استكشف المجموعة الواسعة من العناوين المتاحة.

15-year-old Ever takes the decision of having gastric surgery in order to lose weight and try and find happiness.

Background Excellent results have been reported with mini-gastric bypass. We adopted and modified the one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) concept. Herein is our approach, results, and long-term follow-up (FU). Methods Initial 1200 patients submitted to laparoscopic OAGB between 2002 and 2008 were analyzed after a 6–12-year FU. Mean age was 43 years (12–74) and body mass index (BMI) 46 kg/m 2 (33–86). There were 697 (58 %) without previous or simultaneous abdominal operations, 273 (23 %) with previous, 203 (17 %) with simultaneous, and 27 (2 %) performed as revisions. Results Mean operating time (min) was as follows: (a) primary procedure, 86 (45–180); (b) with other operations, 112 (95–230); and (c) revisions, 180 (130–240). Intraoperative complications led to 4 (0.3 %) conversions. Complications prompted operations in 16 (1.3 %) and were solved conservatively in 12 (1 %). Long-term complications occurred in 12 (1 %). There were 2 (0.16 %) deaths. Thirty-day and late readmission rates were 0.8 and 1 %. Cumulative FU was 87 and 70 % at 6 and 12 years. The highest mean percent excess weight loss was 88 % (at 2 years), then 77 and 70 %, 6 and 12 years postoperatively. Mean BMI (kg/m 2 ) decreased from 46 to 26.6 and was 28.5 and 29.9 at those time frames. Remission or improvement of comorbidities was achieved in most patients. The quality of life index was satisfactory in all parameters from 6 months onwards. Conclusions Laparoscopic OAGB is safe and effective. It reduces difficulty, operating time, and early and late complications of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Long-term weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, and degree of satisfaction are similar to results obtained with more aggressive and complex techniques. It is currently a robust and powerful alternative in bariatric surgery.

The One Anastomosis (Mini) Gastric Bypass is rapidly gaining acceptance. This review reports cumulative results of 12,807 procedures in obese patients with a mean age of 41.18 years and BMI of 46.6 kg/m 2 . The overall mortality was 0.10% and the leak rate was 0.96%. The follow-up duration ranged from 6 months to 12 years. A marginal ulceration rate of 2.7% and an anaemia rate of 7.0% were reported. Approximately 2.0% of patients reported postoperative gastro-oesophageal reflux and 0.71% developed malnutrition. Excess weight loss at 6, 12, 24 and 60 months was 60.68, 72.56, 78.2 and 76.6% respectively. Type 2 diabetes mellitus and hypertension resolved in 83.7 and 66.94% respectively. We conclude that there is now sufficient evidence to include MGB-OAGB as a mainstream bariatric procedure.

Background An increasing number of surgeons worldwide are now performing one anastomosis/mini gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB). Lack of a published consensus amongst experts may be hindering progress and affecting outcomes. This paper reports results from the first modified Delphi consensus building exercise on this procedure. Methods A committee of 16 recognised opinion-makers in bariatric surgery with special interest in OAGB/MGB was constituted. The committee invited 101 OAGB/MGB experts from 39 countries to vote on 55 statements in areas of controversy or variation associated with this procedure. An agreement amongst ≥ 70.0% of the experts was considered to indicate a consensus. Results A consensus was achieved for 48 of the 55 proposed statements after two rounds of voting. There was no consensus for seven statements. Remarkably, 100.0% of the experts felt that OAGB/MGB was an “acceptable mainstream surgical option” and 96.0% felt that it could no longer be regarded as a new or experimental procedure. Approximately 96.0 and 91.0% of the experts felt that OAGB/MGB did not increase the risk of gastric and oesophageal cancers, respectively. Approximately 94.0% of the experts felt that the construction of the gastric pouch should start in the horizontal portion of the lesser curvature. There was a consensus of 82, 84, and 85% for routinely supplementing iron, vitamin B 12 , and vitamin D, respectively. Conclusion OAGB/MGB experts achieved consensus on a number of aspects concerning this procedure but several areas of disagreements persist emphasising the need for more studies in the future.

