4.4 Article

Moderating the Enthusiasm of Sleeve Gastrectomy: Up to Fifty Percent of Reflux Symptoms After Ten Years in a Consecutive Series of One Hundred Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomies

期刊

OBESITY SURGERY
卷 27, 期 7, 页码 1797-1803

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-017-2567-z

关键词

Sleeve gastrectomy; Laparoscopy; Morbid obesity; Complication; Gastroesophageal reflux disease; Proton-pump inhibitor; Secondary gastric bypass

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become a popular one-stage bariatric procedure with a proven efficacy on weight loss. However, the relationship between LSG and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remains a subject of debate. The objective is to determine the long-term effect of LSG on weight loss and reflux disease. A retrospective analysis of 100 consecutive patients who underwent an LSG between January 2005 and March 2009 was performed. The effect of LSG on weight evolution and the relationship between preoperative and postoperative GERD symptoms and PPI dependency was analyzed. A mean follow-up of 8.48 years (range 6.1-10.3) was achieved. We observed a long-term % excess weight loss (%EWL) of 60%. A significant increase in reflux symptoms and use of PPIs was seen. Seventeen percent suffered from reflux disease preoperatively versus 50% at the end of the postoperative follow-up (RR = 2.5882, 95% CI [1.6161-4.1452], p value = 0.0001). The chance of developing de novo reflux after LSG was 47.8% (32/67). Reflux disease was present in 7 of the 26 patients who underwent a secondary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). In four of these seven patients, reflux disease disappeared completely after the secondary RYGB (57.1%). A satisfactory long-term effect on weight loss was achieved. However, a significant increase in GERD and PPI dependency after LSG was noted. New onset GERD was seen in more than 40% of the study population. Conversion to RYGB is a good option in patients with refractory reflux disease after LSG.

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