4.4 Article

Long-Term Results of Primary Vertical Banded Gastroplasty

期刊

OBESITY SURGERY
卷 25, 期 8, 页码 1425-1430

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-014-1543-0

关键词

Vertical banded gastroplasty; Long-term results; Retrospective analysis; Long-term complications; Excess weight loss; Evolution of comorbidities; Failure rate

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) used to be a common restrictive bariatric procedure but has been abandoned by many due to a high failure rate, a high incidence of long-term complications, and the newer adjustable gastric band (AGB) and sleeve. However, potential favorable long-term results and the upcoming banded gastric bypass, with a similar mechanical outlet restriction and control of the pouch size, renewed our interest in the VBG. Therefore, we investigated the long-term outcome of primary VBG at the Catharina Hospital in the Netherlands. Patients that underwent a primary VBG between 1998 and 2008 were included. Patients' characteristics, operative details, evolution on weight and comorbidities, complications, and outcome of revisions were reviewed. A total of 392 patients (80 % female) were reviewed with a mean age of 40 +/- 9 years and body mass index of 44 +/- 5 kg/m(2). Mean follow-up after VBG was 66 +/- 50 months and showed a mean excess weight loss (EWL) of 53 +/- 27 % and comorbidity reduction of 54 %. One hundred fifty-two patients (39 %) out of 227 patients (58 %) with long-term complaints underwent revisional surgery. Main reasons for revision were weight regain and vomiting/food intolerance. Analysis before revision showed an outlet dilatation (17 %), pouch dilatation (16 %), and outlet stenosis (10 %). After revision, an additional EWL of 23 % and 33 % further reduction in comorbidities was seen. Primary VBG has an acceptable EWL of 53 % and 55 % of comorbidities were improved. However, the high complication rate, often necessitating revision, underlines the limits of this procedure.

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