TY - JOUR
T1 - Long-Term Matched Comparison of Adjustable Gastric Banding Versus Sleeve Gastrectomy
T2 - Weight Loss, Quality of Life, Hospital Resource Use and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures
AU - Johari, Yazmin
AU - Ooi, Geraldine
AU - Burton, Paul
AU - Laurie, Cheryl
AU - Dwivedi, Shourye
AU - Qiu, YunFei
AU - Chen, Richard
AU - Loh, Damien
AU - Nottle, Peter
AU - Brown, Wendy
PY - 2020/1/1
Y1 - 2020/1/1
N2 - Background: Comparisons of bariatric procedures across a range of outcomes are required to better inform selection of procedures and optimally allocate health care resources. Aims: To determine differences in outcomes between laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) across nine outcome domains. Methods: Matched primary LSG or LAGB across age, weight and surgery date were recruited. Data were collected from a prospective database and patient-completed questionnaires. Results: Patients (n = 520) were well-matched (LAGB vs. LSG; age 41.8 ± 11.2 vs. 42.7 ± 11.7 years, p = 0.37; male 32.4% vs. 30.2%, p = 0.57; baseline weight 131.2 ± 30.5 vs. 131.0 ± 31.1 kg, p = 0.94). Follow-up rate was 95% at a mean of 4.8 years. LAGB attended more follow-up visits (21 vs. 13, p < 0.05). Mean total body weight loss was 27.7 ± 11.7% vs. 19.4 ± 11.1% (LSG vs. LAGB, p < 0.001). LAGB had more complications (23.8% vs. 10.8%, p < 0.001), re-operations (89 vs. 13, p < 0.001) and readmissions (87 vs. 32, p < 0.001). However, early post-operative complications were higher post-LSG (2.6 vs. 9.2%, p = 0.007). Length of stay (LOS) was higher post-LSG compared with LAGB (5.2 ± 10.9 vs. 1.5 ± 2.2 days, p < 0.001). LSG patients reported better quality of life (SF-36 physical component score 54.7 ± 7.9 vs. 47.7 ± 10.8, p = 0.002) and satisfaction (9.2 ± 1.9 vs. 8.4 ± 1.6, p = 0.001) and less frequent regurgitation (1.2 ± 1.2 vs. 0.7 ± − 1.1, p = 0.032) and dysphagia (2.0 ± 1.3 vs. 1.3 ± 1.6, p = 0.007). Conclusion: This study showed high long-term follow-up rates in a large cohort of well-matched patients. Weight loss was greater with LSG. LAGB reported more re-operations and less satisfaction with the outcome. LOS was driven by patients with complications. This study has reinforced the need for comprehensive measurement of outcomes in bariatric surgery.
AB - Background: Comparisons of bariatric procedures across a range of outcomes are required to better inform selection of procedures and optimally allocate health care resources. Aims: To determine differences in outcomes between laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) across nine outcome domains. Methods: Matched primary LSG or LAGB across age, weight and surgery date were recruited. Data were collected from a prospective database and patient-completed questionnaires. Results: Patients (n = 520) were well-matched (LAGB vs. LSG; age 41.8 ± 11.2 vs. 42.7 ± 11.7 years, p = 0.37; male 32.4% vs. 30.2%, p = 0.57; baseline weight 131.2 ± 30.5 vs. 131.0 ± 31.1 kg, p = 0.94). Follow-up rate was 95% at a mean of 4.8 years. LAGB attended more follow-up visits (21 vs. 13, p < 0.05). Mean total body weight loss was 27.7 ± 11.7% vs. 19.4 ± 11.1% (LSG vs. LAGB, p < 0.001). LAGB had more complications (23.8% vs. 10.8%, p < 0.001), re-operations (89 vs. 13, p < 0.001) and readmissions (87 vs. 32, p < 0.001). However, early post-operative complications were higher post-LSG (2.6 vs. 9.2%, p = 0.007). Length of stay (LOS) was higher post-LSG compared with LAGB (5.2 ± 10.9 vs. 1.5 ± 2.2 days, p < 0.001). LSG patients reported better quality of life (SF-36 physical component score 54.7 ± 7.9 vs. 47.7 ± 10.8, p = 0.002) and satisfaction (9.2 ± 1.9 vs. 8.4 ± 1.6, p = 0.001) and less frequent regurgitation (1.2 ± 1.2 vs. 0.7 ± − 1.1, p = 0.032) and dysphagia (2.0 ± 1.3 vs. 1.3 ± 1.6, p = 0.007). Conclusion: This study showed high long-term follow-up rates in a large cohort of well-matched patients. Weight loss was greater with LSG. LAGB reported more re-operations and less satisfaction with the outcome. LOS was driven by patients with complications. This study has reinforced the need for comprehensive measurement of outcomes in bariatric surgery.
KW - Bariatric
KW - Laparoscopic gastric band
KW - Outcome
KW - Public
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073944318&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11695-019-04168-w
DO - 10.1007/s11695-019-04168-w
M3 - Article
C2 - 31502182
AN - SCOPUS:85073944318
SN - 0960-8923
VL - 30
SP - 214
EP - 223
JO - Obesity Surgery
JF - Obesity Surgery
IS - 1
ER -
