Mini/One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass as a Second Step Procedure After Sleeve Gastrectomy—a Retrospective Cohort Study

Dec 14, 2018Obesity surgery

Comparing Two Types of Gastric Bypass Surgery as a Second Step After Sleeve Gastrectomy

AI simplified

GLP-1 Therapies on OpenScience ↗PubMed ↗DOI ↗

Abstract

Operation time for one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) averaged 79 ± 36 minutes, significantly shorter than Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) at 98 ± 24 minutes (p = 0.03).

In the first 30 postoperative days, three patients experienced complications in the RYGB group, while no complications were reported in the OAGB group.
At 12 months, mean total weight loss was 10.3 ± 7.6% for RYGB and 15.8 ± 7.8% for OAGB (p = 0.0132).
Minor complication rates at 12 months were 33.3% for RYGB and 35.3% for OAGB, indicating comparable risk.
Follow-up data was complete at 100%, but long-term follow-up is necessary to assess the risk of malnutrition associated with OAGB.

AI simplified

BACKGROUND: Whether one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is a better revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is still under debate. The aim is to compare short-term outcomes of RYGB and OAGB as a RBS after SG, pertaining to their effects on weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, and complications.

METHODS: We performed a single-center analysis of 55 patients (n = 34 OAGB, n = 21 RYGB). Indications for revisional surgery included weight regain/loss failure (67%) and intractable gastroesophageal reflux disease (33%). Data were collected up to 1-year follow-up (FU) and included time of revisional surgery, operation time, weight, body mass index, excess weight loss, and total weight loss (TWL), both in percent, complications and resolution of comorbidities.

RESULTS: Operation time was 79 ± 36 (OAGB-MGB) and 98 ± 24 min (RYGB) (p = 0.03). In the first 30 postoperative days, three patients in the RYGB group, and no patient in the OAGB group, had postoperative complications. FU was 100%. Minor complication rates at 12 months were 33.3% (RYGB) and 35.3% (OAGB). At 12 months, mean % TWL was 10.3 ± 7.6% (RYGB) and 15.8 ± 7.8% (OAGB) (p = 0.0132).

CONCLUSIONS: OAGB after failed SG was found to be a quicker procedure with less perioperative complications. At 1-year FU, no significant differences were seen between RYGB and OAGB regarding readmission and minor complications. Still long-term FU including the risk of malnutrition is needed to have a complete evaluation of OAGB as a RBS for the future.

Full Text

Full text is available at the source.

View full text (HTML) ↗View full text (PDF) ↗

Mini/One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass as a Second Step Procedure After Sleeve Gastrectomy—a Retrospective Cohort Study

Abstract

Full Text

You found one interesting study. We’ll send the next 7.

what lands in your inbox each week:

Recent issues from the glp-1 therapies brief

Abstract

Full Text

Related papers

You found one interesting study. We’ll send the next 7.

what lands in your inbox each week:

Recent issues from the glp-1 therapies brief