4.7 Article

Sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass are equally effective in correcting insulin resistance

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY
卷 11, 期 4, 页码 309-313

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2013.02.007

关键词

Diabetes mellitus; HOMA; Insulin resistance; Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy; Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) are associated with glucose metabolism improvement although data on insulin resistance remission rates after these procedures are lacking. Aims: Primary aim was to compare insulin resistance remission rates achieved after LRYGB and LSG, using population-specific HOMA-IR cut-off points. Secondary objectives were to analyze factors associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) complete remission according to the new American Diabetes Association criteria and to examine changes in HOMA-B during follow-up. Methods: Non-randomized, prospective cohort study of patients undergoing LRYGB or LSG with a minimal follow-up of 24 months. Patients on insulin therapy were excluded. Results: At baseline, 56 (48.7%) of the 115 LRYGB group and 48 (61.5%) of the 78 LSG group had insulin resistance, and 29 (25.2%) and 20 (25.6%) T2DM, respectively. No differences were detected in insulin resistance remission rate (92.9% LRYGB and 87.5% LSG, p = 0.355) nor in T2DM complete remission at 2 years (62.1 vs 60% respectively, p = 0.992). Factors independently associated with T2DM complete remission were diabetes treatment and a greater decrease in 3-month HOMA-IR index. The HOMA-B index showed a progressive decline during follow-up. Conclusion: Both surgical techniques are equally effective in achieving insulin resistance normalization in the majority of severely obese patients. Three-month HOMA-IR reduction after surgery was the main predictor of T2DM complete remission. (C) 2013 Surgical Associates Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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