Mini gastric bypass is being explored by many bariatric surgeons as a standalone bariatric procedure. Several surgeons from different parts of the world have now published their extensive experience with this procedure. It appears to be an effective bariatric procedure with acceptable weight loss, co-morbidity resolution, and complication rates in the short and medium term. Its proponents claim that it is safer and easier than the gold standard Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. However, concerns with regard to symptomatic gastric or oesophageal biliary reflux requiring revisional surgery and long-term risk of gastric and oesophageal cancers persist. This paper reviews the published experience to date with this procedure and examines the surrounding controversy.

Introduction We aim to review the available literature on morbidly obese patients treated with one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in order to compare the clinical outcomes of the two methods. Methods A literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Results Sixteen studies were included in the qualitative analysis, and 11 studies were included in the quantitative analysis (meta-analysis), incorporating 12,445 patients. OAGB was associated with shorter mean operative time. The length of hospital stay was comparable between the two procedures. The incidence of leaks, marginal ulcer, dumping, bowel obstruction, revisions, and mortality was similar between the two approaches. The incidence of malnutrition was increased in patients treated with OAGB, while the incidence of internal hernia and bowel obstruction was greater in the RYGB group. In addition, the OAGB was associated with greater % excess weight loss (%EWL) at 1, 2, and 5 years postoperatively. The rate of diabetes remission was greater in the OAGB group. Nonetheless, the rate of hypertension and dyslipidemia remission was similar between OAGB and RYGB. Conclusion The present meta-analysis is the best currently available evidence on the topic and demonstrates the superiority of OAGB compared with RYGB, in terms of weight loss and diabetes remission. However, the OAGB was associated with a significantly higher incidence of malnutrition, thus indicating the significant malabsorptive traits of this operation.

Background Despite published experience with thousands of patients, the uptake of One Anastomosis/Mini Gastric Bypass (OAGB/MGB) has been less than enthusiastic and many surgeons still harbour objections to this procedure. The purpose of this study was to understand these objections scientifically. Methods Bariatric surgeons from around the world were invited to participate in a questionnaire-based survey on SurveyMonkey®. Surgeons already performing this procedure were excluded. Results Four hundred seventeen bariatric surgeons (from 42 countries) not currently performing OAGB/MGB took the survey. There were 211/414 (50.97%) and 188/414 (45.41%) respondents who expressed concerns that it will lead to an increased risk of gastric and oesophageal cancers respectively. A total of 62/416 (14.9%) and 201/413 ( n  = 48.6%) surgeons respectively felt that OAGB/MGB was associated with a higher early (30-day) and late complication rate compared to the RYGB. Moreover, 7.8% ( n  = 32/411) and 16.26% ( n  = 67/412) of the respondents were concerned that OAGB/MGB carried a higher early (30-day) and late mortality, respectively, in comparison with the RYGB. There were 79/410 (19.27%) and 88/413 (21.3%) respondents who were concerned that OAGB/MGB was not an effective procedure for weight loss and co-morbidity resolution, respectively. A total of 258/411 (62.77%) respondents reported that OAGB/MGB was not approved by their national society as a mainstream bariatric procedure; 51.0% of these surgeons would start performing this procedure if it was. Conclusions Surgeons not performing OAGB/MGB cite a number of concerns for not performing this operation. This survey is the first scientific attempt to understand these objections scientifically.

Background A short-term randomized controlled trial shows that the one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a safe and effective alternative to the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Objective The aim of this study is to evaluate the OAGB at our University Hospital between 2006 and 2013. Patients One thousand patients have undergone an OAGB. Data were collected on all consecutive patients. The mean follow-up period was 31 months (SD, 26.3; range, 12–82.9), and complete follow-up was available in 126 of 175 patients (72 %) at 5 years after surgery. Results Mortality rate was 0.2 %. Overall morbidity was 5.5 %; 34 required reoperations: i.e., 6 leaks, 5 obstructions, 5 incisional hernias, 7 biliary refluxes, 2 perforated ulcers, 2 bleeds, 2 abscesses, and 1 anastomotic stricture. Four patients were reoperated for weight regain. Overall rate of marginal ulcers was 2 % ( n  = 20), all in heavy smokers. Conversion from an OAGB to a RYGB was required in nine cases (0.9 %): seven for intractable biliary reflux, two for a marginal ulcer. At 5 years, percent excess body mass index loss was 71.6 ± 27 %. One hundred patients with type-2 diabetes, with a mean preoperative HbA1C of 7.7 ± 1.9 %, were followed for >2 years; the total resolution rate was 85.7 %. Conclusion This study confirms that the OAGB is an effective procedure for morbid obesity with comparable outcomes to RYGB; in addition, it seems to be safer with lower morbidity. Its technical simplicity represents a real advantage and makes it an option that should be considered by all bariatric surgeons.

Background The first global survey of bariatric/metabolic surgery based on data from the nations or national groupings of the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Diseases (IFSO) was published in 1998, followed by reports in 2003, 2009, 2011, and 2012. In this survey, we report a global overview of worldwide bariatric surgery in 2013. Materials and Methods A questionnaire evaluating the number and the type of bariatric procedure performed in 2013 was emailed to all members of bariatric societies belonging to IFSO. Trend analyses from 2003 to 2013 were also performed. Results There were 49/54 (90.7 %) responders; 37 of the 49 with national registries. The total number of bariatric procedures performed worldwide in 2013 was 468,609, 95.7 % carried out laparoscopically. The highest number ( n  = 154,276) was from the USA/Canada region. The most commonly performed procedure in the world was Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), 45 %; followed by sleeve gastrectomy (SG), 37 %; and adjustable gastric banding (AGB), 10 %. Most significant were the rise in prevalence of SG from 0 to 37 % of the world total from 2003 to 2013, and the fall in AGB of 68 % from its peak in 2008 to 2013. Conclusions SG is currently the most frequently performed procedure in the USA/Canada and in the Asia/Pacific regions, and second to RYGB in the Europe and Latin/South America regions. The accuracy of the IFSO-based world survey of procedures would be enhanced if each nation or national group would create a national registry.

Background The epidemic of obesity is engulfing developed as well as developing countries like India. We present our 7-year experience with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and mini-gastric bypass (MGB) to determine an effective and safe bariatric and metabolic procedure. Methods The study is an analysis of a prospectively collected bariatric database of 473 MGBs, 339 LSGs, and 295 RYGBs. Results Mortality rate was 2.1 % in LSG, 0.3 % in RYGB, and 0 % in MGB. Leaks were highest in LSG (1.5 %), followed by RYGB (0.3 %), and zero in MGB. Bile reflux was seen in <1 % in the MGB series. Persistent vomiting was seen only in LSG. Weight regain was 14.2 % in LSG, 8.5 % in RYGB, but 0 % in MGB. Hypoalbuminemia was minimal in LSG, 2.0 % in RYGB, and 13.1 % in MGB (in earlier patients where bypass was >250 cm). The following resolution of comorbidities: dyslipidemia, type 2 diabetes (T2D), hypertension, and percent excess weight loss (%EWL) was maximum in MGB. GERD was maximum in LSG (9.8 %), followed by RYGB (1.7 %), and minimal in MGB (0.6 %). Conclusions RYGB and MGB act on the principle of restriction and malabsorption, but MGB superseded RYGB in its technical ease, efficacy, revisibility, and reversibility. Mortality was zero in MGB. %EWL and resolution of comorbidities were highly significant in MGB. Based on this audit, we suggest that MGB is the effective and safe procedure for patients who are compliant in taking their supplements. LSG may be done in non-compliant patients and those ready to accept weight regain.