4.4 Article

Factors determining conversion from laparoscopic to open Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

期刊

OBESITY SURGERY
卷 14, 期 9, 页码 1193-1197

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1381/0960892042386887

关键词

morbid obesity; gastric bypass; conversion; laparoscopy

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Conversion from laparoscopic to open Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) is expensive and time-consuming. Methods: Data from our first 1,000 laparoscopic RYGBP was, entered into a database (Minnesota Database-Bariatric, Exemplo Medical). All patients met NIH criteria for bariatric surgery. Results: 41 (4.1%) of 1,000 consecutive lapRYGBPs were converted to open. Patients requiring conversion to open surgery, analyzed for predictors, revealed: 1) BMI waist size, and weight all were significantly greater in patients converted to open bypass; 2) Gender: 9 of 109 males (8.3%) and 32 of 891 females (3.6%) were converted (Fischer's exact test, P = 4.035); 3) Average age of patients converted was 44.9 compared to 41.3 in the lap group (P = 0.02); 4) Conversion was required for 12 large livers (1 palpable preop, 7 had diabetes, 7 had NASH or steatosis); 5) 10 conversions for mechanical/technical reasons -6 for inability to distend abdominal wall and/or manipulate instruments due to thickness of wall, and 2 due to loss of instruments in abdomen; 6) 9 required conversion for adhesions (2 from previous cholecystectomies with biliary leaks, and 1 from previous transverse colectomy; 7) 4 visceral injuries. required conversion (2 stomach, 1 small bowel, 1 esophagus); 8) 3 hemorrhages from spleen with blood loss over 1300 ml required conversion (1 spleen removed, 6 minor not requiring open conversion); 9) 3 conversions were for anomaly/disease (1 malrotation of colon, 1 ovarian teratoma, and 1 intrathoracic stomach). Conclusion: Steatohepatitis, diabetes mellitus, adhesions from various causes, previous bile leaks, large waist size, BMI, and weight are predictors for conversion to open surgery.

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