Results of The Comparative Study of 200 Cases: One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass vs Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

Navarrete, Salvador; Leyba, José Luis; Ll, Salvador Navarrete; Borjas, Guillermo; Tapia, José León; Alcazar, Rubén

doi:10.1007/s11695-018-3224-x

Cited by 21 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings are in line with results from other high-volume comparative trials. [54,55] One of the limitations of this study is relative heterogeneity of cohorts due to the retrospective nature of the data collection. Patients were younger and more often male in the OAGB group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

One anastomosis gastric bypass vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, remedy for insufficient weight loss and weight regain after failed restrictive bariatric surgery

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Failure occurs in up to 60% of the patients that were treated with primary restrictive bariatric operations such as Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding (LAGB), or restrictive/metabolic operations like Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG). Insufficient weight loss and weight regain are the most commonly reported reasons of failure. The aim of this retrospective multicenter study was to compare One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) as a revisional procedure in terms of weight loss, procedure time, complication rate and morbidity. Methods 491 patients operated on between 2012 and 2017 for failed restrictive surgery were included in this study (OAGB (n=185) or RYGB (n=306)). Failure was defined as total weight loss (TWL) less than 25%, excess weight loss (EWL) less than 50% and/or a remaining body mass index (BMI) larger than 40 kg/m2 at two years of follow up. Primary outcome measures were %TWL and % excess BMI loss (EBMIL) at 12, 24 and 36 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes were procedure time, reduction of comorbidity, early and late complication rate, and mortality. Results %TWL was significantly larger in the OAGB group at 12 months (mean 24.1±9.8 vs. 21.9±9.7, p = 0.023) and 24 months (mean 23.9±11.7 vs. 20.5±11.2, p = 0.023) of follow-up. %EBMIL was significantly larger in the OAGB group at 12 months (mean 69.0±44.6 vs. 60.0±30.1, p = 0.014) and 24 months (mean 68.6±51.6 vs. 56.4±35.4, p = 0.025) of follow-up. Intraabdominal complications (leakage, bleeding, intra-abdominal abscess and perforation) occurred less frequently after revisional OAGB (1.1% vs. 4.9%, p = 0.025). Surgical intervention for biliary reflux (5.4% vs. 0.3%, p < 0.001) was more prevalent in the OAGB group. Surgical intervention for internal herniation (0.0% vs. 4.9%, p = 0.002) was more prevalent in the RYGB group. Conclusions This study suggests that OAGB is superior to RYGB as a remedy for insufficient weight loss and weight regain after failed restrictive surgery with more weight loss and a lower early complication rate. To substantiate these findings, further research from prospective randomized controlled trials is needed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

One anastomosis gastric bypass vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, remedy for insufficient weight loss and weight regain after failed restrictive bariatric surgery

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Como efeito principal esta técnica causa uma saciedade precoce e a perda do excesso de peso é de aproximadamente 70%. Deve-se garantir reposição de complexo vitamínico e mineral e de vitamina B12, bem como monitoramento dos níveis séricos de ferro, cálcio e vitamina D. Também foi observado que a derivação gástrica exigiu um tempo de internação pós operatório maior entre as técnicas analisadas, e 7 a 24% dos pacientes pesquisados no estudo de Colquitt JL et al tiveram que ser reoperados [10][11][12] .…”

Section: Derivação Gástrica Em Y De Rouxunclassified

Obesidade

Kawai¹,

Coelho²,

Garcia³

2017

PRMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the two methods of gastrointestinal reconstruction are different; hence, the weight loss effect of the two surgical methods may differ as may the incidence of related complications. There have been previous comparative studies on the two surgical methods, and it is believed that the postoperative effect of OAGB is comparably worse to that of RYGB, and that it has the advantages of shorter operation time and fewer complications; however, most of them are retrospective or small sample size studies [13][14][15][16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy and Safety of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass for Obesity: a Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

et al. 2022

OBES SURG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this review is to systematically review the efficacy and safety outcomes of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). From inception to July 4, 2022, a systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomized clinical trials comparing OAGB with RYGB in obesity. A meta-analysis performed using the RevMan 5.4.1 software evaluations was completed. We identified 1217 reports; after exclusions, eight trials with a total of 931 patients were eligible for analysis. Compared with RYGB, OAGB had multiple advantageous indexes. Examples include percent of excess weight loss (%EWL) at 12 months (P = 0.009), body mass index (BMI) at 2 years (P < 0.00001), early postoperative complication (P = 0.04), remission of dyslipidemia (P < 0.0001), and operative time (P < 0.00001). No significant statistical difference was observed in BMI at 6 months, %EWL at 6 months, BMI at 12 months, percent of excess body mass index loss (%EBMIL) at 2 years, BMI at 5 years, intraoperative complications, late postoperative complications, remission of type 2 diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia or gastroesophageal reflux disease remission between OAGB and RYGB. OAGB is no less effective than RYGB; no significant differences in weight loss efficacy were observed, and more large and long-term randomized controlled trials are needed to verify this. In addition, studies have shown that OAGB has a shorter operation time, fewer early postoperative complications, and a shorter learning curve, making it easier for young surgeons to perform.

show abstract

Results of The Comparative Study of 200 Cases: One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass vs Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

Abstract: The results show the benefits of both techniques, OAGB being the easiest to perform and with less surgical time.

Cited by 21 publications

References 27 publications

One anastomosis gastric bypass vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, remedy for insufficient weight loss and weight regain after failed restrictive bariatric surgery

One anastomosis gastric bypass vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, remedy for insufficient weight loss and weight regain after failed restrictive bariatric surgery

Obesidade

Efficacy and Safety of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass for Obesity: a Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About