A Randomized Controlled Trial of Acid and Bile Reflux Esophagitis Prevention by Modified Fundoplication of the Excluded Stomach in One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass: 1-Year Results of the FundoRing Trial
Background The advantages and disadvantages of one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) with primary modified fundoplication using the excluded stomach (“FundoRing”) is unclear. We aimed to assess the impact of this operation in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and answer the next questions: (1) Wha...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Obesity surgery 2023-07, Vol.33 (7), p.1974-1983 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background
The advantages and disadvantages of one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) with primary modified fundoplication using the excluded stomach (“FundoRing”) is unclear. We aimed to assess the impact of this operation in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) and answer the next questions: (1) What the impact of wrapping the fundus of the excluded part of the stomach in OAGB on protection in the experimental group against developing de novo reflux esophagitis? (2) If preoperative RE could be improved in the experimental group? (3) Can preoperative acid reflux as measured by PH impedance, be treated by the addition of the “FundoRing”?
Methods
The study design was a single-center prospective, interventional, open-label (no masking) RCT (FundoRing Trial) with 1-year follow-up. Endpoints were body mass index (BMI, kg/m
2
) and acid and bile RE assessed endoscopically by Los Angeles (LA) classification and 24-h pH impedance monitoring. Complications were graded by Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC).
Results
One hundred patients (
n
= 50 FundoRingOAGB (f-OAGB) vs
n
= 50 standard OAGB (s-OAGB)) with complete follow-up data were included in the study. During OAGB procedures, patients with hiatal hernia underwent cruroplasty (29/50 f-OAGB; 24/50 s-OAGB). There were no leaks, bleeding, or deaths in either group. At 1 year, BMI in the f-OAGB group was 25.3 ± 2.77 (19–30) vs 26.48 ± 2.8 (21–34) s-OAGB group (
p
= 0.03). In f-OAGB vs s-OAGB groups, respectively, acid RE was seen in 1 vs 12 patients (
p
= 0.001) and bile RE in 0 vs 4 patients (
p
|
---|---|
ISSN: | 0960-8923 1708-0428 1708-0428 |
DOI: | 10.1007/s11695-023-06618-y |