The Enteroinsular Axis and the Recovery from Type 2 Diabetes after Bariatric Surgery
ABSTRACT The Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) and the biliopancreatic diversion (BPD) induce long-term control of type 2 diabetes in morbidly obese individuals. The reasons for such an effect on glycemic metabolism are thought to be secondary to reduced food intake, weight loss and modifications of the enteroinsular axis which is impaired in type 2 diabetic patients. Both GLP-1 and GIP have an impaired secretin effect in type 2 diabetics, and surgery can restore this function. GIP is a peptide secreted by the duodenal K-cells in response to ingested fat and carbohydrate. In obese type 2 diabetes patients, its receptor on beta-cells is down-regulated. GLP-1 is a peptide secreted by the gut L-cells, and, in type 2 diabetes, its secretion is impaired. Both RYGBP and BPD provide durable GLP-1 delivery, both during fasting and after meal ingestion, inducing L-cell stimulation by early arrival of nutrients in the distal ileum. The secretion of GLP-1 influences glucose metabolism by inhibiting glucagon secretion, stimulating insulin secretion, delaying gastric emptying and stimulating glycogenogenesis. In conclusion, the early arrival of a meal in the terminal ileum seems to be the common feature of both operations that leads to an improvement in glycemic metabolism and to resolution of type 2 diabetes.
- SourceAvailable from: Sung-Soo Park[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background The question of whether pure metabolic surgery could be used in nonobese patients with type 2 diabetes has been considered. The objective of this study was to assess the comparative effects of the Billroth I (BI) and Billroth II (BII) reconstruction methods on remission of type 2 diabetes in nonobese patients undergoing subtotal gastrectomy for cancer. Methods The charts of 404 patients who underwent radical subtotal gastrectomy for cancer between January 2008 and December 2010 were retrospectively reviewed. From these patients, 49 with type 2 diabetes were included in this study. Diabetes remission rates, the percentage change in fasting plasma glucose levels, glycated hemoglobin levels, body mass index, and fasting total cholesterol levels at 2 years were observed. Outcomes were compared using propensity scores and inverse probability-weighting adjustment that reduced treatment-selection bias. Covariate-adjusted logistic regression models were assessed. Results The 2-year diabetes remission rate for the 23 patients who underwent BI reconstruction was 39.1%, compared with 50.0% for the 26 patients who underwent BII reconstruction. At 2 years, the BII group showed lower glycated hemoglobin levels (BI, 6.4%; BII, 6.1%; P = .003) and had greater percent reductions in their average glycated hemoglobin levels from baseline (BI,−11.6%; BII,−14.5%; P = .043). BII reconstruction was significantly associated with an increased diabetes remission rate (odds ratio, 3.22; 95% confidence interval, 1.05–9.83) in covariate-adjusted logistic regression analysis. Conclusions These propensity score-adjusted analyses of patients who had undergone subtotal gastrectomy indicated that BII reconstruction was associated with increased diabetes remission compared with BI reconstruction during the 2-year follow-up period. This study suggests the possibility of employing the surgical duodenal switch for the treatment of nonobese type 2 diabetes patients.Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases 01/2013; DOI:10.1016/j.soard.2013.09.013 · 4.94 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Background Approximately 80% of patients undergoing bariatric surgery are women, and about one half of these are of reproductive age. The purpose of the present study was to compare laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) in a series of morbidly obese women with respect to maternal and neonatal outcomes at a university hospital in France.Methods From January 2004 to December 2008, the data from women who had undergone LAGB or LRYGB at our center and were pregnant were collected, including age, parity, gravidity, weight, body mass index (BMI) before surgery and at scheduled intervals after surgery (1, 3, 6, 12, and 18 mo and yearly thereafter), interval from surgery to conception, weight and BMI at conception, weight and weight gain during pregnancy, weight and BMI at 2 weeks after pregnancy, complications during pregnancy, gestational age, method of delivery, fetal birth weight, and fetal outcome.ResultsThere were 42 pregnancies in 36 women, 22 in women who had undergone LAGB and 20 who had undergone LRYGB. The LAGB and LRYGB groups were comparable for all analyzed variables, except that the preoperative weight and BMI were greater in the LRYGB group. No differences in weight or BMI were found at conception or after pregnancy. No difference was found between the 2 groups in terms of obstetric complications or neonatal outcomes. A high frequency of cesarean deliveries was necessary in both groups.Conclusions The results of the present study have shown that no significant difference exists in the obstetric and birth outcomes between women who have undergone LRYGB and those who have undergone LAGB.Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases 06/2011; 8(4):-. DOI:10.1016/j.soard.2011.06.006 · 4.94 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Insulin resistance is a nearly universal finding in morbid obesity. It may be compensated and latent or uncompensated with single or multiple clinical abnormalities. Although lifestyle interventions and medical measures alone may control most metabolic problems in the short term, the ultimate benefits of such an approach are usually limited by the complexity of available therapeutic regimens and the difficulty of maintaining full patient compliance. Many studies now document that bariatric surgery can effectively and safely control these complications in the short term and long term or even prevent their occurrence. Further investigations are needed to understand better the mechanisms involved and to define more clearly the appropriate indications and contraindications of the treatments proposed.Medical Clinics of North America 06/2007; 91(3):393-414, x. DOI:10.1016/j.mcna.2007.01.005 · 2.80 Impact Factor