Advertisement

Obesity Surgery

, Volume 29, Issue 11, pp 3443–3447 | Cite as

Reinforced POSE: the 18-Plication Solution

  • Rebecca García García
  • José Vicente VelázquezEmail author
Original Contributions

Abstract

Background

Obesity is one of the main challenges in the first world nowadays. New alternatives are needed and endoscopic endoluminal approaches are gaining importance against the risky surgery and the non-efficient pharmacological treatments. Nevertheless, these techniques seem to be inefficient in obese III patients. The aim of the study is to demonstrate the safety and efficiency of the new reinforced POSE 18-plication protocol.

Methods

Mean body mass index (BMI) ≈ 47 kg/m2 obese type III patients were treated in different Spanish centers with the new POSE method consisting of 18 plications in the stomach body. On the other hand, 15 lower body mass patients BMI ≈ 40 kg/m2 were treated with the standard POSE method previously described.

Results

Three months follow-up shows an overall % total weight loss (TWL) and % excess weight loss (EWL) of 15% and 41% respectively for standard POSE and 17% and 36% for the new reinforced POSE18. Both are equally safe and the endpoint weight loss objectives are reached. Endoluminal procedures have been demonstrated to be useful in overweight and obese type I/II. However, bariatric surgery is recommended for higher BMI > 40 kg/m2. We successfully applied a non-standard POSE protocol and the patients reached 17%TWL in 3 months.

Conclusions

Our study shows that reinforced POSE 18 can be successfully applied in obese type III; it is safer than bariatric surgery and there are no associated risks when compared with standard endoscopic surgery.

Keywords

Endoscopic POSE Bariatric Weight loss Satiety Meta-analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the hospitals HLA la Vega de Murcia, Vithas hospital La Salud de Granada, La Milagrosa de Madrid, and Viamed Santa Ángela de la Cruz de Sevilla for the operating rooms and Simmedical and Pentax for the endoscopic material.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethics Statement

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

References

  1. 1.
    Whitlock G, Lewington S, Sherliker P, et al. Body-mass index and cause-specific mortality in 900 000 adults: collaborative analyses of 57 prospective studies. Lancet. 2009;373:1083–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Colquitt JL, Pickett K, Loveman E, et al. Surgery for weight loss in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014:CD003641.  https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003641.pub4.
  3. 3.
    Bray GA, Kim KK, Wilding JPH, et al. Obesity: a chronic relapsing progressive disease process. A position statement of the World Obesity Federation. Obes Rev. 2017;18:715–23.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Abu Dayyeh BK, Edmundowicz SA, Jonnalagadda S, et al. Endoscopic bariatric therapies. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015;81:1073–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ochner CN, Barrios DM, Lee CD, et al. Biological mechanisms that promote weight regain following weight loss in obese humans. Physiol Behav. 2013;120:106–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Yanovski SZ, Yanovski JA. Long-term drug treatment for obesity: a systematic and clinical review. JAMA. 2014;311:74–86.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fried M, Yumuk V, Oppert JM, et al. Interdisciplinary European guidelines on metabolic and bariatric surgery. Obes Surg. 2014;24:42–55.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Acosta A, Abu Dayyeh BK, Port JD, et al. Recent advances in clinical practice challenges and opportunities in the management of obesity. Gut. 2014;63:687–95.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Abu Dayyeh BK, Acosta A, Camilleri M, et al. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty alters gastric physiology and induces loss of body weight in obese individuals. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;15:37–43. e31CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schauer PR, Bhatt DL, Kirwan JP, et al. Bariatric surgery versus intensive medical therapy for diabetes - 5-year outcomes. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:641–51.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sjöström L, Lindroos AK, Peltonen M, et al. Lifestyle, diabetes, and cardiovascular risk factors 10 years after bariatric surgery. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2683–93.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Miller K, Turró R, Greve JW, et al. MILEPOST multicenter randomized controlled trial: 12-month weight loss and satiety outcomes after pose. Obes Surg. 2017;27:310–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    López-Nava G, Bautista-Castaño I, Jimenez A, et al. The Primary Obesity Surgery Endolumenal (POSE) procedure: one-year patient weight loss and safety outcomes. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2015;11:861–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Espinós JC, Turró R, Mata A, et al. Early experience with the Incisionless Operating Platform™ (IOP) for the treatment of obesity : the Primary Obesity Surgery Endolumenal (POSE) procedure. Obes Surg. 2013;23:1375–83.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sullivan S, Swain JM, Woodman G, et al. Randomized sham-controlled trial evaluating efficacy and safety of endoscopic gastric plication for primary obesity: the ESSENTIAL trial. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2017;25:294–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Abeid M, Miller KA, Kaddah T, et al. Outcome of primary obesity surgery endolumenal procedure as obesity treatment in private practice setting: an intervention study. Obes Surg. 2019;29:1364–6.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-018-03698-z.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    (NICE) NIfHaCE. Obesity: identification, assessment and management. In; 2014Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lopez-Nava G, Galvão MP, Bautista-Castaño I, et al. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty for obesity treatment: two years of experience. Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2017;30:18–20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sartoretto A, Sui Z, Hill C, et al. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a reproducible and effective endoscopic bariatric therapy suitable for widespread clinical adoption: a large, international multicenter study. Obes Surg. 2018;28:1812–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Huberty V, Machytka E, Boškoski I, et al. Endoscopic gastric reduction with an endoluminal suturing device: a multicenter prospective trial with 1-year follow-up. Endoscopy. 2018;50:1156–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Graus Morales J, Crespo Pérez L, Marques A, et al. Modified endoscopic gastroplasty for the treatment of obesity. Surg Endosc. 2018;32:3936–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gotthardt JD, Bello NT. Can we win the war on obesity with pharmacotherapy? Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2016;9:1289–97.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17512433.2016.1232164:1-9.
  23. 23.
    Chang SH, Stoll CR, Song J, et al. The effectiveness and risks of bariatric surgery: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis, 2003-2012. JAMA Surg. 2014;149:275–87.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Clínicas Doctor LifeMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations