Comparison of mini-gastric bypass with sleeve gastrectomy in a mainly super-obese patient group: first results
- 839 Downloads
Whereas sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in its beginnings was mainly performed to treat super-obesity, it has become as popular as gastric bypass in the treatment of obesity of any class. In contrast to this, the persisting problems of early staple line leaks and poor long-term results of SG regarding weight loss and new onset of gastroesophageal reflux have become increasingly obvious. The mini-gastric bypass (MGB) with its low complication rates and possibly better long-term results may be a good alternative to SG, especially in super-obesity.
In this context, two groups of mostly super-obese patients (SG and MGB) of a single bariatric center were retrospectively analyzed and compared for perioperative and early postoperative outcomes.
Between August 2007 and March 2015, 169 patients underwent MGB, while 118 patients were operated by SG. Both groups were comparable for BMI at baseline (MGB = 54.1 kg/m2 vs. SG = 54.6 kg/m2, p = 0.657). Mean operation time (81.7 vs. 112.1 min, p < 0.0001) as well as hospital stay was lower in the MGB-group (4.5 vs. 7.2 days, p < 0.0001). Perioperative (30 days) mortality was 0 % in MGB versus 0.8 % in SG (one patient). Perioperative complication rate was also lower in the MGB-group (3.0 vs. 9.3 %, p = 0.449). %EWL was significantly better after 1 year in MGB: 66.2 % (±13.9 %) versus 57.3 % (±19.0 %) in SG (p < 0.0001), as well as BMI which was 34.9 kg/m2 (±4.8 kg/m2) in MGB versus 38.5 kg/m2 (±8.6 kg/m2) in SG (p = 0.001).
MGB achieved superior weight loss at 1 year and had a lower 30-day complication rate in comparison with SG for super-obese patients. Thus, MGB might be superior to SG regarding the treatment of super-obesity.
KeywordsBariatric surgery Sleeve gastrectomy Mini-gastric bypass Omega-loop gastric bypass Super-obesity
We kindly thank all the colleagues working in our different departments helping us to gain such promising results for our patients.
Compliance with ethical standards
Dr. A. Plamper, Dr. P. Lingohr, J. Nadal and Dr. K. Rheinwalt have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
For this retrospective study, ethical formal consent is not required.
Informed consent was collected from all individuals included in this study.
- 6.Peterli R, Borbély Y, Kern B, Gass M, Peters T, Thurnheer M et al (2013) Early results of the Swiss Multicentre Bypass or Sleeve Study (SM-BOSS): a prospective randomized trial comparing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Ann Surg 258(5):690–694 (discussion 695) CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 14.Musella M, Apers J, Rheinwalt K, Ribeiro R, Manno E, Greco F et al (2016) Efficacy of bariatric surgery in type 2 diabetes mellitus remission: the role of mini gastric bypass/one anastomosis gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy at 1 year of follow-up. A European survey. Obes Surg 26(5):933–940CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Plamper A, Ehresmann F, Kolec S, Kleimann E, Rheinwalt K (2012) Total Oversewing in sleeve-gastrectomy—Is it worth it? [abstract]. Obes Surg 22:1374Google Scholar
- 30.Alvarenga ES, Lo Menzo E, Szomstein S, Rosenthal RJ (2016) Safety and efficacy of 1020 consecutive laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomies performed as a primary treatment modality for morbid obesity. A single-center experience from the metabolic and bariatric surgical accreditation quality and improvement program. Surg Endosc 30(7):2673–2678CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 38.Rutledge R, Kular KS, Deitel M (2015) Laparoscopic mini-gastric (one-anastomosis) bypass surgery. In: Agrawal S (ed) Obesity, bariatric and metabolic surgery: a practical guide. Springer, Switzerland, pp 415–425 (Chapt 43) Google Scholar