Obesity surgery · 2018
Medium-Term Outcomes after Reversal of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Arman Gustavo Andrés, Himpens J, Bolckmans R, Van Compernolle D, Vilallonga R, Leman G
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) can be reversed into normal anatomy (NA) or into sleeve gastrectomy (NASG) to address undesired side effects. Concomitant hiatal hernia repair (HHR) may be required. Before reversal, some patients benefit from placement of a gastrostomy, mostly to predict the result of recreating the native anatomy.
METHODS: Retrospective study on mid-term effects of RYGB reversal to NA and NASG, including clinical and weight evolution, surgical complications, and incidence of gastro-esophageal reflux (GERD).
RESULTS: Undesired side effects leading to reversal included early dumping syndrome, hypoglycemia, malnutrition, severe diarrhea and excessive nausea and vomiting. Twenty-five participants to the study, 13 NA, 12 NASG, and 15 HHR. Mean follow-up time was 5.3 ± 2.3 years. Reversal corrected early dumping, malnutrition, diarrhea, and nausea/vomiting. For hypoglycemic syndrome, resolution rate was 6/8 (75%). NA caused significant weight regain (14.2 ± 13.7 kg, (p = .003)). NASG caused some weight loss (4.8 ± 15.7 kg (NS)). Gastrostomy placement gave complications at reversal in five of seven individuals. Eight patients suffered a severe complication, including leaks (one NA vs. three NASGs). Eight out of 14 (57.1%) patients who previously had never experienced GERD developed de novo GERD after reversal, despite HHR.
CONCLUSIONS: RYGB reversal is effective but pre-reversal gastrostomy and concomitant HHR may be aggravating factors for complications and development of de novo GERD, respectively.
METHODS: Retrospective study on mid-term effects of RYGB reversal to NA and NASG, including clinical and weight evolution, surgical complications, and incidence of gastro-esophageal reflux (GERD).
RESULTS: Undesired side effects leading to reversal included early dumping syndrome, hypoglycemia, malnutrition, severe diarrhea and excessive nausea and vomiting. Twenty-five participants to the study, 13 NA, 12 NASG, and 15 HHR. Mean follow-up time was 5.3 ± 2.3 years. Reversal corrected early dumping, malnutrition, diarrhea, and nausea/vomiting. For hypoglycemic syndrome, resolution rate was 6/8 (75%). NA caused significant weight regain (14.2 ± 13.7 kg, (p = .003)). NASG caused some weight loss (4.8 ± 15.7 kg (NS)). Gastrostomy placement gave complications at reversal in five of seven individuals. Eight patients suffered a severe complication, including leaks (one NA vs. three NASGs). Eight out of 14 (57.1%) patients who previously had never experienced GERD developed de novo GERD after reversal, despite HHR.
CONCLUSIONS: RYGB reversal is effective but pre-reversal gastrostomy and concomitant HHR may be aggravating factors for complications and development of de novo GERD, respectively.