Comparison of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic gastric plication: One year follow-up results.

S. Toprak, Yücel Gültekin, A. Okuş
{"title":"Comparison of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic gastric plication: One year follow-up results.","authors":"S. Toprak, Yücel Gültekin, A. Okuş","doi":"10.5152/UCD.2015.2991","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVE\nVarious different surgical methods are used for obesity surgery. Among them, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic gastric plication (LGP) have been both successfully performed in recent years. In this study, we compared the treatment results of patients who underwent LGP, a method that was introduced later consisting of plication of gastric greater curvature to achieve volume reduction, with results of patients who underwent LSG.\n\n\nMATERIAL AND METHODS\nWe analyzed data on morbid obese patients who underwent bariatric surgery with either LSG or LPG in Konya Beyhekim Hospital between 2009 and 2012. Demographic features including age and sex, preoperative blood biochemistry, body mass index (BMI) before and after operation, duration of hospital stay, morbidity, mortality and complications were analyzed.\n\n\nRESULTS\nFifty-five patients who were operated for obesity between 2009 and 2012 were included in the study. 29 patients underwent LGP, and 26 patients LSG. The BMI in the LGP and LSG groups was 41.4±3 kg/m(2) and 42.0±3.1 kg/m(2), respectively. There was no significant difference between two groups in terms of BMI. Two groups were also similar in terms of age and gender. In the LGP group, one patient had postoperative necrosis of the suture line. One patient in the LSG group was re-operated due to bleeding. Another patient in this group had leakage at the suture line. Postoperative BMI assessment of groups revealed significantly lower BMI levels in the LSG group. Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LGP group. There was no significant difference in complication rates between two groups.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nIn this study, we obtained similar results in patients who were treated with LGP or LSG. Moreover, LSG was more efficient in decreasing BMI in morbid obesity surgery when compared to LGP. However, duration of hospital stay was significantly shorter in LGP group. We concluded that both methods could be effectively and safely used in the surgical management of morbid obesity.","PeriodicalId":90992,"journal":{"name":"Ulusal cerrahi dergisi","volume":"69 1","pages":"18-22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ulusal cerrahi dergisi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5152/UCD.2015.2991","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Various different surgical methods are used for obesity surgery. Among them, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic gastric plication (LGP) have been both successfully performed in recent years. In this study, we compared the treatment results of patients who underwent LGP, a method that was introduced later consisting of plication of gastric greater curvature to achieve volume reduction, with results of patients who underwent LSG. MATERIAL AND METHODS We analyzed data on morbid obese patients who underwent bariatric surgery with either LSG or LPG in Konya Beyhekim Hospital between 2009 and 2012. Demographic features including age and sex, preoperative blood biochemistry, body mass index (BMI) before and after operation, duration of hospital stay, morbidity, mortality and complications were analyzed. RESULTS Fifty-five patients who were operated for obesity between 2009 and 2012 were included in the study. 29 patients underwent LGP, and 26 patients LSG. The BMI in the LGP and LSG groups was 41.4±3 kg/m(2) and 42.0±3.1 kg/m(2), respectively. There was no significant difference between two groups in terms of BMI. Two groups were also similar in terms of age and gender. In the LGP group, one patient had postoperative necrosis of the suture line. One patient in the LSG group was re-operated due to bleeding. Another patient in this group had leakage at the suture line. Postoperative BMI assessment of groups revealed significantly lower BMI levels in the LSG group. Length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LGP group. There was no significant difference in complication rates between two groups. CONCLUSION In this study, we obtained similar results in patients who were treated with LGP or LSG. Moreover, LSG was more efficient in decreasing BMI in morbid obesity surgery when compared to LGP. However, duration of hospital stay was significantly shorter in LGP group. We concluded that both methods could be effectively and safely used in the surgical management of morbid obesity.
腹腔镜胃套筒切除术与腹腔镜胃应用术的比较:1年随访结果。
目的肥胖手术采用多种不同的手术方法。其中,腹腔镜袖胃切除术(LSG)和腹腔镜胃应用手术(LGP)近年来均取得了成功。在本研究中,我们比较了LGP患者的治疗结果和LSG患者的治疗结果。LGP是一种后来引入的方法,包括扩大胃大弯曲以实现体积缩小。材料和方法我们分析了2009年至2012年在Konya Beyhekim医院接受LSG或LPG减肥手术的病态肥胖患者的数据。分析年龄、性别、术前血液生化、术前及术后体重指数(BMI)、住院时间、发病率、死亡率及并发症等人口学特征。结果在2009年至2012年期间,55例因肥胖而接受手术治疗的患者被纳入研究。29例行LGP, 26例行LSG。LGP组BMI为41.4±3 kg/m(2), LSG组BMI为42.0±3.1 kg/m(2)。两组在BMI方面没有显著差异。两组在年龄和性别方面也相似。在LGP组中,1例患者出现术后缝合线坏死。LSG组1例因出血再次手术。本组1例患者缝合线处有渗漏。术后各组BMI评估显示,LSG组BMI水平明显降低。LGP组住院时间明显缩短。两组患者并发症发生率无显著差异。结论在本研究中,我们在LGP或LSG治疗的患者中获得了相似的结果。此外,在病态肥胖手术中,与LGP相比,LSG在降低BMI方面更有效。而LGP组住院时间明显缩短。我们的结论是,这两种方法都可以有效和安全的用于病态肥胖的手术治疗。
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