4.4 Article

Long-term effects of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus roux-en-Y gastric bypass for the treatment of Chinese type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with body mass index 28-35 kg/m2

期刊

BMC SURGERY
卷 15, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12893-015-0074-5

关键词

Bariatric surgery; Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; Sleeve gastrectomy; Type 2 diabetes; Mild obesity

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: To compare long term effects of two bariatric procedures for Chinese type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients with a body mass index (BMI) of 28-35 kg/m(2). Methods: Sixty four T2DM patients with Glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) >= 7.0 % were randomly assigned to receive laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) procedure. Weight, percentage of excess weight loss (% EWL), BMI, waist circumference, HbA1c, fasting blood glucose (FBG), and C-peptide were measured. Serum lipid levels were also measured during three-year postoperative follow-up visits. Results: Fifty five patients completed the 36-month follow-up. Both groups had similar baseline anthropometric and biochemical measures. At the end point, 22 patients (78.6 %) in SG group and 23 patients (85.2 %) in RYGB group achieved complete remission of diabetes mellitus with HbA1c < 6.0 % (P = 0.525) and without taking diabetic medications, and 25 patients in each group (89.3 % vs. 92.6 %) gained successful treatment of diabetes with HbA1c <= 6.5 % (P = 0.100). Change in HbA1c, FBG and C peptide were comparable in the two groups. The RYGB group had significantly greater weight loss than the SG group [percentage of total weight loss (% TWL) of 31.0 % vs. 27.1 % (P = 0.049), % EWL of 92.3 % vs. 81.9 % (P = 0.003), and change in BMI of 11.0 vs. 9.1 kg/m(2) (P = 0.017), respectively]. Serum lipids in each group were also greatly improved. Conclusion: In this three-year study, SG had similar positive effects on diabetes and dyslipidemia compared to RYGB in Chinese T2DM patients with BMI of 28-35 kg/m(2). Longer term follow-ups and larger sample studies are needed to confirm these outcomes, however.

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