Effect of primary versus revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: inferior weight loss of revisional surgery after gastric banding

BackgroundLaparoscopic adjustable gastric banding is a popular and effective restrictive bariatric procedure. However, with longer follow-up, it has become clear that a considerable number of patients require revisional surgery, of which Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the most commonly performed procedure. Studies that compared the outcomes of primary RYGB and revisional RYGB have not been conclusive. Our objective was to determine whether significant differences exist in the 1-year outcomes between primary RYGB (prim-RYGB) and revisional RYGB after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (rev-RYGB) at a major training hospital in The Netherlands.MethodsAll prim-RYGB and rev-RYGB procedures performed from 2007 to 2009 were analyzed. Data were collected regarding weight loss, hospitalization, operative time, postoperative complications, and co-morbidities.ResultsA total of 292 RYGB procedures were performed: 66 rev-RYGB and 226 prim-RYGB procedures. The operative time was significantly shorter in the prim-RYGB group (136.6 ± 37.5 versus 167.5 ± 40.6 min; P < .0001). No significant differences were found in hospitalization time (4.4 ± 1.7 versus 4.9 ± 2.4 d; P = .063) or complication rate (14.7% versus 15.2%; P = .962). No deaths occurred in either group. The number of patients with resolved diabetes and hypertension did not differ between the 2 groups (50.1% versus 23.1%; P = .116; and 40.7% versus 25.0%; P = .384, respectively). Weight loss was significantly greater in the prim-RYGB group in terms of excess weight loss (71.6% ± 20.8% versus 48.4% ± 26.8%; P < .0001), body mass index reduction (13.0 ± 3.8 versus 10.2 ± 5.6 kg/m²; P < .0001), absolute weight loss (37.4 ± 11.5 versus 29.3 ± 17.2 kg; P = .001), and percentage of weight loss (29.7% ± 8% versus 21.7% ± 11.5%; P < .0001).Conclusionrev-RYGB is a safe procedure with outcomes similar to those of prim-RYGB in terms of complication rate, hospitalization time, and effect on co-morbidity. Weight loss, however, was significantly less after rev-RYGB than after prim-RYGB.     

Sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass as revisional bariatric procedures: retrospective evaluation of outcomes

Background

A considerable number of patients require revisional surgery after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). Studies that compared the outcomes of revisional sleeve gastrectomy (r-SG) and revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (r-RYGB) after failed LAGB are scarce in the literature. Our objective was to determine whether significant differences exist in outcomes between r-SG and r-RYGB after failed LAGB.

Methods

From 2005 to 2012, patients who underwent laparoscopic r-SG and r-RYGB after failed LAGB were retrospectively compared and analyzed. Data included demographics, indication for revision, operative time, hospital stay, conversion rate, percentage excess weight loss (%EWL), and morbidity and mortality.

Results

Out of 693 bariatric procedures, 42 r-SG and 53 r-RYGB were performed. The median preoperative weight (107.7 and 117.7 kg, respectively, p = 0.02) and body mass index (BMI) (38.5 vs. 43.2 kg/m², respectively, p = 0.01) were statistically significantly lower in r-SG than in r-RYGB. The mean operative time and median hospital stay were significantly shorter in r-SG than in r-RYGB (108.4 vs. 161.2 min, p < 0.01) (2 vs. 3 days, p = 0.02), respectively. One patient underwent conversion to open surgery after r-RYGB (p = 0.5). The reoperation rate was lower in r-SG than in r-RYGB (0.0 vs. 3.8 %, p = 0.5). There was one postoperative leak in the r-RYGB, and the overall complication rate was significantly lower in r-SG patients than in r-RYGB patients (7.1 vs. 20.8 %, p = 0.05). The mean follow-up was significantly shorter in the r-SG group (9.8 vs. 29.3 months, p < 0.01). However, the mean postoperative BMI was not different at 1 year (32.3 vs. 34.7, p = 0.29) as well as mean %EWL was (47.4 vs. 45.6 %, p = 0.77).

