LAPAROSCOPIC SLEEVE GASTRECTOMY VERSUS LAPAROSCOPIC ROUX-EN-Y GASTRIC BYPASS FOR WEIGHT LOSS IN OBESE PATIENTS: WHICH IS MORE EFFECTIVE? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.

Laura García-Honores, Jose Caballero-Alvarado, Alexander Bustamante-Cabrejos, Katherine Lozano-Peralta, Carlos Zavaleta-Corvera
{"title":"LAPAROSCOPIC SLEEVE GASTRECTOMY VERSUS LAPAROSCOPIC ROUX-EN-Y GASTRIC BYPASS FOR WEIGHT LOSS IN OBESE PATIENTS: WHICH IS MORE EFFECTIVE? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.","authors":"Laura García-Honores, Jose Caballero-Alvarado, Alexander Bustamante-Cabrejos, Katherine Lozano-Peralta, Carlos Zavaleta-Corvera","doi":"10.1590/0102-672020230064e1782","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bariatric surgery is the most effective option to reduce weight in morbid obesity patients. The techniques most employed are the restrictive surgery laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), surgical procedures of intestinal malabsorption, and both types (restrictive and intestinal malabsorption) such as the Roux-en-Y laparoscopic gastric bypass (RYLGB).</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To determine if LSG is more effective than RYLGB for weight loss.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out, including five clinical trials and sixteen cohorts comparing LSG versus RYLGB in weight loss and secondary outcomes: resolution of comorbidities, postoperative complications, operative time, hospital stay, and improvement in quality of life.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Excess weight loss was 10.2% (mean difference [MD] 10.2; 95%CI -10.14; -9.90) higher in patients undergoing LSG than in patients submitted to RYLGB. Diabetes mellitus type 2 was resolved in 17% (relative risk [RR] 0.83; 95%CI 0.77-0.90) of cases, more significantly after LSG, arterial hypertension in 23% (RR 0.77; 95%CI 0.69-0.84), and dyslipidemia in 17% (RR 0.83; 95%CI 0.77-0.90). Postoperative complications were 73% higher in patients undergoing RYLGB (MD 0.73; 95%CI 0.63-0.83). The operative time was 35.76 minutes shorter in the LSG (MD -35.76; 95%CI -37.28; -34.24). Finally, the quality of life improved more in patients operated by LSG (MD 0.37; 95%CI -0.48; -0.26).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The study demonstrated that LSG could be more effective than RYLGB in reducing the percentage of excess weight, comorbidities, postoperative complications, operative time, hospital stay, and in improving quality of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":72298,"journal":{"name":"Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery","volume":"36 ","pages":"e1782"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10712920/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arquivos brasileiros de cirurgia digestiva : ABCD = Brazilian archives of digestive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/0102-672020230064e1782","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Bariatric surgery is the most effective option to reduce weight in morbid obesity patients. The techniques most employed are the restrictive surgery laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), surgical procedures of intestinal malabsorption, and both types (restrictive and intestinal malabsorption) such as the Roux-en-Y laparoscopic gastric bypass (RYLGB).

Aims: To determine if LSG is more effective than RYLGB for weight loss.

Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out, including five clinical trials and sixteen cohorts comparing LSG versus RYLGB in weight loss and secondary outcomes: resolution of comorbidities, postoperative complications, operative time, hospital stay, and improvement in quality of life.

Results: Excess weight loss was 10.2% (mean difference [MD] 10.2; 95%CI -10.14; -9.90) higher in patients undergoing LSG than in patients submitted to RYLGB. Diabetes mellitus type 2 was resolved in 17% (relative risk [RR] 0.83; 95%CI 0.77-0.90) of cases, more significantly after LSG, arterial hypertension in 23% (RR 0.77; 95%CI 0.69-0.84), and dyslipidemia in 17% (RR 0.83; 95%CI 0.77-0.90). Postoperative complications were 73% higher in patients undergoing RYLGB (MD 0.73; 95%CI 0.63-0.83). The operative time was 35.76 minutes shorter in the LSG (MD -35.76; 95%CI -37.28; -34.24). Finally, the quality of life improved more in patients operated by LSG (MD 0.37; 95%CI -0.48; -0.26).

Conclusions: The study demonstrated that LSG could be more effective than RYLGB in reducing the percentage of excess weight, comorbidities, postoperative complications, operative time, hospital stay, and in improving quality of life.

腹腔镜袖带胃切除术与腹腔镜roux-en-y 胃旁路术对肥胖患者的减肥效果:哪种方法更有效?系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:减肥手术是病态肥胖症患者减轻体重的最有效选择。采用最多的技术是限制性手术腹腔镜袖带胃切除术(LSG)、肠道吸收不良外科手术以及两种类型(限制性和肠道吸收不良)手术,如鲁克斯全Y腹腔镜胃旁路术(RYLGB):方法:对五项临床试验和十六个队列进行了系统回顾和荟萃分析,比较了 LSG 与 RYLGB 在减轻体重和次要结果(合并症的缓解、术后并发症、手术时间、住院时间和生活质量的改善)方面的差异:接受LSG手术的患者的超重率为10.2%(平均差[MD] 10.2;95%CI -10.14;-9.90),高于接受RYLGB手术的患者。17%的病例(相对风险[RR] 0.83;95%CI 0.77-0.90)患有2型糖尿病,其中接受LSG治疗的病例患病率更高;23%的病例患有动脉高血压(RR 0.77;95%CI 0.69-0.84);17%的病例患有血脂异常(RR 0.83;95%CI 0.77-0.90)。接受RYLGB手术的患者术后并发症发生率比接受RYLGB手术的患者高73%(MD 0.73;95%CI 0.63-0.83)。LSG的手术时间缩短了35.76分钟(MD -35.76;95%CI -37.28;-34.24)。最后,LSG手术患者的生活质量得到了更大改善(MD 0.37; 95%CI -0.48; -0.26):研究表明,LSG 比 RYLGB 能更有效地减少超重百分比、合并症、术后并发症、手术时间、住院时间,并改善生活质量。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信