Revision of Roux-en-Y-Gastric bypass – Our experience in Indian patients

N. Verma, R. Wadhawan, L. Sehgal, D. Veetil, Muneendra Gupta
{"title":"Revision of Roux-en-Y-Gastric bypass – Our experience in Indian patients","authors":"N. Verma, R. Wadhawan, L. Sehgal, D. Veetil, Muneendra Gupta","doi":"10.4103/jbs.jbs_11_21","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The indications for revision bariatric surgery include inadequate weight loss, weight regain, failure to resolve comorbidities, and complications associated with primary surgery. Objectives: The objective is to evaluate the outcome of revision of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and compare the efficacy of different revision procedures for weight regain, resolution of comorbidities, and complications, if any. Methods: Revision cases performed between May 2017 and April 2021 were included. The analysis of collected data was carried out for weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, and adverse outcomes. Results: Twenty three revision procedures were performed. Two patients were lost to follow-up. The overall complication and reoperation rates were 14.29% and 4.76%, respectively. The follow-up duration was at 6, 12, and 36 months. Twenty-one (91.3%) patients completed 6-month, 18 (78.3%) 12-month, and nine (39.1%) completed 36-month follow-up. The mean postoperative body-mass index at 6, 12, 36 months were 33.07+/−4.15, 33.11+/−4.05, 34.5 ± 8.81, respectively. The mean %excess weight loss (EWL) at 6, 12, 36 months were 39.47+/−13.76, 43.70+/−13.70, 41.14+/−8.48%, respectively. The patients were divided into three groups. Group A - lengthening of biliopancreatic limb (BPL) by 100 cm (n = 6); Group B - placement of ring with a diameter of 7.5 cm in addition to BPL lengthening (n = 12); and Group C - pouch trimming with BPL lengthening by 100 cm (n = 3). %EWL at 6 months was 31.86, 47.69, and 53.49, in Groups A, B, and C, respectively. Similar trends in %EWL were observed in three groups at 12 and 36 months. Conclusion: Revision bariatric surgeries are complex procedures. In our study, banded RYGB with BPL lengthening had better outcomes, though a statistical significance could not be established due to the small sample size and retrospective nature of the study.","PeriodicalId":73828,"journal":{"name":"Journal of metabolic and bariatric surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of metabolic and bariatric surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/jbs.jbs_11_21","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: The indications for revision bariatric surgery include inadequate weight loss, weight regain, failure to resolve comorbidities, and complications associated with primary surgery. Objectives: The objective is to evaluate the outcome of revision of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and compare the efficacy of different revision procedures for weight regain, resolution of comorbidities, and complications, if any. Methods: Revision cases performed between May 2017 and April 2021 were included. The analysis of collected data was carried out for weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, and adverse outcomes. Results: Twenty three revision procedures were performed. Two patients were lost to follow-up. The overall complication and reoperation rates were 14.29% and 4.76%, respectively. The follow-up duration was at 6, 12, and 36 months. Twenty-one (91.3%) patients completed 6-month, 18 (78.3%) 12-month, and nine (39.1%) completed 36-month follow-up. The mean postoperative body-mass index at 6, 12, 36 months were 33.07+/−4.15, 33.11+/−4.05, 34.5 ± 8.81, respectively. The mean %excess weight loss (EWL) at 6, 12, 36 months were 39.47+/−13.76, 43.70+/−13.70, 41.14+/−8.48%, respectively. The patients were divided into three groups. Group A - lengthening of biliopancreatic limb (BPL) by 100 cm (n = 6); Group B - placement of ring with a diameter of 7.5 cm in addition to BPL lengthening (n = 12); and Group C - pouch trimming with BPL lengthening by 100 cm (n = 3). %EWL at 6 months was 31.86, 47.69, and 53.49, in Groups A, B, and C, respectively. Similar trends in %EWL were observed in three groups at 12 and 36 months. Conclusion: Revision bariatric surgeries are complex procedures. In our study, banded RYGB with BPL lengthening had better outcomes, though a statistical significance could not be established due to the small sample size and retrospective nature of the study.
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
roux -en- y胃旁路术的改良-我们在印度患者中的经验
背景:改良减肥手术的适应症包括体重减轻不足、体重恢复、未能解决合并症和与原发性手术相关的并发症。目的:目的是评估Roux-en-Y胃旁路(RYGB)翻修的结果,并比较不同翻修程序对体重恢复、合并症和并发症(如果有的话)的解决效果。方法:纳入2017年5月至2021年4月进行翻修的病例。对收集到的数据进行了体重减轻、合并症的解决和不良结果的分析。结果:共进行了23次翻修手术。2例患者未随访。总并发症和再手术率分别为14.29%和4.76%。随访时间分别为6个月、12个月和36个月。21例(91.3%)完成了6个月的随访,18例(78.3%)完成了12个月的随访,9例(39.1%)完成了36个月的随访。术后6、12、36个月平均体重指数分别为33.07+/ - 4.15、33.11+/ - 4.05、34.5±8.81。6个月、12个月、36个月的平均体重减轻率(EWL)分别为39.47+/ - 13.76、43.70+/ - 13.70、41.14+/ - 8.48%。患者被分为三组。A组:胆胰肢(BPL)延长100 cm (n = 6);B组:在BPL延长的基础上放置直径7.5 cm的环(n = 12);C组:育儿袋修剪,BPL延长100 cm (n = 3)。6个月时,A、B、C组EWL分别为31.86、47.69、53.49。三组患者在12个月和36个月时EWL的变化趋势相似。结论:改良减肥手术是一项复杂的手术。在我们的研究中,带状RYGB与BPL延长有更好的结果,尽管由于研究的小样本量和回顾性的性质,不能确定统计学意义。
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
A Nationwide Report on Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery in 2019-2022: Utilizing the Korean Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Database Registry. Abdominal Drains After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Should They Be Used? Positioning the Bariatric Amputee: A Case Report. Prediction Model for Chronological Weight Loss After Bariatric Surgery in Korean Patients. Enteroendocrine Reprogramming by Altered Epithelial-Mesenchymal Crosstalk in Metabolic Surgery.
×
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