Prospective study of gut hormone and metabolic changes after adjustable gastric banding and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

Department of Medicine, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, NY 10032, USA.
International journal of obesity (2005) (Impact Factor: 5.22). 05/2009; 33(7):786-95.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to quantify hormones that regulate energy and glucose homeostasis to establish possible mechanisms for the greater efficacy of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) compared with laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) in achieving weight loss and improved insulin sensitivity.
Longitudinal study of patients undergoing LAGB (n=15) and RYGB (n=28) who were studied before surgery and at 2, 12, 26 and 52 weeks afterwards.
Fasting blood samples were drawn at each visit. Postprandial blood samples were also obtained before surgery and at 26 and 52 weeks. Samples were assayed for peptide YY (PYY), ghrelin, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), glucose, insulin, leptin, thyrotropic hormone, free T(4) and free T(3).Results:At 1 year there was greater weight loss in RYGB compared with LAGB patients (30 vs 15%), but final body mass index was similar (34 vs 33 kg m(-2)). At week 52, area under the curve (AUC) for PYY in RYGB subjects was greater than LAGB (P<0.01). GLP-1 levels at 30 min after meal were threefold greater after RYGB compared with LAGB (P<0.001). Conversely, ghrelin AUC increased after LAGB at week 52 (P<0.05) but tended to decrease after RYGB. Fasting glucose, insulin, and leptin and homeostasis model of assessment (HOMA-IR) decreased in both groups over time but were significantly lower at week 52 after RYGB compared with LAGB. The change in leptin correlated significantly with weight loss in LAGB (r=0.86) and RYGB (r=0.77), however, HOMA-IR correlated significantly with weight loss only in LAGB (r=0.78), and not RYGB (r=0.15). There was a significant decrease in free T(3) (P<0.01) after RYGB.
Differences in levels of gut hormones may play a role in promoting greater weight loss and insulin sensitivity after RYGB compared with LAGB, however, weight loss may be limited by decreases in free T(3) and leptin.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Obesity and its associated diseases are a worldwide epidemic disease. Usual weight loss cures - as diets, physical activity, behavior therapy and pharmacotherapy - have been continuously implemented but still have relatively poor long-term success and mainly scarce adherence. Bariatric surgery is to date the most effective long term treatment for morbid obesity and it has been proven to reduce obesity-related co-morbidities, among them nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, and mortality. This article summarizes such variations in gut hormones following the current metabolic surgery procedures. The profile of gut hormonal changes after bariatric surgery represents a strategy for the individuation of the most performing surgical procedures to achieve clinical results. About this topic, experts suggest that the individuation of the crosslink among the gut hormones, microbiome, the obesity and the bariatric surgery could lead to new and more specific therapeutic interventions for severe obesity and its co-morbidities, also non surgical.
    World journal of gastroenterology : WJG. 11/2014; 20(44):16649-16664.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Single-anastomosis (mini-) gastric bypass (SAGB) was proposed by Dr. Robert Rutledge. Criticism and prejudice against this procedure was raised by surgeons who preferred a more difficult procedure, laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Increasing data indicates the procedure is an effective and durable bariatric procedure. SAGB has lower operation risks compared to RYGB. The weight loss is better after SAGB because of a greater malabsorptive component than RYGB, but SAGB had a higher incidence of micronutrient deficiencies. Randomized controlled trial and long-term data demonstrate that SAGB can be regarded as a simpler and safer alternative to RYGB. We propose this procedure to be renamed "single-anastomosis gastric bypass (SAGB)" because the key feature of SAGB is the "single anastomosis" compared with the two anastomoses of RYGB.
    Obesity Surgery 07/2014; · 3.74 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: A review of published data addressing hepatic histopathological, metabolical, and functional changes following gastric banding, sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass surgery, and biliopancreatic with duodenal switch surgeries on nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). NAFLD is currently the most common chronic liver disease. Owing to the strong relationship between obesity and NAFLD, the idea of weight reduction as a method to treat NAFLD has rapidly emerged. Bariatric surgery has proved to be the most efficient method for weight reduction; hence, their beneficial effects on NAFLD have been evaluated by several studies. A literature review of published data was performed during the years 2012-2014 using PubMed with the following key words: Bariatric, NAFLD, steatosis, sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass, gastric banding, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch, obesity, and insulin resistance (IR). Exclusion criteria were non-English articles and inherited NAFLD, pregnancy-induced NAFLD, and children. The majority of published data are in favor of indicating that bariatric surgeries improve the histologic and metabolic changes associated with NAFLD. The suggested mechanisms are: The reversal of IR, reduction of inflammatory markers, and improved histological features of NAFLD. Accordingly, bariatric surgeries are potentially one of the future methods in treating patients with morbid obesity and NAFLD. However, some questions remain unanswered, such as whether timing of surgery, type of surgery most effective, and whether bariatric surgeries are capable of curing the disease. Long-term and well-designed prospective studies are needed to address these issues.
    Saudi Journal of Gastroenterology 09/2014; 20(5):270-278. · 1.22 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 1, 2014