Short-term outcome after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for revision after failed sleeve gastrectomy versus De novo Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for bariatric patients

S. Saber, Tarek M. Sehsah, Mahmoud A. Eissa
{"title":"Short-term outcome after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for revision after failed sleeve gastrectomy versus De novo Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for bariatric patients","authors":"S. Saber, Tarek M. Sehsah, Mahmoud A. Eissa","doi":"10.21608/ejsur.2024.273846.1001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Revisional bariatric surgeries for weight regain are rising; however, they are considered as riskier and less efficient than primary bariatric procedures. This study aimed to study short-term postoperative outcomes after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for revision after failed Sleeve gastrectomy versus primary RYGB in Bariatric patients regarding Weight loss, comorbidity resolution, Postoperative complications, hospital stay, mortality, and readmissions. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study was designed to compare early postoperative outcome between 2 groups of patients admitted to General Surgery Department, Tanta University Hospitals during the period from June 2018 and June 2023. Results: A total of 254 patients were included in the study, with 87 patients in revisional RYGB and 167 patients in primary RYGB. Groups were matched for age, sex, smoking, preoperative weight, and comorbidities. The duration of revisional RYGB was significantly longer than primary RYGB (201.1±49.85 vs. 161.9±45.05; P <0.001 ). Revisional RYGB patients stayed longer in the hospital (2.54±0.74 vs. 1.87±0.78; P <0.001 ). Total weight loss was significantly higher after 6 months and 1 year in Primary RYGB than group revisional RYGB ( P value<0.05 ). However, no differences were detected in postoperative complications, readmissions, reoperation rates, and comorbidity resolution. Conclusion: RYGB as revisional surgery after a previous Sleeve gastrectomy is a complex procedure that must be indicated with care. It is a safe technique, with postoperative complication rates similar to those of primary RYGB, while it may need longer operative","PeriodicalId":22550,"journal":{"name":"The Egyptian Journal of Surgery","volume":"115 18","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Egyptian Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/ejsur.2024.273846.1001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Revisional bariatric surgeries for weight regain are rising; however, they are considered as riskier and less efficient than primary bariatric procedures. This study aimed to study short-term postoperative outcomes after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for revision after failed Sleeve gastrectomy versus primary RYGB in Bariatric patients regarding Weight loss, comorbidity resolution, Postoperative complications, hospital stay, mortality, and readmissions. Patients and Methods: This retrospective study was designed to compare early postoperative outcome between 2 groups of patients admitted to General Surgery Department, Tanta University Hospitals during the period from June 2018 and June 2023. Results: A total of 254 patients were included in the study, with 87 patients in revisional RYGB and 167 patients in primary RYGB. Groups were matched for age, sex, smoking, preoperative weight, and comorbidities. The duration of revisional RYGB was significantly longer than primary RYGB (201.1±49.85 vs. 161.9±45.05; P <0.001 ). Revisional RYGB patients stayed longer in the hospital (2.54±0.74 vs. 1.87±0.78; P <0.001 ). Total weight loss was significantly higher after 6 months and 1 year in Primary RYGB than group revisional RYGB ( P value<0.05 ). However, no differences were detected in postoperative complications, readmissions, reoperation rates, and comorbidity resolution. Conclusion: RYGB as revisional surgery after a previous Sleeve gastrectomy is a complex procedure that must be indicated with care. It is a safe technique, with postoperative complication rates similar to those of primary RYGB, while it may need longer operative
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
减肥患者袖状胃切除术失败后进行 Roux-en-Y 胃旁路术翻修与重新进行 Roux-en-Y 胃旁路术后的短期疗效比较
背景:因体重反弹而进行的翻修减肥手术正在增加;然而,与初次减肥手术相比,这些手术被认为风险更高、效率更低。本研究旨在研究减肥患者在袖带胃切除术失败后进行Roux-en-Y胃旁路术(RYGB)翻修与初治RYGB术后的短期疗效,包括体重减轻、合并症缓解、术后并发症、住院时间、死亡率和再住院率。患者和方法:这项回顾性研究旨在比较坦塔大学医院普外科在 2018 年 6 月至 2023 年 6 月期间收治的两组患者的早期术后效果。结果:研究共纳入 254 名患者,其中 87 名患者为翻修 RYGB 患者,167 名患者为初次 RYGB 患者。两组患者的年龄、性别、吸烟、术前体重和合并症均匹配。翻修RYGB的持续时间明显长于初治RYGB(201.1±49.85 vs. 161.9±45.05;P <0.001 )。改良 RYGB 患者的住院时间更长(2.54±0.74 vs. 1.87±0.78;P <0.001 )。初治 RYGB 患者 6 个月和 1 年后的总重量下降明显高于复治 RYGB 组(P<0.05)。然而,在术后并发症、再入院率、再次手术率和合并症缓解率方面没有发现差异。结论RYGB 作为既往袖带胃切除术后的翻修手术是一项复杂的手术,必须谨慎对待。它是一种安全的技术,术后并发症发生率与初治 RYGB 相似,但可能需要更长的手术时间。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Study of the value of core biopsy for establishing tissue diagnosis compared to excisional biopsy in enlarged cervical lymph nodes Fibrin glue versus sutures for mesh fixation in open repair of inguinal hernia Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation with mucopexy versus stapled hemorrhoidopexy in the management of grades 3 and 4 prolapsed hemorrhoids: A prospective randomized clinical study Solitary fibrous tumor of the pleura Correlating preoperative clinicopathological factors with skin and/ or nipple–areola complex tumor involvement in postmastectomy specimens
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1