4.4 Article

Pediatric Bariatric Surgery: The Clinical Pathway

期刊

OBESITY SURGERY
卷 25, 期 5, 页码 910-921

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-015-1586-x

关键词

Clinical pathway; Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy; Bariatric surgery; Children and adolescents; Weight management

类别

资金

  1. Deanship of Scientific Research at King Saud University [RGP-VPP-186]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Despite the rising interest in bariatric surgery (BS) for children and adolescents, algorithms that incorporate BS in weight management (WM) programs are lacking. This study presents the results of the pediatric bariatric surgery clinical pathway employed in our institution. Starting March 2008, we enrolled obese children and adolescents in a standardized multidisciplinary obesity management program. Weight loss, complications, comorbidities, and growth results of those who eventually underwent BS were compared with a matched (age, gender, and height z-score) group of patients on non-surgical WM only. Up to July 2014, a total of 659 patients received care through the pathway, of whom 291 patients underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Mean age and pre-LSG body mass index (BMI) were 14.4 +/- 4.0 years (range; 5 to 21 years) and 48.3 +/- 10.0 (range; 31.8-109.6). Mean BMI change (% excess weight loss) at 1, 2, 3, and 4 postoperative years was -16.9 +/- 4.9 (56.6 +/- 22.6), -17.5 +/- 5.2 (69.8 +/- 22.5), -18.9 +/- 4.3 (75.1 +/- 26.8), and -19.6 +/- 6.4 (73.6 +/- 24.3), respectively. Postoperatively, complications occurred in 12 patients (4.1 %), with no leaks or mortality, and more than 90 % of comorbidities were resolved or improved without recurrence. Additionally, LSG patients exhibited significantly higher postoperative growth velocity compared to WM patients. Applying this standardized clinical pathway with its BS component results in safe and successful weight loss for pediatric patients, with low complication rates, maximum comorbidity resolution, and minimum morbidity.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据