Obesity Surgery

, Volume 14, Supplement 1, pp S40–S48 | Cite as

“What are the Yanks Doing?” The U.S. Experience with Implantable Gastric Stimulation (IGS) for the Treatment of Obesity — Update on the Ongoing Clinical Trials

Article

En

Abstract

Background

The prevalence of obesity is growing worldwide. Medical therapies are often ineffective, and surgical treatments have significant risk. IGS® offers a novel approach to weight loss that was found to be safe and effective in European trials. In the U.S., 2 consecutive trials have been undertaken.

Methods

In 2000, a multicenter, prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving 103 morbidly obese patients (U.S. O-01) was undertaken. In 2002, a prospective, open label trial involving 30 morbidly obese patients was initiated (DIGEST). Patients were followed for complications, postoperative untoward events, and weight loss.

Results

In O-01, there were no significant perioperative complications. However, 20 patients were found to have had lead dislodgements. At 7 months, there was no significant difference in weight loss between the activated and non-activated groups. After 29 months, loss of excess weight (EWL) approached 20%. With DIGEST, there was 1 operative complication (a lost needle retrieved surgically). There were no untoward events or known lead dislodgements. EWL was 23% after only 16 months follow-up. With the introduction of a preoperative screening algorithm, almost 40% EWL was achieved for selected patients in both trials.

Conclusions

In the U.S., the IGS system for the treatment of obesity has been shown to be safe. Technical improvements and better patient selection resulted in improved weight loss. The preliminary results of these trials suggest that IGS may be a suitable surgical option for selected patients.

Key words

Obesity morbid obesity bariatric surgery laparoscopy gastric stimulation weight loss 

References

  1. 1.
    Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Ogden CL et al. Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999–2000. JAMA 2002; 288: 1723–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Freedman DS, Khan LK, Serdula MK et al. Trends and correlates of class 3 obesity in the United States from 1990–2000. JAMA 2002; 288: 1758–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Steinbrook R: at]Fr Surgery for severe obesity. N Engl J Med 2004; 350: 1075–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Schauer P, Ikramuddin S, Gourash W et al. Outcomes after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity. Ann Surg 2000; 232: 515–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pories WJ, Swanson MS, MacDonald KG et al. Who would have thought it? An operation proves to be the most effective therapy for adult-onset diabetes mellitus. Ann Surg 1995; 222: 339–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dixon JB, O’Brien P. Health outcomes of severely obese type 2 diabetic subjects 1 year after laparoscopic adjustable silicone gastric banding. Diab Care 2002; 25: 358–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Must A, Spadano J, Coakley EH et al. The disease burden associated with overweight and obesity. JAMA 1999; 282: 1523–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shikora SA. Implantable gastric stimulation for the treatment of severe obesity. Obes Surg 2004; 14: 545–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    D’Argent J. Implantable gastric stimulation as therapy for morbid obesity: Preliminary results from the French study. Obes Surg 2002; 12: 21S–24S.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Favretti F, De Luca M, Segato G et al. Treatment of morbid obesity with the Transcend® Implantable Gastric Stimulator (IGS®): A prospective survey. Obes Surg 2004; 14; 660–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cigaina V. Gastric pacing as therapy for morbid obesity. Preliminary results. Obes Surg 2002; 12: 12S-16S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bjorntrop P. Treatment of obesity. Int J Obes 16 1992; 3 (Suppl 16): S81–S84.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Scopinaro N, Adami GF, Marinari GM et al. Biliopancreatic diversion. World J Surg 1998; 22: 936–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rubenstein RB. Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding at a U.S. center with up to 3-year follow-up. Obes Surg 2002; 12: 380–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hsu LKG, Benotti PN, Dwyer J et al. Nonsurgical factors that influence outcome of bariatric surgery: A review. Psychosomatic Med 1998; 60: 338–346.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Green A E-C, Dymek-Valentine M, Pytiuk S et al. Psychosocial outcome of gastric bypass surgery for patients with and without binge eating. Obes Surg 2004, 14: 975–85.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Poole N, Al Atar A, Bidlake L et al. Pouch dilatation following laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding: psychobehavioral factors (Can psychiatrists predict pouch dilatation?) Obes Surg 2004; 14: 798–801.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chen JD, Qian L, Ouyang H. Gastric electrical stimulation with short pulses reduces vomiting but not dysrhythmias in dogs. Gastroenterology 2003; 124: 401–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Xing JH, Brody F, Brodsky J et al. Gastric electrical stimulation at proximal stomach induces gastric relaxation in dogs. Neurogastroenterol Motil 2003; 15: 15–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cummings DE, Weigle DS, Frayo RS et al. Plasma ghrelin levels after diet-induced weight loss or gastric bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1623–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cigaina V, Hirschberg AL. Gastric pacing for morbid obesity: plasma levels of gastrointestinal peptides and leptin. Obes Res 2003; 11: 1456–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© FD-Communications Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tufts University School of MedicineBostonUSA
  2. 2.Division of Bariatric SurgeryTufts-New England Medical CenterBostonUSA
  3. 3.Tufts-New England Medical CenterBoston

Personalised recommendations