Advertisement

Obesity Surgery

, Volume 29, Issue 6, pp 1976–1981 | Cite as

Laparoscopic Gastroileal Bypass with Single Anastomosis: Analysis of the First 1512 Patients

  • Joaquín Resa BienzobasEmail author
  • Javier Lagos Lizan
  • Ana Isabel Pérez Zapata
  • Mónica Valero Sabater
  • Juan Ferrando Vela
  • Mariano Sanjuan Casamayor
New Concept
  • 152 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Biliopancreatic diversion is perceived as the most effective operation for long-term treatment of massive obesity. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that gastroileal bypass with single anastomosis is a safe and feasible procedure with similar results to the classic derivation, but reducing surgical time without decreasing the efficacy.

Methods

Descriptive, observational, prospective study of patients undergoing gastroileal bypass with single anastomosis between April 2010 and December 2015. The postoperative follow-up was 24 months.

Results

One thousand five hundred twelve patients underwent gastroileal bypass. The mean time of the procedure was 32 min; the average stay was 2.2 days. 30.1% of patients lost more than 100% of their excess weight, and 72.35% of patients lost more than 75% of their excess weight. 95.17% of patients dropped to a BMI < 35; 75.99% to a BMI < 30 and 30.15% to a BMI < 25.

Conclusions

Gastroileal bypass with single anastomosis is a safe and fast procedure providing similar results to biliopancreatic diversion with respect to weight loss.

Keywords

Gastroileal-bypass 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the

study.

References

  1. 1.
    Resa JJ. Cirugía de la obesidad mediante gastroplastia vertical. Estado actual de nuestra experiencia en humanos. Nuevas posibilidades técnicas de la cirugía laparoscópica. Aportación experimental original. [Surgery of obesity through vertical gastroplasty. Current status of our experience in humans. New technical possibilities of laparoscopic surgery. Original experimental contribution]. Zaragoza. Facultad de Medicina. Universidad de Zaragoza. 1994.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Resa JJ. Aportaciones a la cirugía bariátrica por vía laparoscópica. Modelos experimentales en cerdo. [Contributions to laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Experimental models in pig ]. Facultad de Veterinaria. Universidad de Zaragoza. 1998.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Resa JJ. Laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion without gastrectomy. Obes Surg. 2001;11:445.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Resa JJ, Solano J, Fatás JA, et al. Laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion with distal gastric preservation: technique and three-year follow up. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2004;14(3):131–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Resa JJ, Solano J, Fatás JA, et al. Laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion: technical aspects and results of our protocol. Obes Surg. 2004;14(3):329–33. discussion 333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Buchwald H, Avidor Y, Braunwald E, et al. Bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2004;292(14):1724–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Buchwald H, Estok R, Fahrbach K, et al. Weight and type 2 diabetes after bariatric surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Med. 2009;122(3):248–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Scopinaro N. Biliopancreatic diversion: mechanisms of action and longterm results. Obes Surg. 2006;16(6):683–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement. Gastrointestinal surgery for severe obesity. Am J Clin Nutr. 1992;55:615S–9S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hess DS, Hess DW, Oakley RS. The biliopancreatic diversion with the duodenal switch: results beyond 10 years. Obes Surg. 2005;15(3):408–16. ReviewCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Marceau P, Biron S, Marceau S, et al. Long-term metabolic outcomes 5 to 20 years after biliopancreatic diversion. Obes Surg. 2015;25(9):1584–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rutledge R, Walsh TR. Continued excellent results with the mini-gastric bypass: six-year study in 2,410 patients. Obes Surg. 2005;15(9):1304–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Still CD, Wood GC, Chu X, et al. Clinical factors associated with weight loss outcomes after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery. Obesity. 2014;22:888–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sapala JA, Wood MH, Sapala MA, et al. Marginal ulcer after gastric bypass: a prospective 3-year study of 173 patients. Obes Surg. 1998;8(5):505–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fisher BL, Buchwald H, Clark W, et al. Mini-gastric bypass controversy. Obes Surg. 2001;11(6):773–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Csendes A, Burgos AM, Smok G, et al. Latest results (12-21 years) of a prospective randomized study comparing Billroth II and Rouxen-Y anastomosis after a partial gastrectomy plus vagotomy in patients with duodenal ulcers. Ann Surg. 2009;249(2):189–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Unidad de Cirugía Laparoscópica de la Obesidad y el Metabolismo (UCLOM), Clínica MontpellierZaragozaSpain
  2. 2.Unidad de Cirugía Laparoscópica de la Obesidad y el Metabolismo (UCLOM), Clínica MontpellierZaragozaSpain

Personalised recommendations