ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness results of sleeve gastrectomy as a bariatric technique. METHODS: Observational follow-up study of a cohort of patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy in our center between 2008 and 2017. A total of 223 patients were included: 166 as a primary technique (group 1) and 57 as a hypothetical first stage (group 2). RESULTS: In group 1, the postoperative morbidity is 12.6%, with a fistula rate of 4.2%; 5.4% required reoperation and mortality was 0.6%. In group 2, postoperative morbidity is 14%, with a fistula rate of 5.3%; 10.5% required reoperation and mortality was 5.3%. In group 1, 79.6% and 62.5% of patients at 2 and 5 years respectively managed to achieve a % EBMIL > 50%. In group 2, the second stage was completed only in 8 patients (14.0%). Of the patients who did not complete the second stage, 32.2% and 5.9% achieved a % EEBMIL > 100% at 2 and 5 years. Analyzing those who completed the second stage, the mean EEBMIL% was 90.5% and 93.4% at 2 and 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Sleeve gastrectomy is a safe technique in patients with BMI < 45 and effective in terms of weight loss in the short-medium term. In patients with BMI > 55, a preoperative optimization aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality is necessary, as well as adequately planning the second stage, without which it is clearly insufficient.
Subject(s)
Bariatric Surgery , Gastric Bypass , Obesity, Morbid , Bariatric Surgery/adverse effects , Follow-Up Studies , Gastrectomy/adverse effects , Humans , Obesity, Morbid/surgeryABSTRACT
Introducción: El objetivo de este trabajo es evaluar los resultados de seguridad y efectividad de la gastrectomía vertical como técnica bariátrica. Métodos: Estudio observacional de seguimiento de una cohorte de pacientes intervenidos de gastrectomía vertical en nuestro centro entre los años 2008 y 2017. Se incluyen en total de 223 pacientes: 166 como técnica primaria (grupo 1) y 57 como teórico primer tiempo (grupo 2). Resultados: En el grupo 1, la morbilidad postoperatoria es del 12,6%, siendo la tasa de fístula del 4,2%; un 5,4% precisó reintervención quirúrgica, y la mortalidad es del 0,6%. En el grupo 2, la morbilidad postoperatoria es del 14%, con una tasa de fístula del 5,3%; un 10,5% precisó reintervención quirúrgica y la mortalidad es del 5,3%. En el grupo 1, un 79,6 y un 62,5% de los pacientes a los 2 y 5 años, respectivamente, consiguen alcanzar un %EIMCP>50%. En el grupo 2, el segundo tiempo se completó únicamente en 8 pacientes (14,0%). De los pacientes que no completaron el segundo tiempo, el 32,2 y el 5,9% alcanzan un %EIMCPE>100% a 2 y 5 años. Analizando los pacientes que completaron el segundo tiempo, el %EIMCPE medio fue de 90,5 y 93,4% a los 2 y 5 años del mismo. Conclusiones: La gastrectomía vertical es una técnica segura en pacientes con IMC<45 y efectiva en cuanto a la pérdida de peso a corto-medio plazo. En pacientes con IMC>55 es necesario una optimización preoperatoria encaminada a reducir la morbimortalidad, así como planificar adecuadamente el segundo tiempo, sin el cual resulta claramente insuficiente.Palabras clave:ObesidadCirugía bariátricaGastrectomía verticalResultados de seguridad y efectividadEstándares de calidad (AU)
Introduction: The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness results of sleeve gastrectomy as a bariatric technique. Methods: Observational follow-up study of a cohort of patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy in our center between 2008 and 2017. A total of 223 patients were included: 166 as a primary technique (group 1) and 57 as a hypothetical first stage (group 2). Results: In group 1, the postoperative morbidity is 12.6%, with a fistula rate of 4.2%; 5.4% required reoperation and mortality was 0.6%. In group 2, postoperative morbidity is 14%, with a fistula rate of 5.3%; 10.5% required reoperation and mortality was 5.3%. In group 1, 79.6% and 62.5% of patients at 2 and 5 years respectively managed to achieve a % EBMIL>50%. In group 2, the second stage was completed only in 8 patients (14.0%). Of the patients who did not complete the second stage, 32.2% and 5.9% achieved a % EEBMIL>100% at 2 and 5 years. Analyzing those who completed the second stage, the mean EEBMIL% was 90.5% and 93.4% at 2 and 5 years. Conclusions: Sleeve gastrectomy is a safe technique in patients with BMI<45 and effective in terms of weight loss in the short-medium term. In patients with BMI>55, a preoperative optimization aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality is necessary, as well as adequately planning the second stage, without which it is clearly insufficient (AU)
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adult , Middle Aged , Bariatric Surgery/methods , Gastrectomy/methods , Obesity/surgery , Treatment Outcome , Cohort Studies , Body Mass Index , ComorbidityABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness results of sleeve gastrectomy as a bariatric technique. METHODS: Observational follow-up study of a cohort of patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy in our center between 2008 and 2017. A total of 223 patients were included: 166 as a primary technique (group 1) and 57 as a hypothetical first stage (group 2). RESULTS: In group 1, the postoperative morbidity is 12.6%, with a fistula rate of 4.2%; 5.4% required reoperation and mortality was 0.6%. In group 2, postoperative morbidity is 14%, with a fistula rate of 5.3%; 10.5% required reoperation and mortality was 5.3%. In group 1, 79.6% and 62.5% of patients at 2 and 5 years respectively managed to achieve a % EBMIL>50%. In group 2, the second stage was completed only in 8 patients (14.0%). Of the patients who did not complete the second stage, 32.2% and 5.9% achieved a % EEBMIL>100% at 2 and 5 years. Analyzing those who completed the second stage, the mean EEBMIL% was 90.5% and 93.4% at 2 and 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Sleeve gastrectomy is a safe technique in patients with BMI<45 and effective in terms of weight loss in the short-medium term. In patients with BMI>55, a preoperative optimization aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality is necessary, as well as adequately planning the second stage, without which it is clearly insufficient.
