Revision of a failed band can be done by laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). It can be performed synchronously with band removal or during two separate procedures.
Comparing single- and two-staged LSG following a failed LAGB in terms of short- and mid-term outcomes, with an emphasis on postoperative quality of life.
A retrospective cohort study comparing revisional LSG’s safety and efficacy after failed LAGB removal. Data included patients’ medical files, as telephone interviews. We compared demographics, weight loss, complications, long-term outcomes, and quality-of-life measures, including the Bariatric Analysis and Reporting Outcome System (BAROS).
Ninety-three patients were enrolled, of which 68 (73.1%) underwent a single-stage revisional LSG. Of these, 40 were males (35.1%) with a mean age of 44.9 years (± 12.9). The two-staged group were older. The reasons for band removal differed between the groups: whereas in the two-stage surgery, the common causes were slippage (29.2%) or band intolerance (25%); in the single-stage group, it was weight gain (51%). There were no differences in short- and mid-term complications, weight loss, and quality of life.
In selected cases, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy as a revision of failed gastric banding in one stage is as safe as a two-stage procedure in terms of short- and mid-term complications, weight loss, and quality of life. We believe that there is little benefit in performing elective surgery in two stages unless there are clinical indications. Exceptions for two-stage revision should include cases of band erosion and acute slippage with patient preference for band removal.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Al-Kurd A, Grinbaum R, Abubeih A, Mizrahi I, Kupietzky A, Lourie NEE, et al. Results of conversion of gastric banding to gastric bypass in patients between 50 and 60 years of age are similar to those observed in younger patients. Am J Surg. 2019;217(4):745–9.
Al-Kurd A, Grinbaum R, Mizrahi I, Abubeih A, Indursky A, Abu HH, et al. A comparison between one- and two-stage revisional gastric bypass. Surg Endosc. 2019;33(5):1459–64.
Bueter M, Thalheimer A, Lager C, Schowalter M, Illert B, Fein M. Who benefits from gastric banding? Obes Surg. 2007;17(12):1608–13.
Carandina S, Tabbara M, Bossi M, Helmy N, Polliand C, Barrat C. Two-stage conversion of failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding to laparoscopic roux-en-y gastric bypass: a study of one hundred patients. J Gastrointest Surg. 2014;18(10):1730–6.
Dang JT, Switzer NJ, Wu J, Gill RS, Shi X, Thereaux J, et al. Gastric band removal in revisional bariatric surgery, one-step versus two-step: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Surg. 2016;26(4):866–73.
DeMaria EJ, Sugerman HJ, Meador JG, Doty JM, Kellum JM, Wolfe L, et al. High failure rate after laparoscopic adjustable silicone gastric banding for treatment of morbid obesity. Ann Surg. 2001;233(6):809–18.
Gagner M, Gumbs AA. Gastric banding: conversion to sleeve, bypass, or DS. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(11):1931–5.
Janik M, Ibikunle C, Khan A, Aryaie AH. Safety of single-stage revision laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy compared to laparoscopic Roux-Y gastric bypass after failed gastric banding. Obes Surg. 2021;31(2):588–96.
Marchesini JB, Nicareta JR. Comparative study of five different surgical techniques for the treatment of morbid obesity using BAROS. Arq Bras Cir Dig. 2014;27(Suppl 1):17–20.
Marion Y, Eid Y, Menahem B, Lee Bion A, Thobie A, Alves A. What to propose after failed adjustable gastric banding: one-, or two-step procedure? World J Surg. 2020;44(10):3423–32.
Oria HE, Moorehead MK. Updated Bariatric Analysis and Reporting Outcome System (BAROS). Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2009;5(1):60–6.
Oria HE, Moorehead MK. Bariatric analysis and reporting outcome system (BAROS). Obes Surg. 1998;8(5):487–99.
Oria HE. The BAROS and the Moorehead-Ardelt quality of life questionnaire. Obes Surg. 2003;13(6):965.