Conclusions

Both r-SG and r-RYGB are safe procedures with similar outcomes in terms of %EWL. As a result of the long-term potential nutritional complication of r-RYGB, r-SG may be a better option in this group of patients. Longer follow-up is needed.     

Early postoperative complications after gastric bypass revisional surgery in patients with previous sleeve gastrectomy versus primary gastric bypass

BackgroundRevisional bariatric surgery (RS) is indicated if there is weight regain or insufficient weight loss, no improvement or reappearance of co-morbidities, or previous bariatric surgery complications. It has been associated with higher postoperative morbidity.ObjectiveTo evaluate the early postoperative complications (<30 d) of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass RS (RYGB-RS) after primary sleeve gastrectomy (SG-1) compared with primary RYGB (RYGB-1) at a bariatric surgery referral center.SettingDepartment of General and Digestive Surgery of General Universitary Hospital of Alicante, Spain.MethodsRetrospective cohort study comparing RYGB-RS after SG-1 and RYGB-1 between January 2008 and March 2021. Postoperative complications, hospital stay, mortality, and readmissions were analyzed.ResultsSix hundred and twenty-eight RYGB surgeries (48 RYGB-RS, 580 RYGB-1) were studied. The mean age of patients undergoing RYGB-RS was 50 years, compared with 46 years in the RYGB-1 group (P = .017). Mean initial body mass index was 44.2 kg/m² (RYGB-RS) versus 47.6 kg/m² (RYGB-1; P = .004). Cardiovascular risk factors were higher in the RYGB-1 group (P < .05). Indications for RS were weight regain or insufficient weight loss (72.9%), weight regain or insufficient weight loss plus gastroesophageal reflux disease (14.6%), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (12.5%). There were no differences in the frequency of complications (RYGB-RS 22.9% vs RYGB-1 20.5%) or in their severity (Clavien–Dindo ≥IIIa; RYGB-RS 10.4% vs RYGB-1 6.4%; P > .05). There were no differences in emergency room visits (RYGB-RS at 12.5% vs RYGB-1 at 14.9%) or in readmissions (RYGB-RS at 12.5% vs RYGB-1 at 9.4%).ConclusionNo differences were observed between primary RYGB and revisional RYGB in early morbidity, mortality, emergencies, or readmissions. Revisional bariatric surgery is a safe procedure at referral centers and must be done by expert hands.     

Twelve-year results for revisional gastric bypass after failed restrictive surgery in 131 patients

BackgroundGastric banding (GB) and vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) may result in unsatisfactory weight loss or intolerable side effects. Such outcomes are potential indications for additional bariatric surgery, and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is frequently used at such revisions (rRYGB). The present study examined long-term results of rRYGB.MethodsIn total, 175 patients who had undergone rRYGB between 1993 and 2003 at 2 university hospitals received a questionnaire regarding their current status. The questionnaire was returned by 131 patients (75% follow-up rate, 66 VBG and 65 GB patients). Blood samples were obtained and medical charts studied. The reason for conversion was mainly unsatisfactory weight loss among the VBG patients and intolerable side effects among GB patients.ResultsThe 131 patients (112 women), mean age 41.8 years at rRYGB, were evaluated at mean 11.9 years (range 7–17) after rRYGB. Mean body mass index of those with prior unsatisfactory weight loss was reduced from 40.1 kg/m² (range 28.7–52.2) to 32.6 kg/m² (range 19.1–50.2) (P<.01). Only 2 patients (2%) underwent additional bariatric surgery after rRYGB. The overall result was satisfactory for 74% of the patients. Only 21% of the patients adhered to the recommendation of lifelong multivitamin supplements while 76% took vitamin B₁₂. Anemia was present in 18%.ConclusionsrRYGB results in sustained weight loss and satisfied patients when VBG or GB have failed. Subsequent bariatric surgery was rare but micronutrient deficiencies were frequent.     

