Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

One anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a 30-day follow-up review

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) type procedures have been widely adopted outside the United States. International experience of OAGB commonly suggests improved early postoperative safety with OAGB over Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). This study aims to report on the early experience with OAGB in Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) accredited centers, and compare with RYGB in terms of complication rates.

Methods

The MBSAQIP public use files from 2015 to 2018 were used to identify adult patients who underwent primary OAGB and RYGB. Propensity score analysis was used to estimate the marginal population-average differences between OAGB and RYGB patients. Based on the matched samples, McNemar’s tests and Wilcoxon signed rank test were carried out for binary and continuous outcomes. P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Propensity score matching analysis resulted in 279 matched pairs for OAGB and RYGB. Twelve OAGB patients (4.3%) experienced a complication; 3 of them (1.1%) were diagnosed with anastomotic leaks. Compared to 14 (5%) of RYGB patients experiencing a complication; 5 (1.8%) were diagnosed with anastomotic leaks. Reintervention, reoperation and readmission rates for OAGB were 2.5%, 3.2% and 5%, compared to 1.8%, 1.8%, and 3.2% for RYGB.

Discussion

Our study supports previous data that suggests OAGB has a similar early safety profile compared to RYGB and perioperative risks of OAGB should not be of a concern regarding its adoption. Conversely, OAGB does not seem to be associated with an improved safety profile over RYGB.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. De Luca M, Tie T, Ooi G et al (2018) Mini gastric bypass-one anastomosis gastric bypass (MGB-OAGB)-IFSO position statement. Obes Surg 28(5):1188–1206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kassir R, Petrucciani N, Debs T, Juglard G, Martini F, Liagre A (2020) Conversion of one anastmosis gastric bypass (OAGB) to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for biliary reflux resistant to medical treatment: lessons learned from retrospectic series of 2780 consecutive patients undergoing OAGB. Obes Surg 30(6):2093–2098

  3. Lee W, Almalki OM, Ser KH, Chen JC, Lee Y (2019) Randomized controlled trial of one anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for obesity: comparision of YOMEGA and Taiwan studies. Obes Surg 29:3047–3053

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lee WJ, Lin YH (2014) Single-anastomosis gastric bypass (SAGB): appraisal of clinical evidence. Obes Surg 24:1749–1756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Austin PC (2009) Some methods of propensity-score matching had superior performance to others: results of an empirical investigation and Monte Carlo simulations. Biom J 51:171–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Austin PC (2010) Statistical criteria for selecting the optimal number of untreated subjects matched to each treated subject when using many-to-one matching on the propensity score. Am J Epidemiol 172(9):1092–1097

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. L. Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  8. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB (1983) The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 70(1):41–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hoenig JM, Heisey DM (2001) The abuse of power: the pervasive fallacy of power calculations for data analysis. Am Stat 55(1):1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. DeMaria EJ, Pate V, Warthen M, Winegar DA (2010) Baseline data from American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery-designated Bariatric Surgery Centers of Excellence using the Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database. Surg Obes Relat Dis 6:347–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Parmar CD, Mahawar KK (2018) One anastomosis (mini) gastric bypass is now an established baritric procedure: a systmatic review of 12,807 patients. Obes Surg 28(9):2956–2957

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Rutledge R (2001) The mini-gastric bypass: experience with the first 1,274 cases. Obes Surg 11:276–280

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Victorzon M (2014) Single-anastomosis gastric bypass: better, faster, and safer? Scand J Surg 104(1):48–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/1457496914564106.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee WJ, Yu PJ, Wang W, Chen TC, Wei PL, Huang MT. (2005) Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y versus mini-gastric bypass for the treatment of morbid obesity: a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Ann Surg 242(1):20–28

  15. Robert M, Espalieu P, Pelascini E et al (2019) Efficacy and safety of one anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for obesity (YOMEGA): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 393(10178):1299–1309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ramos A, Kow L, Brown W. 5th IFSO Global Registry report. https://www.ifso.com/pdf/5th-ifso-global-registry-report-september-2019.pdf

  17. Magouliotis DE, Tasiopoulou VS, Tzovaras G (2019) One anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity: an updated meta-analysis. Obes Surg 29(9):2721–2730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mocanu V, Dang J, Ladak F, Switzer N, Birch DW, Karmali S (2019) Predictors and outcomes of leak after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: an analysis of the MBSAQIP data registry. Surg Obes Relat Dis 15(3):396–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Birkmeyer NJ, Dimick JB, Share D, Hawasli A, English WJ, Genaw J et al (2010) Hospital complication rates with bariatric surgery in Michigan. JAMA 304:435–442

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Chaar ME, Lundberg P, Stoltzfus J (2018) Thirty-day outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: first report based on Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database. Surg Obes Relat Dis 14(5):545–551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Guirat A, Addossari HM (2018) One anastomosis gastric bypass and risk of cancer. Obes Surg 28(5):1441–1444. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-018-3156-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Mahawar KK, Borg CM, Kular KS et al (2017) Understanding objections to one anastomosis (Mini) gastric bypass: a survey of 417 surgeons not performing this procedure. Obes Surg 27(9):2222–2228

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the biostatistical consultation and support provided by the Biostatistical Consulting Core at School of Medicine, Stony Brook University.

Funding

No funding was utilized during completion of this research and manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Renaissance School of Medicine at Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA

    Salvatore Docimo, Aurora Pryor & Konstantinos Spaniolas

  2. Department of Family, Population & Preventive Medicine, Renaissance School of Medicine at Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA

    Jie Yang & Xiaoyue Zhang

Authors
  1. Salvatore Docimo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jie Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiaoyue Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Aurora Pryor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Konstantinos Spaniolas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Salvatore Docimo.

Ethics declarations

Disclosures

Dr. Docimo is a consultant for Boston Scientific and received honorarium for lectures; Dr. Pryor Dr. Pryor reports personal fees and non-financial support from Ethicon, personal fees from Medtronic, personal fees from Stryker, personal fees from Gore, grants from Baranova, grants from Obalon outside the submitted work; Dr. Spaniolas reports non-financial support from Mallincktodt, grants from Merck, outside the submitted work; Dr. Yang and Xiaoyue Zhang have nothing to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Docimo, S., Yang, J., Zhang, X. et al. One anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a 30-day follow-up review. Surg Endosc 36, 498–503 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08309-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-021-08309-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation