Advertisement

Long-Term Matched Comparison of Adjustable Gastric Banding Versus Sleeve Gastrectomy: Weight Loss, Quality of Life, Hospital Resource Use and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

  • Yazmin JohariEmail author
  • Geraldine Ooi
  • Paul Burton
  • Cheryl Laurie
  • Shourye Dwivedi
  • YunFei Qiu
  • Richard Chen
  • Damien Loh
  • Peter Nottle
  • Wendy Brown
Original Contributions
  • 14 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Comparisons of bariatric procedures across a range of outcomes are required to better inform selection of procedures and optimally allocate health care resources.

Aims

To determine differences in outcomes between laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) across nine outcome domains.

Methods

Matched primary LSG or LAGB across age, weight and surgery date were recruited. Data were collected from a prospective database and patient-completed questionnaires.

Results

Patients (n = 520) were well-matched (LAGB vs. LSG; age 41.8 ± 11.2 vs. 42.7 ± 11.7 years, p = 0.37; male 32.4% vs. 30.2%, p = 0.57; baseline weight 131.2 ± 30.5 vs. 131.0 ± 31.1 kg, p = 0.94). Follow-up rate was 95% at a mean of 4.8 years. LAGB attended more follow-up visits (21 vs. 13, p < 0.05). Mean total body weight loss was 27.7 ± 11.7% vs. 19.4 ± 11.1% (LSG vs. LAGB, p < 0.001). LAGB had more complications (23.8% vs. 10.8%, p < 0.001), re-operations (89 vs. 13, p < 0.001) and readmissions (87 vs. 32, p < 0.001). However, early post-operative complications were higher post-LSG (2.6 vs. 9.2%, p = 0.007). Length of stay (LOS) was higher post-LSG compared with LAGB (5.2 ± 10.9 vs. 1.5 ± 2.2 days, p < 0.001). LSG patients reported better quality of life (SF-36 physical component score 54.7 ± 7.9 vs. 47.7 ± 10.8, p = 0.002) and satisfaction (9.2 ± 1.9 vs. 8.4 ± 1.6, p = 0.001) and less frequent regurgitation (1.2 ± 1.2 vs. 0.7 ± − 1.1, p = 0.032) and dysphagia (2.0 ± 1.3 vs. 1.3 ± 1.6, p = 0.007).

Conclusion

This study showed high long-term follow-up rates in a large cohort of well-matched patients. Weight loss was greater with LSG. LAGB reported more re-operations and less satisfaction with the outcome. LOS was driven by patients with complications. This study has reinforced the need for comprehensive measurement of outcomes in bariatric surgery.

Keywords

Bariatric Laparoscopic gastric band Public Outcome 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Ethical Statement

Ethics approval was obtained from the Avenue Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (project no. 213).

Consent Statement

All participants provided written informed consent.

