Efficacy and Safety of Sleeve Gastrectomy or One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Conversion Following Adjustable Gastric Banding

Primary versus Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass: Outcomes of Patients with at Least 8-Year Follow-Up

INTRODUCTION

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) prevalence is increasing worldwide and shows good mid- to long-term results. Data on long-term outcomes of revisional OAGB (rOAGB) is limited. This study's objective was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing primary OAGB (pOAGB) and rOAGB.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained patient registry at a single-tertiary center. Patients undergoing OAGB from January 2015 to May 2016 were included and grouped into pOAGB and rOAGB.

RESULTS

There were 424 patients, of which 363 underwent pOAGB, and 61 underwent rOAGB. Baseline characteristics were insignificantly different between groups except for the type 2 diabetes (T2D) rate which was higher in pOAGB (26% vs. 11.5%, p = 0.01). The mean follow-up time was 98.5 ± 3.9 months, and long-term follow-up data were available for 52.5% of patients. The mean total weight loss (TWL) was higher in the pOAGB group (31.3 ± 14 vs. 24.1 ± 17.6, p = 0.006); however, TWL was comparable when relating to the weight at primary surgery for rOAGB. The rate of T2D and hypertension resolution was 79% and 72.7% with no difference between groups. Thirteen patients (5.9%) underwent OAGB revision during follow-up, with no difference between groups. Two deaths occurred during follow-up, both non-related to OAGB.

CONCLUSION

OAGB is effective as a primary and as a revisional procedure for severe obesity with good long-term results in terms of weight loss and resolution of associated diseases. In addition, the revisional surgery rates and chronic complications are acceptable. Further large prospective studies are required to clarify these data.

Revisional One-Step Bariatric Surgical Techniques After Unsuccessful Laparoscopic Gastric Band: A Retrospective Cohort Study with 2-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has high reported rates of revision due to poor weight loss (WL) and high complication rates. Yet, there is yet to be a consensus on the best revisional procedure after unsuccessful LAGB, and studies comparing different revisional procedures after LAGB are still needed.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study that compared the outcomes of one-step revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (rRYGB), one-anastomosis gastric bypass (rOAGB), or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (rLSG) after LAGB. WL, complications, resolution of associated medical conditions, and food tolerance were assessed with a post hoc pairwise comparison one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) throughout a 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 102 (rRYGB), 80 (rOAGB), and 70 (rLSG) patients. After 2 years, an equal percentage of excess weight loss was observed in rOAGB and rRYGB (both >90%; p=0.998), significantly higher than that in rLSG (83.6%; p<0.001). In our study, no leaks were observed. rRYGB had higher complication rates according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (10.8% vs. 3.75% and 5.7% in rOAGB and rLSG, respectively, p=0.754), and re-operations were not statistically significant. Food tolerance was comparable between rOAGB and rRYGB (p = 0.987), and both had significantly better food tolerance than rLSG (p<0.001). The study cohorts had comparable resolution rates for associated medical problems (p>0.60).

CONCLUSION

rOAGB and rRYGB had better outcomes after LAGB than rLSG regarding WL, feasibility, food tolerance, and safety. rOAGB had significantly higher rates of nutritional deficiencies.