Quality of Life 1 Year After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Randomized Controlled Trial Focusing on Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Biter, L. Ulas; Buuren, M.M.A. van; Mannaerts, Guido H. H.; Apers, Jan A.; Dunkelgrün, Martin; Vijgen, Guy H. E. J.

doi:10.1007/s11695-017-2688-4

Cited by 78 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 52 publications

(56 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, two studies were conducted in each of China, Switzerland, and Greece . One study was conducted in Poland, Finland, Netherland, France, and Brazil . The number of patients undergoing LSG was 544, and 532 patients undergone LRYGB.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic Roux‐en‐Y gastric bypass: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Zhao

Liu

Wang

et al. 2019

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) are widely performed to cure obesity and obesity-related diseases. Our aim was to compare these two procedures. Materials and methods:An electronic literature search was performed from inception to December 2018. The clinical outcomes between LSG and LRYGB were pooled using software RevMan5.3. Results: A total of 1076 patients from 11 studies were analysed. LSG had shorter operation time (mean difference [MD] = −33.81; 95% confidence interval [CI], −46.04 to −21.57; P < .00001) and less early complications rate (risk ratio [RR] = 0.55;95% CI, 0.36-0.84; P = .005) compared with LRYGB. There were no significant difference about the readmission rate (RR = 0.57; 95% CI, 0.21-1.54; P = .27) and reoperation rate (RR = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.14-1.27; P = .13) between LSG and LRYGB.The conversion to open rate and mortality rate within 30 days was low in both LSG and LRYGB. Mean hospital stay in LSG group (0.3-5.2 d) seems shorter than that in the LRYGB group (2.3-6.6 d). As to the effect of LSG and LRYGB on the percentage of excess weight loss (EWL), there was no significant difference between these two surgeries in EWL (MD = −4.05; 95% CI, −8.89 to 0.80; P = .10). LSG was equal to LRYGB on remission of T2DM (RR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.84-1.06; P = .31). Conclusions: Both LSG and LRYGB can be performed with very low conversion toopen rate and mortality rate. The readmission rate and re-operation rate are comparable between these two surgeries. The efficacy of these two surgeries on EWL and T2DM is equivalent, but LSG has an advantage over LRYGB in operation time and early complications rate.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic Roux‐en‐Y gastric bypass: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Zhao

Liu

Wang

et al. 2019

Evaluation Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Improvement was comparable between LSG and LRYGB, except for physical functioning and general health perception for which RYGB was more beneficial [ 39 ]. In the short-term follow-up (1–2 years), authors report comparable outcomes with significant improvement of QoL after both LSG and LRYGB [ 40 , 41 ]. A study by Takemoto et al reported significant improvement in both mental and physical aspects of QoL 1 year after bariatric procedures, which remained stable during the following 5 years [ 42 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quality of Life 10 Years After Bariatric Surgery

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Improvement of the quality of life after bariatric surgery is an important outcome of the treatment. Assessing the long-term QoL results provides better insights into the effectiveness of bariatric surgery. Materials and Methods This is a cohort study including patients who underwent bariatric surgery between June 2009 and May 2010 in one academic center. Patients underwent either laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) or laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). Overall, 34 patients underwent LSG (52.3%) and 31 patients underwent LRYGB (47.7%). Preoperatively, and after 1 and 10 years, QoL was assessed using two standardized questionnaires: SF-36 and MA-QoLII. After 10 years, 72% of patients filled out these questionnaires. Results The global QoL score before surgery was 48.3 ± 20.6. At the 1-year follow-up, the global total QoL score was 79.7 ± 9.8. At the 10-year follow-up, the global total QoL score was 65.1 ± 21.4. There was a significant increase in total QoL between measurements before the operation and 10 years after surgery in the whole study group (p = 0.001) and for patients who underwent LSG (p = 0.001). There was no significant difference between total QoL prior to surgery and 10 years after for patients who underwent LRYGB (p = 0.450). Conclusion LSG led to significant improvement in QoL.

show abstract

“…However, patients' demand is more often in favor of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), which in the patients' opinion is felt to be associated with lower morbidity, and it does not require long-term vitamins and elemental nutrient supplementation; the cost of which has to be covered by the patients themselves. However, LSG cannot be proposed to obese patients with severe GERD or to sweet eaters, and LRYGB has proven to be an excellent option in these cases [ 23 ]. The first LRYGB in the authors' unit was performed in March 2016, and since then, nine patients have undergone this procedure.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hiatoplasty with Crura Buttressing versus Hiatoplasty Alone during Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

Balla

Quaresima

Ursi

et al. 2017

Gastroenterology Research and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction In obese patients with hiatal hernia (HH), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) with cruroplasty is an option but use of prosthetic mesh crura reinforcement is debated. The aim was to compare the results of hiatal closure with or without mesh buttressing during LSG. Methods Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) was assessed by the Health-Related Quality of Life (GERD-HRQL) questionnaire before and after surgery in two consecutive series of patients with esophageal hiatus ≤ 4 cm2. After LSG, patients in group A (12) underwent simple cruroplasty, whereas in group B patients (17), absorbable mesh crura buttressing was added. Results At mean follow-up of 33.2 and 18.1 months for groups A and B, respectively (p = 0.006), the mean preoperative GERD-HRQL scores of 16.5 and 17.7 (p = 0.837) postoperatively became 9.5 and 2.4 (p = 0.071). In group A, there was no difference between pre- and postoperative scores (p = 0.279), whereas in group B, a highly significant difference was observed (p = 0.002). The difference (Δ) comparing pre- and postoperative mean scores between the two groups was significantly in favor of mesh placement (p = 0.0058). Conclusions In obese patients with HH and mild-moderate GERD, reflux symptoms are significantly improved at medium term follow-up after cruroplasty with versus without crura buttressing during LSG.

show abstract

Quality of Life 1 Year After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Randomized Controlled Trial Focusing on Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Abstract: This randomized controlled trial shows that patients who underwent LSG have significantly higher GerdQ scores at both 2 and 12 months postoperatively than patients who underwent LRYGB, whereas overall QOL did not differ significantly.

Cited by 78 publications

References 52 publications

Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic Roux‐en‐Y gastric bypass: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Safety and efficacy of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic Roux‐en‐Y gastric bypass: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Quality of Life 10 Years After Bariatric Surgery

Hiatoplasty with Crura Buttressing versus Hiatoplasty Alone during Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About