Conflict of Interest

The product Formulite™ was donated by the manufacturer for the purpose of this study. Geraldine Ooi received a grant from the NHMRC, outside the submitted work. Wendy Brown received grants from Johnson and Johnson, grants from Medtronic, grants from GORE, personal fees from GORE, grants from Applied Medical, grants from Apollo Endosurgery, grants and personal fees from Novo Nordisc and personal fees from Merck Sharpe and Dohme, outside the submitted work. The rest of the authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Esteban Varela J, Nguyen NT. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy leads the U.S. utilization of bariatric surgery at academic medical centers. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2015;11(5):987–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Welbourn R, Hollyman M, Kinsman R, et al. Bariatric surgery worldwide: baseline demographic description and one-year outcomes from the Fourth IFSO Global Registry Report 2018. Obes Surg. 2019;29(3):782–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    O’Brien PE, Hindle A, Brennan L, et al. Long-term outcomes after bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of weight loss at 10 or more years for all bariatric procedures and a single-centre review of 20-year outcomes after adjustable gastric banding. Obes Surg. 2019;29(1):3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arman GA, Himpens J, Dhaenens J, et al. Long-term (11+years) outcomes in weight, patient satisfaction, comorbidities, and gastroesophageal reflux treatment after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2016;12:1778–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sjöström L, Narbro K, Sjöström CD, et al. Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Swedish obese subjects. N Eng J Med, The. 2007;357(8):741–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Colquitt JL, Pickett K, Loveman E, et al. Surgery for weight loss in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;8:CD003641.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    O’Brien PE, Brennan L, Laurie C, et al. Intensive medical weight loss or laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding in the treatment of mild to moderate obesity: long-term follow-up of a prospective randomised trial. Obes Surg. 2013;23(9):1345–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dixon JB, Eaton LL, Vincent V, et al. LAP-BAND for BMI 30–40: 5-year health outcomes from the multicenter pivotal study. Int J Obes. 2016;40(2):291–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brown A, O’Brien PE. The band must not be abandoned. Obes Surg. 2017;27:1911–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carlin AM, Zeni TM, English WJ, et al. The comparative effectiveness of sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass, and adjustable gastric banding procedures for the treatment of morbid obesity. Ann Surg. 2013;257(5):791–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Freeman RA, Overs SE, Zarshenas N, et al. Food tolerance and diet quality following adjustable gastric banding, sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Obes Res Clin Pract. 2014;8(2):e115–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee JH, Nguyen QN, Le QA. Comparative effectiveness of 3 bariatric surgery procedures: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, laparoscopic adjustable gastric band, and sleeve gastrectomy. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2016;12(5):997–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Al Khalifa K, Al AA. Quality of life, food tolerance, and eating disorder behavior after laparoscopic gastric banding and sleeve gastrectomy - results from a middle eastern center of excellence. BMC Obes. 2018;5:44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Doble B, Welbourn R, Carter N, et al. Multi-centre micro-costing of Roux-En-Y gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy and adjustable gastric banding procedures for the treatment of severe. Complex Obesity Obesity Surgery. 2019;29(2):474–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    O’Brien PE, Dixon JB, Laurie C, et al. A prospective randomized trial of placement of the laparoscopic adjustable gastric band: comparison of the perigastric and pars flaccida pathways. Obes Surg. 2005;15(6):820–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Burton PR, Brown W, Laurie C, et al. Outcomes, satiety, and adverse upper gastrointestinal symptoms following laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding. Obes Surg. 2011;21(5):574–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shikora SA, Mahoney CB. Clinical benefit of gastric staple line reinforcement (SLR) in gastrointestinal surgery: a meta-analysis. Obes Surg. 2015;25(7):1133–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Parikh M, Issa R, McCrillis A, et al. Surgical strategies that may decrease leak after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 9991 cases. Ann Surg. 2013;257(2):231–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Burton PR, Brown WA, Laurie C, et al. Predicting outcomes of intermediate term complications and revisional surgery following laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding: utility of the CORE classification and Melbourne motility criteria. Obes Surg. 2010;20(11):1516–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Brown W, Burton P, Anderson M, et al. Symmetrical pouch dilatation after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding: incidence and management. Obes Surg. 2008;18(9):1104–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Oor JE, Roks DJ, Unlu C, et al. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Surg. 2016;211(1):250–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Burton PR, Ooi GJ, Laurie C, et al. Changes in outcomes, satiety and adverse upper gastrointestinal symptoms following laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding. Obes Surg. 2016;Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Maciejewski ML, Arterburn DE, Van Scoyoc L, et al. Bariatric surgery and long-term durability of weight loss. JAMA Surg. 2016;151(11):1046–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Adams TD, Davidson LE, Litwin SE, et al. Health benefits of gastric bypass surgery after 6 years. JAMA. 2012;308(11):1122–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Himpens JJ, Dapri GG, Cadière GBGB. A prospective randomized study between laparoscopic gastric banding and laparoscopic isolated sleeve gastrectomy: results after 1 and 3 years. Obes Surg. 2006;16(11):1450–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Oesophago-Gastric and Bariatric Unit, Department of General SurgeryThe Alfred HospitalPrahranAustralia
  2. 2.Centre for Obesity Research and Education (CORE)Monash UniversityPrahranAustralia

Personalised recommendations