Revision Procedures After Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding: Comparison of Efficacy and Safety

Chansaenroj, Pawan; Aung, Lwin; Lee, Wei-Jei; Chen, Shu Chun; Chen, Jung-Chien; Ser, Kong-Han

doi:10.1007/s11695-017-2716-4

Cited by 40 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The complication rate in this study is in line with what has been published in re-operative bariatric surgical literature [6][7][8][9][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] (Tables 5 and 6). Multiple papers support our findings; Dang et al systematically reviewed the literature comparing the safety of onestep versus two-step revisional bariatric surgery from LAGB to RYGB or sleeve gastrectomy.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Conversion of Adjustable Gastric Banding to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass in One or Two Steps: What Is the Best Approach? Analysis of a Multicenter Database Concerning 832 Patients

Pujol-Rafols¹,

Abbas

Devriendt

et al. 2020

OBES SURG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is often the preferred conversion procedure for laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) poor responders. However, there is controversy whether it is better to convert in one or two stages. This study aims to compare the outcomes of one and two-stage conversions of LAGB to RYGB. Methods Retrospective review of a multicenter prospectively collected database. Data on conversion in one and two stages was compared. Results Eight hundred thirty-two patients underwent LAGB conversion to RYGB in seven specialized bariatric centers. Six hundred seventy-three (81%) were converted in one-stage. Patients in the two-stage group were more likely to have experienced technical complications, such as slippage or erosions (86% vs. 37%, p = 0.0001) and to have had a higher body mass index (BMI) (41.6 vs. 39.9 Kg/m 2 , p = 0.005). There were no differences in postoperative complications and mortality rates between the onestage and two-stage groups (13.5% vs. 10.8%, and 0.7% vs. 0.0% respectively, p = ns). Mean final BMI and %total weight loss (%TWL) for the one-stage and the two-stage groups were 31.6 vs. 32.4 Kg/m 2 (p = ns) and 30.4 vs. 26.8 (p = 0.017) after a mean follow-up of 33 months. Follow-up at 1, 3, and 5 years was 98%, 75%, and 54%, respectively. Conclusions One-stage conversion of LAGB to RYGB is safe and effective. Two-stage conversion carries low morbidity and mortality in the case of band slippage, erosion, or higher BMI patients. These findings suggest the importance of patient selection when choosing the appropriate conversion approach.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Conversion of Adjustable Gastric Banding to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass in One or Two Steps: What Is the Best Approach? Analysis of a Multicenter Database Concerning 832 Patients

Pujol-Rafols¹,

Abbas

Devriendt

et al. 2020

OBES SURG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Достоинством такого подхода является высокая эффективность мини-желудочного шунтирования, продемонстрированная в целом ряде клинических исследований последних лет: средняя потеря избыточного веса после данной операции в течение двух лет составляет 78,2 ± 12,4 %. Осложнения операции минимальны [7].…”

Section: установк а рег улируемого же лудочного банд а ж аunclassified

Revision procedures in bariatric surgery

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Searching the optimal options for reoperations in overweight patients has the same lengthy and difficult history as all bariatric surgery. The key issues of this aspect of obesity surgery are inefficiency (inadequate weight reduction or it regain) and the unavoidable complications of conservative methods and the negative effects of primary surgery. Weight regain after bariatric surgery is a multicomponent problem. The main reason for the unsatisfactory results of surgical (and conservative) treatment of obesity in some patients is the nature of obesity – the lifelong chronic recurrent disease. A certain role in the return of excess weight is played by the imperfection of the currently existing surgical procedures for the correction of overweight, as well as the wrong choice of options for surgical interventions and technical errors in their implementation. Increase the number of worldwide operations for obesity and its associated diseases translates the problem of revision bariatric surgery from the category of narrow questions in this field of medicine into a serious problem. The article describes modern approaches to the surgical treatment of re-gaining weight after bariatric operations. It considered options for audit procedures, depending on the previously performed surgery. Original techniques of repeated operations for effective correction of the relapse of overweight are described in article.

show abstract

“…Revision surgery represents today one of the main research fields in bariatric surgery and will most likely produce a major demand in the future and consequently, a significant economic burden [ 4 – 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resectional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass/Mini Gastric Bypass as a Novel Option for Revision of Restrictive Procedures: Preliminary Results

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Revisional surgery is becoming a common and challenging practice in bariatric centers. The aim of this study was to evaluate resectional one anastomosis gastric bypass/mini gastric bypass (R-OAGB/MGB) as a revisional procedure. Methods From January 2016 to February 2017, data on 21 consecutive patients undergoing R-OAGB/MGB for weight loss failure after primary restrictive procedures were prospectively collected and analysed. Results Mean age was 39 ± 12 years (18–65), and 11 (52.3%) were women. The mean operative time was 96.4 ± 20.9 min (range, 122–80), and the mean postoperative stay was 47.8 ± 7.4 hours (range, 36–73). There were no deaths and no procedure-related complications. The mean body mass index (BMI) decreased from 42.9 ± 6.5 at the time of R-OAGB/MGB to 28.5 ± 4 at the 12-month follow-up. At that time point, the mean percentage of BMI loss (%EBL) and the mean percentage of total body weight loss (%TWL) reached 81.6 ± 0.17% and 35 ± 0.01%, respectively. Conclusion R-OAGB/MGB was technically straightforward, effective, and safe in this at-surgical risk population. R-OAGB/MGB should be added to the armamentarium of revisional bariatric procedures considering its technical aspects and the potential advantage on weight loss.

show abstract

Revision Procedures After Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding: Comparison of Efficacy and Safety

Cited by 40 publications

References 31 publications

Conversion of Adjustable Gastric Banding to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass in One or Two Steps: What Is the Best Approach? Analysis of a Multicenter Database Concerning 832 Patients

Conversion of Adjustable Gastric Banding to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass in One or Two Steps: What Is the Best Approach? Analysis of a Multicenter Database Concerning 832 Patients

Revision procedures in bariatric surgery

Resectional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass/Mini Gastric Bypass as a Novel Option for Revision of Restrictive Procedures: Preliminary Results

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About