Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Revisional Gastric Bypass for Failed Restrictive Procedures: Comparison of Single-Anastomosis (Mini-) and Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

  • Original Contributions
  • Published:
Obesity Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Ten to 50% of patients who received restrictive bariatric operations may require reoperation for unsatisfactory weight loss or weight regain. Failed restrictive procedures are usually managed with conversion to another bariatric procedure with a favor of conversion to laparoscopic gastric bypass. Our aim is to evaluate two different bypass techniques, laparoscopic RY gastric bypass (RYGB) versus single-anastomosis (mini-) gastric bypass (SAGB) as a revision option (R-RYGB and R-SAGB) for failed restrictive bariatric operations.

Material and Methods

From May 2001 to December 2015, a total of 116 patients with failed restrictive bariatric operations underwent laparoscopic revisional bypass surgery (81 R-SAGB and 35 R-RYGB). Among them, 81 were failed after vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) and 35 were after adjustable gastric band (AGB). The demographic data, surgical parameters, and outcomes were studied.

Results

The average age at revision surgery was 35.7 years (range 22–56), and the average body mass index (BMI) before reoperation was 37.2 kg/m2 (29.0–51.8). Revision surgery was performed after 58.8 months from the primary surgery on average (14–180 months). The main reasons for the revisions were weight regain (50.9%), inadequate weight loss (31%), and intolerance (18.1%). All of the procedures were completed laparoscopically as one-stage procedure. R-RYGB had significantly longer operative times than R-SAGB. Major complication occurred in 12 (10%) patients without significant difference between R-SAGB group and R-RYGB group. At 1 year follow-up, weight loss was better in R-SAGB than R-RYGB (76.8 vs. 32.9% EWL; p = 0.001). At 5 year follow-up, a significantly lower hemoglobin level was found in R-SAGB group (p = 0.03).

Conclusion

Both SAGB and RYGB are acceptable options for revising a restrictive type of bariatric procedures with equal safety profile. R-SAGB was shown to be a simpler procedure with better weight reduction than R-RYGB but anemia is a considerable complication at long-term follow-up.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Buchwald H, Avidor Y, Braunwald E, et al. Bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2004;292:1724–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sjöström L, Narbro K, Sjöström CD, et al. Effects of bariatric surgery on mortality in Swedish obese subjects. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:741–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Padwal R, Klarenbach S, Wiebe N, et al. Bariatric surgery: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials. Obes Rev. 2011;12(8):602–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. E.Mason, S. Tang, K.E.Renquistetal., A decade of change in obesity surgery. Obes Surg 1997; 7(3):189–197.

  5. Schouten R, Wiryasaputra DC, et al. Long-term results of bariatric restrictive procedures: a prospective study. Obes Surg. 2010 Dec;20(12):1617–26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Kirshtein B, Kirshtein A, Perry Z, et al. Laparoscopic adjustable gastric band removal and outcome of subsequent revisional bariatric procedures: a retrospective review of 214 consecutive patients. Int J Surg. 2016 Mar;27:133–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Van Nieuwenhove Y, Ceelen W, Stockman A, et al. Long-term results of a prospective study on laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding for morbid obesity. Obes Surg. 2011;21(5):582–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Marsk R, Jonas E, Gartzios H, et al. High revision rates after laparoscopic vertical banded gastroplasty. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2009;5(1):94–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Robert M, Poncet J, Boulez J, et al. Laparoscopic gastric bypass for failure of adjustable gastric banding: a review of 85 cases. Obes Surg. 2011;21:1513–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. De Maria EJ, Sugerman HJ, Meador JG, et al. High failure rate after laparoscopic adjustable silicone gastric banding for treatment of morbid obesity. Ann Surg. 2001;223:809–18.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Elnahas A, Graybiel K, Farrokhyar F, et al. Revisional surgery after failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding: a systematic review. Surg Endosc. 2013;27(3):740–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rutledge R. The mini-gastric bypass: experience with the first 1274 cases. Obes Surg. 2001;11:276–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rutledge R, Walsh TR. Continued excellent results with the mini-gastric bypass: six year study in 2410 patients. Obes Surg. 2005;15:1304–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lee W, Yu P, Wang W, et al. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y versus mini-gastric bypass for the treatment of morbid obesity: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg. 2005;242:20–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Noun R, Skaff J, Riachi E, et al. One thousand consecutive mini-gastric bypass: short- and long-term outcome. Obes Surg. 2012;22:697–703.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Piazza L, Ferrara F, Bellia A, et al. Laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass: short-term single-institute experience. Updat Surg. 2011;63:239–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang W, Huang MT, Wei PL, et al. Laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass for failed vertical banded gastroplasty. Obes Surg. 2004;14:777–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bruzzi M, Voron T, Zinzindohoue F, et al. Revisional single anastomosis gastric bypass for a failed restrictive procedure: 5-year results. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2016 Feb;12(2):240–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 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;240:205–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Suter M, Ralea S, Millo P, et al. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass after failed vertical banded gastroplasty: a multicenter experience with 203 patients. Obes Surg. 2012;22(10):1554–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kuzminov A, Palmer AJ, Wilkinson S, et al. Re-operation after secondary bariatric surgery: a systematic review. Obes Surg. 2016;26:2237–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lee WJ, Ser KH, Lee YC, et al. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y vs. mini-gastric bypass for the treatment of morbid obesity: a 10-year experience. Obes Surg. 2012;22(12):1827–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lee WJ, Lin YH. Single-anastomosis gastric bypass (SAGB): appraisal of clinical evidence. Obes Surg. 2014;24:1749–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bruzzi M, Rau C, Voron T, et al. Single anastomosis or mini-gastric bypass: long-term results and quality of life after a 5-year follow-up. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2015;11:321–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. von Drygalski A, Andris DA. Anemia after bariatric surgery: more than just iron deficiency. Nutr Clin Pract. 2009;24:217–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kwon Y, Kim HJ, Lo Menzo E. Anemia, iron and vitamin B12 deficiencies after sleeve gastrectomy compared to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a meta-analysis. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2014;10(4):589–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Schauer P, Ikranuddin S, Gourash W, et al. Outcomes after laparoscopic gastric bypass for morbid obesity. Ann Surg. 2000;232:515–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Min-Sheng General Hospital, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Owaid M. Almalki, Wei-Jei Lee, Jung-Chien Chen, Kong-Han Ser & Shu-Chun Chen

  2. Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, Taif University, Taif, Saudi Arabia

    Owaid M. Almalki

  3. Department of International Business, ChienHsin University of Science and Technology, Taoyuan, Taiwan

    Yi-Chih Lee

Authors
  1. Owaid M. Almalki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wei-Jei Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jung-Chien Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kong-Han Ser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yi-Chih Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Shu-Chun Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wei-Jei Lee.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Almalki, O.M., Lee, WJ., Chen, JC. et al. Revisional Gastric Bypass for Failed Restrictive Procedures: Comparison of Single-Anastomosis (Mini-) and Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass. OBES SURG 28, 970–975 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-017-2991-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-017-2991-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation