TY - JOUR
T1 - Revisional bariatric surgery at a single institution
AU - Fronza, Jeffrey Scott
AU - Prystowsky, Jay B.
AU - Hungness, Eric S.
AU - Nagle, Alexander P.
PY - 2010/11
Y1 - 2010/11
N2 - Background: Bariatric surgery, although safe, can have long-term complications that require revision. Our series illustrates the spectrum of primary procedures, indications for surgery, and strategies for revision. Methods: The study was a retrospective chart review. Sixty-three patients were identified. Of specific interest were complications and percentage of excess weight loss (EWL) during the follow-up period. Results: Eighteen patients had a previous vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG), 26 had a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), 18 had a laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB), and 1 had a jejunal-ileal bypass. All VBG patients were revised to RYGB. Seventeen RYGB patients were revised with RYGB. Eight LAGB patients were revised with RYGB. Eight RYGB patients had placement of LAGB. Two LAGB patients were revised with LAGB because of a slipped band. Eight LAGB patients had the band removed. The morbidity rate was 30% with a major morbidity rate of 11%. There were 2 leaks, neither required reoperation. Other major complications included 3 pneumonias, 2 reoperations, and 2 intra-abdominal abscesses. There were no mortalities. In the 15 patients who had conversion of VBG to RYGB, the mean EWL was 50%, with 60% of patients achieving more than 50% EWL. In the 10 patients who had revision of their RYGB, the mean EWL was 51%, with 60% of patients achieving more than 50%. In the 6 patients who had revision of LAGB to RYGB, the mean EWL was 39%, with 33% of patients achieving more than 50% EWL. In the 8 patients who had LAGB after RYGB the mean EWL was -2%, with 0% of patients achieving more than 50%. Conclusions: Revisional surgery is effective, although complication rates are higher than primary bariatric surgery. The type of initial and revisional procedure affects EWL.
AB - Background: Bariatric surgery, although safe, can have long-term complications that require revision. Our series illustrates the spectrum of primary procedures, indications for surgery, and strategies for revision. Methods: The study was a retrospective chart review. Sixty-three patients were identified. Of specific interest were complications and percentage of excess weight loss (EWL) during the follow-up period. Results: Eighteen patients had a previous vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG), 26 had a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), 18 had a laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB), and 1 had a jejunal-ileal bypass. All VBG patients were revised to RYGB. Seventeen RYGB patients were revised with RYGB. Eight LAGB patients were revised with RYGB. Eight RYGB patients had placement of LAGB. Two LAGB patients were revised with LAGB because of a slipped band. Eight LAGB patients had the band removed. The morbidity rate was 30% with a major morbidity rate of 11%. There were 2 leaks, neither required reoperation. Other major complications included 3 pneumonias, 2 reoperations, and 2 intra-abdominal abscesses. There were no mortalities. In the 15 patients who had conversion of VBG to RYGB, the mean EWL was 50%, with 60% of patients achieving more than 50% EWL. In the 10 patients who had revision of their RYGB, the mean EWL was 51%, with 60% of patients achieving more than 50%. In the 6 patients who had revision of LAGB to RYGB, the mean EWL was 39%, with 33% of patients achieving more than 50% EWL. In the 8 patients who had LAGB after RYGB the mean EWL was -2%, with 0% of patients achieving more than 50%. Conclusions: Revisional surgery is effective, although complication rates are higher than primary bariatric surgery. The type of initial and revisional procedure affects EWL.
KW - Bariatric surgery
KW - Revisional bariatric surgery
KW - Roux-en-Y gastric bypass
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78149340568&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78149340568&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.07.012
DO - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2010.07.012
M3 - Article
C2 - 21056147
AN - SCOPUS:78149340568
SN - 0002-9610
VL - 200
SP - 651
EP - 654
JO - American Journal of Surgery
JF - American Journal of Surgery
IS - 5
ER -