Five-year results after resleeve gastrectomy

Noe͏̈l, Patrick; Nedelcu, Anamaria; Eddbali, Imane; Gautier, Michel; Danan, Marc; Nedelcu, Marius

doi:10.1016/j.soard.2020.04.021

Cited by 22 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, authors failed to report data on postoperative BMI and %EWL in a narrow patient sample. Finally, a recent paper reporting data at 5year follow-up (26 patients) concluded that ReSG is welltolerated bariatric procedure with low long-term complication rate and favorable results particularly in nonsuperobese patients (BMI ,50) and for primary dilation [39].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resleeve for failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Aiolfi

Micheletto

Marin

et al. 2020

Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite excellent long-term results, insufficient weight loss, weight regain, and pathologic gastroesophageal reflux disease may require revisional procedures after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Resleeve gastrectomy (ReSG) for failed LSG, has been proposed as an alternative to more complex malabsorptive procedures. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the current evidence on the therapeutic role and outcomes of ReSG for failed LSG. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science data sets were consulted. A systematic review and Frequentist metaanalysis were performed. Ten studies published between 2010 and 2019 met the inclusion criteria for a total of 300 patients. The age of the patient population ranged from 20 to 66 years old and 80.5% were females. The elapsed time between the LSG and ReSG ranged from 9 to 132 months. The estimated pooled prevalence of postoperative leak and overall complications were 2.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 5 .5%-4.7%) and 7.6% (95%CI 5 3.1%-13.4%). The estimated pooled mean operative time and hospital length of stay were 51 minutes (95%CI 5 49.4-52.6) and 3.3 days (95%CI 5 3.13-3.51). The postoperative follow-up ranged from 12 to 36 months and the estimated pooled mean percentage excess weight loss was 61.46% (95%CI 5 55.9-66.9). The overall mortality ranged from 0% to 2.2%. ReSG after failed LSG seems feasible and safe with acceptable postoperative leak rate, overall complications, and mortality. The effectiveness of ReSG in term of weight loss seems promising in the short-term but further studies are warranted to explore its effect on patients' quality of life, postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease, and long-term weight loss. (Surg Obes Relat Dis 2020;-:1-9.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resleeve for failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Aiolfi

Micheletto

Marin

et al. 2020

Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Compared with other bariatric surgeries, it has many advantages such as technical simplicity, lack of anastomoses, feasible bridge treatment in high-risk patients, lower major morbidity (0.2-10%), and mortality (<1%) [4][5][6]. For all these reasons, LSG has become the most common bariatric for morbid obesity all around the world [7][8][9][10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Staple Line Reinforcement During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Staple line reinforcement (SLR) during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is controversial. The purpose of this study was to perform a comprehensive evaluation of the most commonly utilized techniques for SLR. Materials and Methods Network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare no reinforcement (NR), suture oversewing (SR), glue reinforcement (GR), bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement (Gore® Seamguard®) (GoR), and clips reinforcement (CR). Risk Ratio (RR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and 95% credible intervals (CrI) were used as pooled effect size measures. Results Overall, 3994 patients (17 RCTs) were included. Of those, 1641 (41.1%) underwent NR, 1507 (37.7%) SR, 689 (17.2%) GR, 107 (2.7%) GoR, and 50 (1.3%) CR. SR was associated with a significantly reduced risk of bleeding (RR=0.51; 95% CrI 0.31–0.88), staple line leak (RR=0.56; 95% CrI 0.32–0.99), and overall complications (RR=0.50; 95% CrI 0.30–0.88) compared to NR while no differences were found vs. GR, GoR, and CR. Operative time was significantly longer for SR (WMD=16.2; 95% CrI 10.8–21.7), GR (WMD=15.0; 95% CrI 7.7–22.4), and GoR (WMD=15.5; 95% CrI 5.6–25.4) compared to NR. Among treatments, there were no significant differences for surgical site infection (SSI), sleeve stenosis, reoperation, hospital length of stay, and 30-day mortality. Conclusions SR seems associated with a reduced risk of bleeding, leak, and overall complications compared to NR while no differences were found vs. GR, GoR, and CR. Data regarding GoR and CR are limited while further trials reporting outcomes for these techniques are warranted. Graphical abstract

show abstract

“…Clapp et al showed that the weight loss failure rate was found to be higher than expected after LSG, and that it increased accordingly to the length of the analysed follow-up period [ 24 ]. The procedure, in fact, could require revisional surgery as Re-Sleeve gastrectomy, RYGB or one anastomosis gastric by-pass exposing patients to a further intervention and eventual complications [ 16 , 25 , 26 ]. It is worth to comment that the high absolute number of patients experiencing not satisfying results (insufficient EWL or WR) after LSG are related, on the other hand, to the widespread diffusion of the latter technique among obese patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

It is really time to retire laparoscopic gastric banding? Positive outcomes after long-term follow-up: the management is the key

Lucido

Scognamiglio²,

Nesta

et al. 2021

Updates Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After the initial widespread diffusion, laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has been progressively abandoned and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become the worldwide most adopted procedure. Nevertheless, recent reports raised concerns about the long-term weight regain after different bariatric techniques. Considering the large LAGB series recorded in our multicentric bariatric database, we analysed the anthropometric and surgical outcomes of obese patients underwent LAGB at a long-term follow-up, focusing on LAGB management. Between January 2008 to January 2018, demographics, anthropometric and post-operative data of obese patients undergone LAGB were retrospectively evaluated. To compare the postoperative outcomes, the cohort was divided in two groups according to the quantity of band filling (QBF): low band filling group (Group 1) with at most 3 ml of QBF, and patients in the high band filling group (Group 2) with at least 4 ml. 699 obese patients were considered in the analysis (351 in Group 1 and 348 in Group 2). Patients in Group 1 resulted significantly associated (p < 0.05) to higher % EWL and quality of life score (BAROS Score), 49.1 ± 11.3 vs 38.2 ± 14.2 and 5.9 ± 1.8 vs 3.8 ± 2.5, respectively. Moreover, patients with lower band filling (Group 1) complained less episodes of vomiting, epigastric pain and post-prandial reflux and significantly decreased slippage and migration rate (p < 0.001 for all parameters). LAGB is a safe and reversible procedure, whose efficacy is primarily related to correct postoperative handling. Low band filling and strict follow-up seem the success’ key of this technique, which deserves full consideration among bariatric procedures.

show abstract

Five-year results after resleeve gastrectomy

Cited by 22 publications

References 30 publications

Resleeve for failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Resleeve for failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Staple Line Reinforcement During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

It is really time to retire laparoscopic gastric banding? Positive outcomes after long-term follow-up: the management is the key

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About