Article

Prospective comparative evaluation of stapled versus transected silastic ring gastric bypass: 6-year follow-up

Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Ángeles, California, United States
Obesity Surgery (Impact Factor: 3.74). 03/2001; 11(1):18-24. DOI: 10.1381/096089201321454051
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The effect of transecting vs. stapling the stomach in continuity in the banded gastric bypass (GBP) operation was studied.
50 patients, 25 in each group, were enrolled into a prospective study to determine if transecting the stomach vs. stapling it in continuity in performing GBP for obesity decreases the incidence of gastro-gastric fistula formation without increased morbidity.
The patient profiles in the 2 groups were very similar. The peri-operative complications included 1 splenic capsular injury in each group, controlled without a splenectomy. There was 1 anastomotic leak in the stapled and 1 bleeding from the cut edge of the bypassed stomach in the transected group, both requiring re-operations in the immediate postoperative period. There was no peri-operative mortality. The percent follow-up after 6 years was 80% and 88% in the stapled and transected groups respectively. The incidence of late complications of solid food intolerance, ventral incisional hernia, cholelithiasis and small bowel obstruction was similar in both groups. There were 8 gastro-gastric fistulas in the stapled group and 1 in the transected group. The reduction in body mass index and percent excess weight loss (66%) were similar in both groups.
The incidence of gastro-gastric fistula may be reduced in GBP procedures by transecting the stomach as opposed to stapling it in continuity, without an increase in morbidity or mortality or any loss in the effectiveness of the operation.

1 Follower
 · 
96 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We attempted to compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding with vertical-banded gastroplasty and gastric bypass. Morbid obesity presents a serious health issue for Western countries, with a rising incidence and a strong association with increased mortality and serious comorbidities, such as diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and cardiovascular disease. Unfortunately, conservative treatment options have proven ineffective. Surgical interventions, such as vertical-banded gastroplasty (stomach stapling), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, and, more recently, laparoscopic gastric banding have been developed with the aim of providing a laparoscopically placed device that is safe and effective in generating substantial weight loss.Methods Electronic databases were systematically searched for references relating to obesity surgery by (1) laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB), (2) vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG), and (3) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).ResultsOnly 6 studies reported comparative results for laparoscopic gastric banding and other surgical procedures. One study reported comparative results for all 3 surgical procedures, and this study was only of moderate quality. In total, 64 studies were found that reported results for LAGB and 57 studies reported results on the comparative procedures. LAGB was associated with a mean short-term mortality rate of approximately 0.05% and an overall median morbidity rate of approximately 11.3%, compared with 0.50% and 23.6% for RYGB, and 0.31% and 25.7% for VBG. Overall, all 3 procedures produced considerable weight loss in patients up to 4 years in the case of LAGB (the maximum follow-up available at the time of the review), and more than 10 years in the case of the comparator procedures.Conclusions The Australian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures–Surgical Review Group concluded that the evidence base was of average quality up to 4 years for LAGB. Laparoscopic gastric banding is safer than VBG and RYGB, in terms of short-term mortality rates. LAGB is effective, at least up to 4 years, as are the comparator procedures. Up to 2 years, LAGB results in less weight loss than RYGB; from 2 to 4 years there is no significant difference between LAGB and RYGB, but the quality of data is only moderate. The long-term efficacy of LAGB remains unproven, and evaluation by randomized controlled trials is recommended to define its merits relative to the comparator procedures.
    Surgery 03/2004; 135(3):326-351. DOI:10.1016/S0039-6060(03)00392-1 · 3.11 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Primary banding of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass remains controversial. Though there are surgeons who believe it should be the standard practice as it results in superior weight loss and prevents weight regain in the long term, there are others who are concerned about the risk of food intolerance and complications related to band. This review investigates published English language literature systematically to find out the advantages and disadvantages of primary banding of a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.
    Obesity Surgery 06/2014; 24(10). DOI:10.1007/s11695-014-1346-3 · 3.74 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: This present study shows the preoperative and postoperative serum gastric, a fundamental hormone in the production of gastric chloridric acid, correlating these findings with postoperative complications, in patients submitted to GVBYR. METHODS: We selected 20 patients with body mass index (BMI) over 40 Kg/m2 after a rigorous psychological evaluation. Serum gatrin was measured in the preoperative and postoperative periods. These patients were also submitted to upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with biopsy for histological analysis. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference between preoperative and postoperative serum gastrin (p= 0.4281). CONCLUSION: Our results show that GVBYR leads to a digestive tract adaptation after surgery, in order to maintain its physiology, suggesting that this procedure is safe for the treatment of morbid obesity. Key-words: morbid obesity*, gastric bypass*, gastrin*.
    Revista do Colégio Brasileiro de Cirurgiões 12/2008; 35(6):392-396. DOI:10.1590/S0100-69912008000600009