Long-Term Matched Comparison of Adjustable Gastric Banding Versus Sleeve Gastrectomy: Weight Loss, Quality of Life, Hospital Resource Use and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures
- 14 Downloads
Comparisons of bariatric procedures across a range of outcomes are required to better inform selection of procedures and optimally allocate health care resources.
To determine differences in outcomes between laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) across nine outcome domains.
Matched primary LSG or LAGB across age, weight and surgery date were recruited. Data were collected from a prospective database and patient-completed questionnaires.
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).
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.
KeywordsBariatric Laparoscopic gastric band Public Outcome
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Ethics approval was obtained from the Avenue Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee (project no. 213).
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.
- 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
- 6.Colquitt JL, Pickett K, Loveman E, et al. Surgery for weight loss in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;8:CD003641.Google Scholar
- 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