This is the Scientific Surgery Archive, which contains all randomized clinical trials in surgery that have been identified by searching the top 50 English language medical journal issues since January 1998. Compiled by Jonothan J. Earnshaw, former Editor-in-Chief, BJS
Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic Roux‐en‐Y gastric bypass versus laparoscopic vertical banded gastroplasty for obesity. BJS 2005; 92: 557-562.
Published: 4th April 2005
Authors: T. Olbers, M. Fagevik‐Olsén, A. Maleckas, H. Lönroth
Background
Laparoscopic techniques have been developed for performing Roux‐en‐$fontss=cmss10 scaled 1000 hbox{Y}$ gastric bypass (LRYGBP) and vertical banded gastroplasty (LVBG) in patients with morbid obesity. It is not certain, however, which is the better technique in non‐superobese patients (body mass index less than 50 kg/m2).
Method
Eighty‐three patients (LRYGBP 37, LVBG 46) were assessed in a randomized clinical trial. Perioperative complications were recorded together with preoperative and postoperative respiratory function and mobilization rate. Patients were monitored for 2 years after operation with regard to weight change and the need for remedial surgery.
Results
There were no conversions to open surgery. The mean operating time was longer for LRYGBP than LVBG (138 versus 105 min). Five early reoperations were performed after LRYGBP (three for haemorrhage, one for ileus and one suspected leak) and one after LVBG (suspected leak). There were no differences in postoperative respiratory function or mobilization. Weight reduction was greater after LRYGBP (excess weight loss 78·3 versus 62·9 per cent 1 year after surgery, P = 0·009; 84·4 versus 59·8 per cent at 2 years, P < 0·001). Remedial surgical intervention was required in eight patients after LVBG (conversion to Roux‐en‐$fontss=cmss10 scaled 1000 hbox{Y}$ gastric bypass) and none after LRYGBP.
Conclusion
LRYGBP and LVBG were comparable in terms of operative safety and postoperative recovery, but weight reduction was better after LRYGBP. Copyright © 2005 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Full text