Anatomic findings and outcomes after antireflux procedures in morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

BACKGROUND: To report the anatomic findings and outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic takedown of Nissen fundoplication with conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. METHODS: We reviewed the records of patients who underwent laparoscopic Nissen takedown with conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass from January 2001 to April 2006 at the University of Minnesota Medical Center. RESULTS: Eleven patients were identified. Nine patients had gastroesophageal reflux disease preoperatively, of whom six underwent 24-hour pH monitoring. In 2 patients, the pH study findings were negative. Eight prior procedures had been performed laparoscopically. Eight patients were women. The mean age was 44 years. The average body mass index preoperatively was 44 kg/m(2) (range 35-61). The mean follow-up was 13.8 months (range 4-39). The body mass index at follow-up was 30.2 kg/m(2). The operative time was 349 minutes (range 222-624). The hospital length of stay was 3.4 days (range 2-6). No conversions to open surgery were required. No major short-term complications developed. Minor complications included wound or drain site infection in 3 patients, with abscess in 2, pressure sore of the lateral aspect of the foot in 1, pneumonia in 2, and marginal ulcer in 2 patients. No strictures were observed. One internal hernia occurred. Of the 9 patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease preoperatively, all had 100% improvement in symptoms, with complete resolution in 7 (78%). Wrap disruption was present in 5 (45%) of 11 patients. Herniation of an intact wrap had occurred in 1 patient. One patient had both herniation and wrap disruption. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic conversion of Nissen fundoplication to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is a feasible salvage operation for recurrent gastroesophageal reflux disease in the morbidly obese. The incidence of wrap disruption appears to be relatively high and the incidence of intact wrap herniation low in obese patients after failed Nissen fundoplication, suggesting that the mechanism of failure after primary antireflux surgery in obese patients may be different than that in normal-weight patients.     

Short- to medium-term results of single-anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass compared with one-anastomosis gastric bypass for weight recidivism after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy

BackgroundSingle-anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI) and the one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) are 2 revisional procedures to address the problem of weight recidivism after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of SADI and OAGB as revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) in initially super-obese patients (body mass index [BMI] >50 kg/m²).SettingAcademic hospital, bariatric center of excellence, Germany.MethodsObservational study of outcomes in 84 initially super-obese patients who had undergone RBS after LSG (SADI n = 42, OAGB n = 42) between July 2013 and April 2018. Follow-up examinations were performed at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months after RBS. The variables analyzed included time between LSG and RBS, BMI, excess weight loss, total weight loss, operation time, and complications.ResultsThe time interval between LSG and RBS was 45.5 ± 22.8 and 43.5 ± 24.2 months for SADI and OAGB, respectively. At the time of RBS, the mean BMI was 42.8 ± 7.9 kg/m² for SADI and 43.4 ± 9.2 kg/m² for OAGB. The follow-up examinations rates (%) after SADI were 97.6, 92.8, 90.5, 78.6, 57.1, and 100, 97.6, 95.2, 85.7, and 59.5 after OAGB. The BMI at the follow-up examinations were 39.1 ± 7.2, 34.2 ± 6.9, 31.2 ± 5.8, 30.2 ± 5.3, 29.3 ± 5.1 for SADI, and 39.5 ± 8.1, 36.6 ± 7.4, 34.7 ± 7.9, 32.9 ± 6.3, and 31.6 ± 5.9 for OAGB. The mean operating times for SADI and OAGB were 138 ± 40 and 123 ± 39 minutes, respectively. Three patients in the SADI group and 1 patient in the OAGB group developed a major complication within the first 30 postoperative days.ConclusionSADI and OAGB were effective second-step procedures for further weight reduction after LSG in initially super-obese patients after short to medium follow-up. There was a trend toward higher weight loss for SADI though this did not reach statistical significance. Substantial differences concerning surgery time and complications between the 2 procedures were not observed.     

