Comparative effectiveness of 3 bariatric surgery procedures: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, laparoscopic adjustable gastric band, and sleeve gastrectomy

Bariatric surgery is associated with improved co-morbidities, quality of life, and survival in severely obese patients. Common bariatric surgery procedures include Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB), and sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Currently, literature studyin...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Surgery for obesity and related diseases 2016-06, Vol.12 (5), p.997-1002
Hauptverfasser: Lee, Jenny H., Nguyen, Quynh-Nhu, Le, Quang A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Bariatric surgery is associated with improved co-morbidities, quality of life, and survival in severely obese patients. Common bariatric surgery procedures include Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB), and sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Currently, literature studying comparative effectiveness on different bariatric surgery procedures in veterans is limited. To compare effectiveness of 3 bariatric surgery procedures performed in veterans. Veterans Affairs Loma Linda Healthcare Systems (VALLHS), Loma Linda, California, United States. This study was a single-institution, retrospective cohort study. Primary outcome was weight reduction, expressed as kilograms lost, body mass index (BMI) reduction, percentage weight loss (%WL), and percentage excess weight loss (%EWL) after 12 months of bariatric surgery. Secondary outcomes were reduction in number of medications and laboratory markers for obesity-related chronic conditions. Inverse-probability weighting propensity score method was used to balance baseline characteristics among the procedures. A total of 162 patients were included in the study. At 12 months, the kilograms lost, BMI reduction, %WL, and %EWL were 40.7±14.5 kg, 13.4±4.1 kg/m2, 31.5±8.5%, and 41.4±11.6% for RYGB; 24.4±22.1 kg, 7.9±7.3 kg/m2, 20.2±21.5%, and 26.7±27.6% for SG; and 15.3±15.7 kg, 5.0±5.0 kg/m2, 12.0±11.7%, and 16.1±15.9% for LAGB, respectively (RYGB versus SG, RYGB versus LAGB, and SG versus LAGB, all P
ISSN:1550-7289
1878-7533
DOI:10.1016/j.soard.2016.01.020