL (54 Vs. 68%, p = .018), %TWL (26 Vs. 34%, p = .002). We also found more severe GERD (gastroesophageal reflux disease) symptoms in the revisional than in the primary group (9.0 vs. 1.8% mild and 23.0 vs. 3.0% severe). Ten patients from the revisional group (22.7%) vs. eight in the primary group (13%) underwent further bariatric surgery (LRYGB). Our results showed less favorable weight loss in revisional than primary LSG after LABG, higher prevalence of GERD, and a more frequent need for further revisional surgery. Despite the study’s limitations, the present data suggest that the long-term outcomes may offset the possible reduced short-term complication rate after revisional sleeve gastrectomy for a failed LABG.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Long-term outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy as a revisional procedure after failed gastric band: a multicenter cross-matched cohort study

Angelis¹,

Boru²,

Iossa³

et al. 2021

Updates Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…and vomiting in up to 60.0% of patients increasingly necessitated revision of the AGB to RYGB or to LSG [18][19][20][21]. Revisional LSG (rLSG) has been found safe in both oneand two-step operative approaches to AGB conversion, with very low 30-day adverse event rates and good medium-term excess weight loss (EWL) between 59.9 and 78.5% [22][23][24][25][26][27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-Term Matched Comparison of Primary and Revisional Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

et al. 2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Reports of long-term (> 5–15-year) outcomes assessing the safety and efficacy of primary revisional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) are few. Methods Retrospective long-term comparisons of primary (pLSG) and revisional (rLSG) procedures were matched for gender, age ± 5 years, and body mass index (BMI) ± 5 kg/m 2 . Weight loss, associated medical condition status, and patient satisfaction were evaluated. Results Between May 1, 2006, and December 31, 2016, 194 matched patients with severe obesity (mean BMI 44.1 ± 6.7 kg/m 2 ; age 44.2 ± 10.0 years, 67.0% female) underwent pLSG ( n = 97) or rLSG ( n = 97) and were followed for a mean 12.1 ± 1.5 vs 7.6 ± 2.1 years. Respective mean weight regain from nadir was 15.0 ± 14.4 kg vs 11.9 ± 12.2 kg. Respective percent mean total weight loss and excess weight loss were 20.9 ± 12.7% and 51.8 ± 33.1%, and 18.3 ± 12.8% and 43.4 ± 31.6% at last follow-up, with no significant difference between groups. Resolution of type 2 diabetes (HbA1 C < 6.5%, off medications) was 23.1% vs 11.1%; hypertension 36.0% vs 16.0%; and hyperlipidemia 37.1% vs 35.3%. Patients in the pLSG group were significantly more satisfied with LSG (59.8% vs 43.3%, p < 0.05) and more likely to choose the procedure again. Conclusions There were no significant differences in long-term weight loss or associated medical condition outcomes in matched pLSG and rLSG patients. Graphical Abstract

show abstract

“…Higher risk of complications might be expected in one-step revision due to fibrotic tissue at the band site, especially with concomitant band complications. However, several single- and multi-center studies and meta-analyses have reported the high safety profile of one-step rOAGB, rRYGB, and rLSG for unsuccessful LAGB that is comparable to the two-step procedures and even primary procedures [ 12 – 14 , 26 , 43 , 44 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisional One-Step Bariatric Surgical Techniques After Unsuccessful Laparoscopic Gastric Band: A Retrospective Cohort Study with 2-Year Follow-up

Hany,

Zidan,

Ibrahim

et al. 2024

OBES SURG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has high reported rates of revision due to poor weight loss (WL) and high complication rates. Yet, there is yet to be a consensus on the best revisional procedure after unsuccessful LAGB, and studies comparing different revisional procedures after LAGB are still needed. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study that compared the outcomes of one-step revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (rRYGB), one-anastomosis gastric bypass (rOAGB), or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (rLSG) after LAGB. WL, complications, resolution of associated medical conditions, and food tolerance were assessed with a post hoc pairwise comparison one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) throughout a 2-year follow-up. Results The final analysis included 102 (rRYGB), 80 (rOAGB), and 70 (rLSG) patients. After 2 years, an equal percentage of excess weight loss was observed in rOAGB and rRYGB (both >90%; p=0.998), significantly higher than that in rLSG (83.6%; p<0.001). In our study, no leaks were observed. rRYGB had higher complication rates according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (10.8% vs. 3.75% and 5.7% in rOAGB and rLSG, respectively, p=0.754), and re-operations were not statistically significant. Food tolerance was comparable between rOAGB and rRYGB (p = 0.987), and both had significantly better food tolerance than rLSG (p<0.001). The study cohorts had comparable resolution rates for associated medical problems (p>0.60). Conclusion rOAGB and rRYGB had better outcomes after LAGB than rLSG regarding WL, feasibility, food tolerance, and safety. rOAGB had significantly higher rates of nutritional deficiencies. Graphical Abstract

show abstract

Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Following Failed Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding—a Comparison Between One- and two-Stage Procedures, an Israeli National Database Study

Cited by 5 publications

References 40 publications

Long-term outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy as a revisional procedure after failed gastric band: a multicenter cross-matched cohort study

Long-term outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy as a revisional procedure after failed gastric band: a multicenter cross-matched cohort study

Long-Term Matched Comparison of Primary and Revisional Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

Revisional One-Step Bariatric Surgical Techniques After Unsuccessful Laparoscopic Gastric Band: A Retrospective Cohort Study with 2-Year Follow-up

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About