Long-term follow-up evaluation of revisional gastric bypass after failed adjustable gastric banding

Background

Disappointing long-term results, frequent band failure, and high rates of band-related complications increasingly necessitate revisional surgery after adjustable gastric banding. Laparoscopic conversion to gastric bypass has been recommended as the procedure of choice. This single-center retrospective study aimed to evaluate the long-term results of revisional gastric bypass after failed adjustable gastric banding.

Methods

The study included 108 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic conversion of gastric banding to gastric bypass from 2002 to 2012. Indications for surgery, operative data, weight development, morbidity, and mortality were analyzed. The median follow-up period was 3.4 years (maximum, 10 years).

Results

The most common indications for band removal were band migration, insufficient weight loss, and pouch dilation. The median interval between gastric banding and gastric bypass was 6.6 years. In 52 % of the cases, band removal and gastric bypass surgery were performed simultaneously as a single-stage laparoscopic procedure. The early postoperative morbidity rate was 10.2 %. The body mass index before gastric banding (43.3 kg/m²) decreased significantly to 37.9 kg/m² before gastric bypass and to 28.8 kg/m² 5 years after gastric bypass.

Conclusions

This is the first report on the long-term outcome after conversion of failed adjustable gastric banding to gastric bypass. Findings have shown revisional gastric bypass to be a feasible bariatric procedure particularly for patients with insufficient weight loss that guarantees a constant and long-lasting weight loss.     

Laparoscopic revisional surgery after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy

BackgroundFailure of primary bariatric surgery is frequently due to weight recidivism, intractable gastric reflux, gastrojejunal strictures, fistulas, and malnutrition. Of these patients, 10–60% will undergo reoperative bariatric surgery, depending on the primary procedure performed. Open reoperative approaches for revision to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) have traditionally been advocated secondary to the perceived difficulty and safety with laparoscopic techniques. Few studies have addressed revisions after RYGB. The aim of the present study was to provide our experience regarding the safety, efficacy, and weight loss results of laparoscopic revisional surgery after previous RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy procedures.MethodsA retrospective analysis of patients who underwent laparoscopic revisional bariatric surgery for complications after previous RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy from November 2005 to May 2007 was performed. Technical revisions included isolation and transection of gastrogastric fistulas with partial gastrectomy, sleeve gastrectomy conversion to RYGB, and revision of RYGB. The data collected included the pre- and postoperative body mass index, operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, and intraoperative and postoperative complications.ResultsA total of 26 patients underwent laparoscopic revisional surgery. The primary operations had consisted of RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy. The complications from primary operations included gastrogastric fistulas, refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease, weight recidivism, and gastric outlet obstruction. The mean prerevision body mass index was 42 ± 10 kg/m². The average follow-up was 240 days (range 11–476). The average body mass index during follow-up was 37 ± 8 kg/m². Laparoscopic revision was successful in all but 1 patient, who required conversion to laparotomy for staple line leak. The average operating room time and estimated blood loss was 131 ± 66 minutes and 70 mL, respectively. The average hospital stay was 6 days. Three patients required surgical exploration for hemorrhage, staple line leak, and an incarcerated hernia. The overall complication rate was 23%, with a major complication rate of 11.5%. No patients died.ConclusionLaparoscopic revisional bariatric surgery after previous RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy is technically challenging but compared well in safety and efficacy with the results from open revisional procedures. Intraoperative endoscopy is a key component in performing these procedures.     

Long-term follow-up in patients undergoing open gastric bypass as a revisional operation for previous failed restrictive procedures

BackgroundWe have previously described our early experience with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as a revisional procedure. The favorable results have stimulated us to continue using RYGB as our standard operating procedure after failed bariatric surgery. Our objective was to evaluate the perioperative risks, weight result, and abdominal symptoms 5 years after revisional RYGB surgery at a university hospital in Sweden.MethodsWe studied 121 patients undergoing revisional open RYGB (age 42.0 yr, body mass index 37.7 kg/m², 101 women) 5 years after RYGB surgery. The patients underwent reoperation because of either intolerable side effects or inferior weight loss. The initial procedures were horizontal gastroplasty (n = 2), vertical banded gastroplasty (n = 34), gastric banding (n = 21), and silicone adjustable gastric banding (n = 64). The mean interval between the first surgery and revision was 5 years. The 5-year follow-up data were obtained annually using a questionnaire survey.ResultsThe average operating time was 162 minutes (range 75–355). In these 121 cases, 10 (8%) reoperations were performed in the first 30-day period (4 for leakage). No perioperative mortality occurred, and the 5-year follow-up rate was 91%. The mean body mass index was 30.7 kg/m². Seven patients (5.7%) had undergone subsequent surgery because of complications. At follow-up, 93% reported being very satisfied or satisfied with the revisional procedure. Disturbing abdominal symptoms after RYGB were rare.ConclusionThe perioperative risks of revisional RYGB are greater than those for primary RYGB. However, because the long-term weight results and patient satisfaction are very good, we believe that the 8% reoperative rate is acceptable. We consider RYGB to be a suitable procedure for patients in whom previous bariatric procedures have failed.     

Endoscopic findings in the excluded stomach after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery

HYPOTHESIS: After gastric bypass surgery performed because of morbid obesity, the excluded stomach can rarely be endoscopically examined. With the advent of a new apparatus and technique, possible mucosal changes can be routinely accessed and monitored, thus preventing potential benign and malignant complications. DESIGN: Prospective observational study in a homogeneous population with nonspecific symptoms. SETTING: Outpatient clinic of a large public academic hospital. PATIENTS: Forty consecutive patients (mean +/- SD age, 44.5 +/- 10.0 y ears; 85.0% women) were seen at a mean +/- SD of 77.3 +/- 19.4 months after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery. INTERVENTION: Elective double-balloon enteroscopy of the excluded stomach was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rate of successful intubation, endoscopic findings, and complications. RESULTS: The excluded stomach was reached in 35 of 40 patients (87.5%). Mean +/- SD time to enter the organ was 24.9 +/- 14.3 minutes (range, 5-75 minutes). Endoscopic findings were normal in 9 patients (25.7%), whereas in 26 (74.3%), various types of gastritis (erythematous, erosive, hemorrhagic erosive, and atrophic) were identified, primarily in the gastric body and antrum. No cancer was documented in the present series. Tolerance was good, and no complications were recorded during or after the intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The double-balloon method is useful and practical for access to the excluded stomach. Although cancer was not noted, most of the studied population had gastritis, including moderate and severe forms. Surveillance of the excluded stomach is recommended after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery performed because of morbid obesity.     

Case-matched analysis comparing outcomes of revisional versus primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

Background

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is one of the most common approaches used to revise post-bariatric patients with inadequate weight loss or significant weight regain. Previous studies have analyzed the outcomes of open revisional RYGB versus primary RYGB, but no case–control matched analysis comparing revisional LRYGB versus primary LRYGB has been performed.

Methods

Our cohort includes 37 consecutive patients who underwent revisional LRYGB because of unsatisfactory weight loss or weight regain matched in a 1:2 ratio with 74 control patients who underwent primary LRYGB. Matching included the following parameters: age, gender, preoperative body mass index and comorbidities (diabetes, obstructive sleep apnea, and hypertension).

Results

The revisional group had longer length of stay compared with the primary group (3.8 vs. 2.4 days, P = 0.02) and a higher conversion to laparotomy rate (10.8 vs. 0 %, P = 0.01). The revisional group had a higher 30-day morbidity compared with the primary group (27 vs. 8.1 %, P = 0.02). There were no deaths in both groups. The two groups had similar 30-day readmission and 30 day reoperation rates. At 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up, the revisional LRYGB group had significantly lower percent of excess weight loss (EWL) than the primary LRYGB group (3 months, 30 vs. 38.4, P = 0.001; 6 months, 36.3 vs. 52.9, P = 0.001; 12 months, 46.5 vs. 68.2, P = 0.001).

Conclusions

Revisional LRYGB is characterized by lower EWL and higher morbidity than primary LRYGB. However, our data suggest that revisional LRYGB is still capable of providing significant weight loss in these high-risk patients.     

Outcome of revisional bariatric surgery for insufficient weight loss after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: an observational study

BackgroundInsufficient weight loss or secondary weight regain with or without recurrence of comorbidity can occur years after laparoscopic Roux en Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). In selected patients, increasing restriction or adding malabsorption may be a surgical option after conservative measures failed.ObjectivesEvaluation of short and long term results of revisional surgery for insufficient weight loss or weight regain after LRYGB.SettingTertiary hospital.MethodsRetrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from a cohort of 1150 LRYGB patients. Included were patients, who underwent revisional bariatric surgery after LRYGB for insufficient weight loss with a follow-up of minimal 1 year.ResultsFifty-four patients were included in the analysis. After an interdisciplinary evaluation, patients with insufficient weight loss, signs of dumping syndrome, and lacking restriction were offered a nonadjustable band around the pouch (banded group, n = 34) and patients with sufficient restriction, excellent compliance, and adherence were offered a revision to laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion (BPD group, n = 20). The revisional procedure was performed 3.3 ± 2.3 years after LRYGB in the banded-group and after 6.4 ± 4.3 years in the BPD group (P = .001). Mean body mass index at the time of the primary bariatric procedure was 41.7 ± 6.2 kg/m² in the banded group and 45.2 ± 8.2 kg/m² in the BPD group (P = .08); minimal body mass index between both operations was 29.1 ± 4.7 kg/m² in the banded group and 36.5 ± 9.4 kg/m² in the BPD group, and, at the time of revisional surgery, 31.4 ± 5.5 kg/m² in the banded group and 40.8 ± 6.7 kg/m² in the BPD group (P = .0001). The mean body mass index difference 1 year after revisional surgery was 1.3 ± 3.0 kg/m² in the banded group and 6.7 ± 4.5 kg/m² in the BPD group (P = .01). In the banded group, 11 patients (32.4%) needed removal of the band, 4 patients (11.8%) needed an adjustment, and 4 patients (11.8%) were later converted to BPD. In the BPD group, 2 (10.0%) patients needed revision for severe protein malabsorption.ConclusionsInsufficient weight loss or secondary weight regain after LRYGB is a rare indication for revisional surgery. Banded bypass has modest results for additional weight loss but can help patients suffering from dumping. In very carefully selected cases, BPD can achieve additional weight loss with acceptable complication rate but higher risk for reoperation. Future “adjuvant medical treatments,” such as glucagon-like peptide 1 analogues and other pharmacologic treatment options could be an alternative for achieving additional weight loss and better metabolic response.     

Bariatric revisional surgery for gastrogastric fistula following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass positively impacts weight loss

BackgroundGastrogastric fistula (GGF) is a rare complication from Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). It is a known risk factor associated with weight recidivism and an indication for Bariatric Revisional Surgery (BRS).ObjectivesThe primary outcome of this study is to evaluate perioperative outcomes and the long-term total body weight loss (TBWL) outcomes following revision.SettingSingle Academic Institution, Center of Bariatric Excellence.MethodsWe selected patients who had primary bariatric surgery and BRS from 2003 to 2020, followed by BRS for GGF. Patients’ demographics, perioperative outcomes, and TBWL were analyzed.ResultsOne hundred five patients underwent BRS for GGF. Mean body mass index (BMI) at index operation and revision was 51.6 ± 10.1, and 42.4 ± 11.2 respectively. Ninety percent of patients had open primary RYGB, and 69% had open revisional surgery. The median length of stay after BRS was 3 days. The 30-day reintervention rate was 19%. The 30-day readmission rate was 34%. Of the 77 patients included for weight loss analysis, the mean %TBWL after primary RYGB was 34% ± 14. The total mean %TBWL at the time of revision was 18.8%, translating into a weight regain of 13.6% ± 9.5. The total mean %TBWL after revision was 37.6% ± 11.4, translating into TBWL of 18.8% ± 9.4 after revision when compared to TBWL at revision time.ConclusionsOur results demonstrate that revision for GGF can be safely performed, however is associated with higher morbidity than primary bariatric surgery. Revision for GGF results in significant long-term weight loss.     

Perioperative outcomes of revisional laparoscopic gastric bypass after failed adjustable gastric banding and after vertical banded gastroplasty: experience with 107 cases and subgroup analysis

Background

A growing number of revision procedures are to be expected in bariatric surgery after failed restrictive procedures such as failed adjustable gastric banding (AGB) or vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG). Conversion to revisional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (ReLRYGBP) has been advocated as the procedure of choice.

Methods

The results of ReLRYGBP were reviewed in a retrospective chart review. A subgroup analysis compared perioperative results after VBG and after AGB. A second subgroup analysis compared perioperative results of ReLRYGBP immediately after AGB removal and after a delay as a two-step procedure.

Results

Between 2003 and 2009, ReLRYGBP was performed for 107 patients. Of these 107 operations, 21 were performed after failed VBG and 86 after failed AGB. The mean body mass index (BMI) was 42 kg/m². The causes of failure were mainly insufficient weight loss or reflux disease-related symptoms. During a median follow-up period of 44 months, there was no mortality, and morbidity was 34 %, including late complications. Major early complications occurred in 11 % of the cases (n = 12). Conversions and major early complications occurred significantly more frequently after VBG than after AGB (p < 0.05). In 59 % of the cases (n = 50), ReLRYGBP was performed as a single-stage procedure immediately after removal of AGB and in 41 % of the cases (n = 36) as a delayed two-step procedure. The outcomes did not differ significantly (p > 0.5).

Conclusions

The perioperative outcomes of ReLRYGBP are worse after VBG than after AGB. The ReLRYGBP operation can be performed safely as a one-step procedure after AGB removal.     

One-year weight loss after primary or revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for failed adjustable gastric banding

BackgroundAdjustable gastric banding has been widely used in Europe, but recently gastric bypass (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass [RYGB]) has become the procedure of choice. With a gastric banding failure rate of nearly 40% at 5 years, the need for revisional surgery is increasing. The effect of a failed previous bariatric surgery on the weight loss curve after RYGB is still a controversial issue.MethodsA total of 259 patients underwent RYGB from 2003 to 2007, 58 after failed gastric banding and 201 as primary surgery. All the procedures were laparoscopically performed by the same surgeon at a single institution. The postoperative course and the percentage of excess weight loss were compared between the 2 groups.ResultsThe 2 groups were similar in age and initial body mass index (46.3 ± 7.2 kg/m² for revision versus 47.7 ± 6.7 kg/m² for primary RYGB). In contrast, the prerevision body mass index was 43.2 ± 7.0 kg/m². Revisional RYGB required a significantly longer operative time (128.3 ± 25.9 minutes versus 89.0 ± 14.7 minutes, P <.0001) and the morbidity was greater (8.6% versus 5.5%), but no patient died in the postoperative period after revision. As determined from the initial body mass index, the 1-year percentage of excess weight loss was comparable between the 2 groups (66.1% ± 26.8% and 70.4% ± 18.9%).ConclusionWhen RYGB is performed after an adjustable gastric band failure to restore weight loss or because of a complication, the weight loss curve is similar to that after primary RYGB. Therefore, the strategy of adjustable gastric banding first is an option that does not seem to preclude satisfactory weight loss after revision to RYGB.