Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastric bypass: A retrospective cohort study
Additional Document Info
There are many reports on short-term outcomes following sleeve gastrectomy, which demonstrate that it has comparable efficacy to gastric bypass. However, there are very few long-term comparative reports. This study compared the outcomes from laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic gastric bypass (LGB) in a cohort of patients who had surgery in 2011 with a six-year follow up.
Materials and methods
Data on patients who had either LSG or LGB at a single centre in Mohak Bariatric and Robotic Surgery Centre, Indore, M.P. India in 2011 were identified from a database of routinely collected data. This retrospective cohort was analysed for weight loss, resolution of comorbidities and nutritional status over six years. Patients who had revision operations or for whom six-year follow-up data were not available were excluded from the analysis.
154 patients had LGB and 152 had LSG. The six-year follow up rate was 61.7% (n = 95) and 64.5% (n = 98) respectively for LGB and LSG. Percentage of excess bodyweight loss (%EWL) peaked at approximately 70% after two years in the LSG group and after three years in the LGB group. However, after six years %EWL was 61% for LGB and 50% for LSG (p = 0.001). Resolution of type-2 diabetes was more common in the LGB group compared to the LSG group (79% vs 62%, p = 0.126). Resolution of hypertension and dyslipidaemia was similar in both groups at approximately half of patients in each group for each condition. Nutrient deficiencies were found in both groups but were generally more pronounced in the LGB group.
LGB is a better operation for weight loss, weight loss maintenance, and resolution of type-2 diabetes than LSG. This is at the expense of an increased incidence of nutrient deficiencies. LSG appears to have greater treatment failure by six years follow up and this should be further investigated.