4.4 Article

Long-Term Evaluation of Biliary Reflux on Esogastric Mucosae after One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass and Esojejunostomy in Rats

期刊

OBESITY SURGERY
卷 30, 期 7, 页码 2598-2605

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-020-04521-4

关键词

Mini gastric bypass; One anastomosis gastric bypass; Biliary reflux; Cancer; Metaplasia; Morbid obesity; Bariatric surgery

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background One-anastomosis gastric bypass/mini-gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB) remains controversial because it may cause chronic biliary reflux (BR). The risk of developing esogastric cancer due to BR after OAGB/MGB is based on the results of experimental rat studies using esojejunostomy (EJ). The aim of this study was to analyze the potential long-term consequences of BR on the esogastric mucosae in OAGB/MGB-operated rats and to compare these results to those from the use of EJ. Methods Wistar rats received OAGB/MGB (n = 16), EJ (n = 16), and sham (n = 8) operations. Mortality and weight changes were evaluated throughout the experiment. BR was measured using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Rats received follow-ups for 30 weeks. A double-blinded histological analysis was performed in the esogastric segments. Results BR was diagnosed in OAGB/MGB and EJ rats using the MRI technique; no BR occurred in the sham group. After a 30-week follow-up, no incidences of dysplasia or cancer were observed in the three groups. Additionally, esophageal intestinal metaplasia and mucosal ulcerations were observed in 41.7% and 50% of EJ rats, respectively, and no incidences of these conditions were observed in OAGB/MGB and sham rats. The incidence of esophagitis was significantly higher and more severe in the EJ group compared to those in the OAGB/MGB and sham groups (EJ = 100%, OAGB/MGB = 16.7%, sham = 8.3%;p < 0.001). Conclusions After a 30-week follow-up period, OAGB/MGB rats did not develop any precancerous or cancerous lesions when more than 40% of EJ rats had intestinal metaplasia.

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