Advertisement

Obesity Surgery

, Volume 28, Issue 12, pp 3744–3755 | Cite as

A Longer Biliopancreatic Limb in Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Improves Weight Loss in the First Years After Surgery: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

  • Jens Homan
  • Abel Boerboom
  • Edo Aarts
  • Kemal Dogan
  • Cees van Laarhoven
  • Ignace Janssen
  • Frits Berends
Original Contributions
  • 220 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Despite the fact that the RYGB is performed on a broad scale worldwide as a reliable treatment for morbid obesity, there is no uniform technique for this operation. A number of studies have tried to demonstrate an additional weight loss effect by lengthening the alimentary limb, but to no avail. At this moment in time, the role of the biliopancreatic limb on weight loss is for the greater part unknown. The aim of this randomized controlled trial was to compare the effect on weight loss of a long biliopancreatic limb Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LBP-GB) with a standard RYGB (S-GB).

Methods

A LBP-GB (BPL 150 cm, alimentary limb 75 cm) was compared with a S-GB (BPL 75 cm, alimentary limb 150 cm). One hundred forty-six patients were randomized in two groups. Weight loss, morbidity, reduction of comorbidities, nutritional status, and quality of life were measured during a period of 4 years.

Results

Patient characteristics were comparable in both groups. Mean EWL in the LBP-GB group after 12, 24, 36, and 48 months was 81, 85, 78, and 72% respectively versus 71, 73, 68, and 64% in the S-GB group. The %EWL difference between groups was significant as soon as 9 months postoperatively and continued throughout the follow-up period.

Conclusions

While LBP-GB achieved a significant increase in %EWL in the first years after surgery, no difference in long-term %TWL was observed after 4 years. In this study, the advantage of LBP-GB with respect to weight loss is modest, but shows promising gripping points for future improvements in RYGB design.

Keywords

Morbid obesity Bariatric surgery Roux-en-Y gastric bypass Long biliopancreatic limb Weight loss 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Central Medical Committee for Research in humans in Nijmegen, the Netherlands (CMO). The study was registered at the clinical trials registry of clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01686997). This study was in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (originally adopted in 1964, with the last amendment before this trial in October 2008).

References

  1. 1.
    Rubino F, Gagner M. Potential of surgery for curing type 2 diabetes mellitus. Ann Surg. 2002;236(5):554–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    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(3):339–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vasas P, Al-Khyatt W, Idris I, et al. Mid-term remission of type 2 diabetes mellitus after laparoscopic Roux en-Y gastric bypass. World J Surg. 2016;40(11):2719–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cummings DE, Arterburn DE, Westbrook EO, et al. Gastric bypass surgery vs intensive lifestyle and medical intervention for type 2 diabetes: the CROSSROADS randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia. 2016;59(5):945–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Courcoulas AP, Belle SH, Neiberg RH, et al. Three-year outcomes of bariatric surgery vs lifestyle intervention for type 2 diabetes mellitus treatment: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg. 2015;150(10):931–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boza C, Munoz R, Salinas J, et al. Safety and efficacy of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus in non-severely obese patients. Obes Surg. 2011;21(9):1330–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mason EE, Ito C. Gastric bypass. Ann Surg. 1969;170(3):329–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Powell MS, Fernandez AZJ. Surgical treatment for morbid obesity: the laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Clin North Am. 2011;91(6):1203–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Griffen Jr WO, Young VL, Stevenson CC. A prospective comparison of gastric and jejunoileal bypass procedures for morbid. Ann Surg. 1977;1977(4):500–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Madan AK, Harper JL, Tichansky DS. Techniques of laparoscopic gastric bypass: on-line survey of American Society for Bariatric Surgery practicing surgeons. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2008;4(2):166–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Choban PS, Flancbaum L. The effect of Roux limb lengths on outcome after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Obes Surg. 2002;12(4):540–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    MacLean LD, Rhode BM, Nohr CW. Long- or short-limb gastric bypass? J Gastrointest Surg. 2001;5(5):525–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leifsson BG, Gislason HG. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with 2-metre long biliopancreatic limb for morbid obesity: technique and experience with the first 150 patients. Obes Surg. 2005;15(1):35–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nergaard BJ, Leifsson BG, Hedenbro J, et al. Gastric bypass with long alimentary limb or long pancreato-biliary limb--long-term results on weight loss, resolution of co-morbidities and metabolic parameters. Obes Surg. 2014;24(10):1595–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fried M, Hainer V, Basdevant A, et al. Interdisciplinary European guidelines for surgery for severe (morbid) obesity. Obes Surg. 2007;17(2):260–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oria HE, Moorehead MK. Bariatric analysis and reporting outcome system (BAROS). Obes Surg. 1998;8(5):487–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al. CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Br Med J. 2010;340:c869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    American Diabetes Association. Standards of medical care in diabetes - 2017. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(suppl. 1):S11–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schauer PR, Bhatt DL, Kirwan JP, et al. Bariatric surgery versus intensive medical therapy for diabetes--3-year outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(21):2002–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Buse JB, Caprio S, Cefalu WT, et al. How do we define cure of diabetes? Diabetes Care. 2009;32(11):2133–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mahawar KK, Kumar P, Parmar C, et al. Small bowel limb lengths and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a systematic review. Obes Surg. 2016;26(1):196–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rutledge R. The mini-gastric bypass: experience with the first 1274 cases. Obes Surg. 2001;11(3):276–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lee WJ, Wang W, Lee YC, et al. Effect of laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass for type 2 diabetes mellitus: comparison of BMI>35 and <35 kg/m2. J Gastrointest Surg. 2008;12(5):945–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Topart P, Becouarn G. The single anastomosis duodenal switch modifications: a review of the current literature on outcomes. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017;13(8):1306–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mingrone G, Panunzi S, De Gaetano A, et al. Bariatric surgery versus conventional medical therapy for type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(17):1577–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yu J, Zhou X, Li L, et al. The long-term effects of bariatric surgery for type 2 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized and non-randomized evidence. Obes Surg. 2015;25(1):143–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Risstad H, Kristinsson JA, Fagerland MW, et al. Bile acid profiles over 5 years after gastric bypass and duodenal switch: results from a randomized clinical trial. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017;13(9):1544–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kolotkin RL, Andersen JR. A systematic review of reviews: exploring the relationship between obesity, weight loss and health-related quality of life. Clin Obes. 2017;7(5):273–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jens Homan
    • 1
  • Abel Boerboom
    • 1
  • Edo Aarts
    • 1
  • Kemal Dogan
    • 1
  • Cees van Laarhoven
    • 2
  • Ignace Janssen
    • 1
  • Frits Berends
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryRijnstate HospitalArnhemThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryRadboud University Medical CentreNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations