Surgery results in greater improvement in weight loss outcomes and weight associated comorbidities compared with non-surgical interventions , regardless of the type of procedures used .
When compared with each other , certain procedures result ed in greater weight loss and improvements in comorbidities than others .
Outcomes were similar between RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy , and both of these procedures had better outcomes than adjustable gastric b and ing .
For people with very high BMI , biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch result ed in greater weight loss than RYGB .
Isolated sleeve gastrectomy led to better weight-loss outcomes than adjustable gastric b and ing after three years follow-up .
BACKGROUND Bariatric ( weight loss ) surgery for obesity is considered when other treatments have failed .
The effects of the available bariatric procedures compared with medical management and with each other are uncertain .
This is an up date of a Cochrane review first published in 2003 and most recently up date d in 2009 .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of bariatric surgery for overweight and obesity , including the control of comorbidities .
Prospective randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus open Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for the management of patients with morbid obesity
Introduction Roux-en-Y gastric bypass ( RYGB ) is considered the gold st and ard bariatric procedure with documented safety and effectiveness . Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy ( LSG ) is a newer procedure being done with increasing frequency . R and omized comparisons of LSG and other bariatric procedures are limited . We present the results of the first prospect i ve r and omized trial comparing LSG and RYGB in the Polish population . Aim To assess the efficacy and safety of LSG versus RYGB in the treatment of morbid obesity and obesity-related comorbidities . Material and methods Seventy-two morbidly obese patients were r and omized to RYGB ( 36 patients ) or LSG ( 36 patients ) . Both groups were comparable regarding age , gender , body mass index ( BMI ) and comorbidities . The follow-up period was at least 12 months . Baseline and 6 and 12 month outcomes were analyzed including assessment of percent excess weight lost ( % EWL ) , reduction in BMI , morbidity ( minor , major , early and late complications ) , mortality , reoperations , comorbidities and nutritional deficiencies . Results There was no 30-day mortality and no significant difference in major complication rate ( 0 % after RYGB and 8.3 % after LSG , p > 0.05 ) or minor complication rate ( 16.6 % after RYGB and 10.1 % after LSG , p > 0.05 ) . There were no early reoperations after RYGB and 2 after LSG ( 5.5 % ) ( p > 0.05 ) . Weight loss was significant after RYGB and LSG but there was no difference between both groups at 6 and 12 months of follow-up . At 12 months % EWL in RYGB and LSG groups reached 64.2 % and 67.6 % respectively ( p > 0.05 ) . There was no significant difference in the overall prevalence of comorbidities and nutritional deficiencies . Conclusions Both LSG and RYGB produce significant weight loss at 6 and 12 months after surgery . The procedures are equally effective with regard to % EWL , reduction in BMI and amelioration of comorbidities at 6 and 12 months of follow-up . Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and RYGB are comparably safe techniques with no significant differences in minor and major complication rates at 6 and 12 months
Surgery results in greater improvement in weight loss outcomes and weight associated comorbidities compared with non-surgical interventions , regardless of the type of procedures used .
When compared with each other , certain procedures result ed in greater weight loss and improvements in comorbidities than others .
Outcomes were similar between RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy , and both of these procedures had better outcomes than adjustable gastric b and ing .
For people with very high BMI , biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch result ed in greater weight loss than RYGB .
Isolated sleeve gastrectomy led to better weight-loss outcomes than adjustable gastric b and ing after three years follow-up .
BACKGROUND Bariatric ( weight loss ) surgery for obesity is considered when other treatments have failed .
The effects of the available bariatric procedures compared with medical management and with each other are uncertain .
This is an up date of a Cochrane review first published in 2003 and most recently up date d in 2009 .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of bariatric surgery for overweight and obesity , including the control of comorbidities .