Comparison of Outcomes Between Banded and Non-banded Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Managing the Complication of Band Erosion in Banded Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Case Report

We present a case involving a patient with laparoscopic banded sleeve gastrectomy (BSG) with a 3-month history of persistent vomiting, decreased tolerance for fluids, and limited intake of soft food items. Upon investigation, an eroded band and gastric dilatation were identified. The treatment involved the removal of the eroded band and a segment of the stomach, followed by the restoration of gastric continuity through a gastrogastrostomy.

Best practice approach for redo-surgeries after sleeve gastrectomy, an expert's modified Delphi consensus

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common metabolic and bariatric surgical (MBS) procedure worldwide. Despite the desired effect of SG on weight loss and remission of obesity-associated medical problems, there are some concerns regarding the need to do revisional/conversional surgeries after SG. This study aims to make an algorithmic clinical approach based on an expert-modified Delphi consensus regarding redo-surgeries after SG, to give bariatric and metabolic surgeons a guideline that might help for the best clinical decision.

METHODS

Forty-six recognized bariatric and metabolic surgeons from 25 different countries participated in this Delphi consensus study in two rounds to develop a consensus on redo-surgeries after SG. An agreement/disagreement ≥ 70.0% on statements was considered to indicate a consensus.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached for 62 of 72 statements and experts did not achieve consensus on 10 statements after two rounds of online voting. Most of the experts believed that multi-disciplinary team evaluation should be done in all redo-procedures after SG and there should be at least 12 months of medical and supportive management before performing redo-surgeries after SG for insufficient weight loss, weight regain, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Also, experts agreed that in case of symptomatic GERD in the presence of adequate weight loss, medical treatment for at least 1 to 2 years is an acceptable option and agreed that Roux-en Y gastric bypass is an appropriate option in this situation. There was disagreement consensus on efficacy of omentopexy in rotation and efficacy of fundoplication in the presence of a dilated fundus and GERD.

CONCLUSION

Redo-surgeries after SG is still an important issue among bariatric and metabolic surgeons. The proper time and procedure selection for redo-surgery need careful considerations. Although multi-disciplinary team evaluation plays a key role to evaluate best options in these situations, an algorithmic clinical approach based on the expert's consensus as a guideline can help for the best clinical decision-making.

Comparison of Sleeve Volume Between Banded and Non-banded Sleeve Gastrectomy: Midterm Effect on Weight and Food Tolerance-a Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Sleeve dilatation after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) causes weight regain (WR). Banded sleeve gastrectomy (BSG) was proposed to prevent dilatation and reduce WR.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study on patients who underwent BSG and LSG and completed 4 years of follow-up from 2016 to 2021 was included. Body mass index (BMI), percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL), percentage of total weight loss (%TWL), and FT scores were calculated at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years. The sleeve volume was estimated at 6 months, 1 year, and 4 years. Multi-variate analysis was conducted to assess correlations between covariates. WR was calculated as weight gain > 10%, > 10 kg above the nadir, or BMI increase of ≥ 5 kg/m 2 above the nadir.

RESULTS

This study included LSG 1279 patients and BSG 132 patients. Mean %EWL at 1 year was 83.87 ± 17.25% in LSG vs. 85.71 ± 7.92% in BSG and was 83.47 ± 18.87% in LSG and 85.54 ± 7.48% in BSG at 4 years. Both had significant weight loss over time (p. < 0.001) with no significant main effect of surgery (p.0.438). Mean sleeve volume at 6 months was 102.32 ± 9.88 ± 10.28 ml in LSG vs. 101.89 ± 10.019 ml in BSG and at 4 years was 580.25 ± 112.25 ml in LSG vs. 157.94 ± 12.54 ml in BSG (p. < 0.001). WR occurred in 136 (10.6%) and 4 (3.1%) (p.0.002) in LSG and BSG patients, 90 (7%) vs. zero (0%) (p.0.002) and 31 (2.4%) vs. zero (0%) (p.0.07) using the > 10%, > 10 kg increase above the nadir and the ≥ 5 kg/m 2 BMI increases above the nadir formulas, respectively.

CONCLUSION

BSG had significantly lower sleeve volume, significantly lower WR, and significantly lower FT scores than LSG after 4 years from surgery; however, volume changes were not correlated with weight loss.