Obeid NR, Schwack BF, Kurian MS, Ren-Fielding CJ, Fielding GA. Single-stage versus 2-stage sleeve gastrectomy as a conversion after failed adjustable gastric banding: 30-day outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2014;28(11):3186–92.
Park YH, Kim SM. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy as revisional surgery for adjustable gastric band erosion. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2014;24(9):593–600.
Perry Z, Romano-Zelekha O, Sakran N, Avital I, Atias S, Netz U, et al. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy following failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding: a comparison between one- and two-stage procedures – an Israeli National Database Study. Obes Surg. 2021;31(6):2364–72.
Rebibo L, Mensah E, Verhaeghe P, Dhahri A, Cosse C, Diouf M, et al. Simultaneous gastric band removal and sleeve gastrectomy: a comparison with front-line sleeve gastrectomy. Obes Surg. 2012;22(9):1420–6.
Silecchia G, Rizzello M, De Angelis F, Raparelli L, Greco F, Perrotta N, et al. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy as a revisional procedure for failed laparoscopic gastric banding with a “2-step approach”: a multicenter study. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2014;10(4):626–31.
Skroubis G, Karamanakos S, Sakellaropoulos G, Panagopoulos K, Kalfarentzos F. Comparison of early and late complications after various bariatric procedures: incidence and treatment during 15 years at a single institution. World J Surg. 2011;35(1):93–101.
Stroh C, Benedix D, Weiner R, Benedix F, Wolff S, Knoll C, et al. Is a one-step sleeve gastrectomy indicated as a revision procedure after gastric banding? Data analysis from a quality assurance study of the surgical treatment of obesity in Germany. Obes Surg. 2014;24(1):9–14.
Weiner RA, El-Sayes IA, Theodoridou S, Weiner SR, Scheffel O. Early post-operative complications: Incidence, management, and impact on length of hospital stay – a retrospective comparison between laparoscopic gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy. Obes Surg. 2013;23(12):2004–12.
Zadeh J, Le C, Ben-David K. Safety of adjustable gastric band conversion surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the leak rate in 1- and 2-stage procedures. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2020;16(3):437–44.
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.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no competing interests to declare.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
• Single-stage LSG as a revision after a failed LAGB is feasible and has similar results in terms of morbidity and leak rate to a 2-staged procedure.
• This is seen in areas like short- and mid-term complications, weight loss, and quality of life, as measured by the standardized BAROS questionnaire.
• Patient’s advantages of the one-stage procedure include single admission and single surgery with good weight loss and quality of life.
• We believe that there is no benefit in performing elective surgery in two stages unless there are clinical indications such as band erosion.
Appendix: Bariatric Analysis and Reporting Outcome System (BAROS)
Appendix: Bariatric Analysis and Reporting Outcome System (BAROS)
BAROSy [11, 13] presents results of bariatric surgery in a simple, objective, and non-biased manner, and consists of five main sections (see Appendix):
Weight loss—calculated as the percentage of decrease relative to excess weight over ideal weight. Maximum score can be given to an overweight drop of 75—100%.
Improvement in obesity-related morbidity—hypertension, dyslipidemia, cardiac problems, diabetes, obstructive sleep apnea, menstrual disorders, osteoarthritis, and incontinence. Score is given based on decrease in the severity of the problem or its elimination.
Quality of life (QOL) indices—6 sections: (A) Self-esteem, (B) physical ability, (C) social ability, (D) functioning at work, (E) sexual function, (F) attitude toward food. Each section is scored on a scale from significant aggravation to significant improvement.
Complications. Early: conversion to laparotomy, infection, suture leakage, bleeding. Late: sleeve stenosis, difficulty eating and drinking (no stenosis). Score drops with level of complication.
Recurrent surgery—points subtracted for each surgery.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Perry, Z., Zioni, T., Netz, U. et al. A Comparison of One- and Two-Stage Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Following Failed Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding Using the BAROS Score. OBES SURG 32, 1243–1250 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-022-05944-x
- Laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB)
- Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG)
- Postoperative complications
- Quality of life