Tailored one anastomosis gastric bypass - Subgroup analysis of a randomised control trial based on bilio-pancreatic limb length with long-term results of 101 patients.

Background: : Ideal bilio-pancreatic limb (BPL) length is a highly debatable issue in one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). Whether to use a tailored BPL or a fixed-length BPL needs to be answered. Materials and Methods: : One-hundred and one patients who have undergone tailored OAGB based on basal metabolic index (BMI) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) were analysed. Sixty-three patients had BPL of 150 cm and 38 patients had BPL of 180 cm. Mean pre-operative BMI of BPL 150 and 180 cm groups were 39.73 and 51.92 kg/m2, respectively. Results: There was a significant drop in mean total body weight, BMI and excess body weight of both the groups at 1 year which persisted for 5 years post-operatively. The mean BMI of BPL 150 and BPL 180 cm group at 5 years was 29.17 and 32.88 kg/m2, respectively. Although mean percentage excess weight loss (%EWL) and percentage of excess BMI loss in the two groups was similar, the mean percentage total weight loss (%TWL) was significantly higher for the BPL 180 cm group. There was no difference between the two groups in the number of patients who had >50% EWL and >20% TWL. At 5 years of follow-up, the mean serum iron level was significantly low in BPL 180 cm group. There was a significant drop in mean haemoglobin A1c values postoperatively, with no difference between the two groups. Conclusions: Tailored BPL of 150 and 180 cm do not show any difference in the number of patients achieving >50% EWL or >20% TWL and so increasing limb length may not increase the number of good responders for weight loss. Although the resolution of T2DM and improvement of QoL score do not change significantly with increase in BPL length, mean serum iron levels may be lower with longer BPL.

LSG vs MGB-OAGB: 5-Year Follow-up Data and Comparative Outcome of the Two Procedures over Long Term-Results of a Randomised Control Trial.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery is a durable and effective way for the management of obesity and resolution of related comorbidities. The aim of this study is to evaluate the outcome of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) over long term in a South Asian population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective randomised trial comparing the outcome of 100 and 101 LSG and OAGB patients respectively after 5-year follow-up. This study is in continuity with previous published papers with 1- and 3-year follow-up. 71 LSG and 73 OAGB patients followed at 5 years. The results of these patients were analysed and compared in terms of %EWL, comorbidity resolution and quality of life (QoL) at 5 years. Bariatric analysis reporting and outcome system (BAROS) was used to assess the outcome of patients. RESULTS: At 5-year follow-up, both LSG and OAGB patients performed well and patients had significant improvement in BMI (kg/m2). The mean preoperative BMI of LSG and OAGB patients was 44.89 ± 7.94 and 45.32 ± 8.24, and their mean BMI at 5 years was 33.41 ± 6.02, 30.80 ± 3.40 respectively. At 5 years, %EWL was 55.95 ± 27.01 and 65.28 ± 13.98 for LSG and OAGB patients respectively. The QoL score of LSG and OAGB patients was 1.86 ± 0.56 and 2.35 ± 0.41 while comorbidity score was 1.84 ± 0.68 and 2.24 ± 0.62 respectively at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Both LSG and OAGB are effective bariatric procedures over long term with respect to weight loss, comorbidity resolution and improvement in QoL. OAGB is significantly better than LSG in all the three parameters at 5 years.

MGB-OAGB: Effect of Biliopancreatic Limb Length on Nutritional Deficiency, Weight Loss, and Comorbidity Resolution.

INTRODUCTION: Mini gastric bypass-one anastomosis gastric bypass (MGB-OAGB) has been approved as a mainstream metabolic/bariatric procedure by IFSO. Still there are lots of concerns regarding nutritional deficiency after MGB-OAGB. The purpose of this retrospective analysis is to evaluate the effect of biliopancreatic limb (BPL) length on weight loss, comorbidity resolution, and nutritional deficiencies in patients 1 year after MGB-OAGB and to find suitable BPL length. MATERIAL AND METHODS: One hundred and one patients who underwent MGB-OAGB were divided into three groups of 150 cm, 180 cm, and 250 cm depending on the length of BPL bypassed. The nutritional parameters (vitamin D3, vitamin B12, serum iron, serum ferritin, total protein, serum albumin, serum globulin), anthropometric measurements (weight, BMI), and comorbidity resolution (T2DM, hypertension) were compared between the three groups at 1-year follow-up. RESULTS: There was statistically significant difference in number of patients having deficiencies in all the nutritional parameters except globulin between 150 cm and 250 cm groups (P < 0.05). While on comparing 180- and 250-cm group, a statistically significant difference was present in vitamin D3, vitamin B12, and total protein (P < 0.05) only. The difference was statistically insignificant between the three groups on T2DM, hypertension resolution, and %EWL but TWL between 150 cm vs 180 cm and 150 cm vs 250 cm showed significant difference. CONCLUSION: A 150-cm BPL length is adequate with very minimal nutritional complications and good results. A 180-cm BPL can be used in super obese while a 250-cm BPL should be used with utmost care as it results in significant nutritional deficiencies.

LSG vs MGB-OAGB-3 Year Follow-up Data: a Randomised Control Trial.

AIM: The objective of this study is to compare 3-year follow-up results of one anastomosis gastric bypass (MGB-OAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in terms of weight loss, complications, resolution of comorbidities and quality of life. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective randomised study of results between 100 LSG patients and 101 MGB-OAGB patients was done from 2012 to 2015. The results were compared regarding operative outcomes, percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL), complications, resolution of comorbidities and quality of life (BAROS score) at 3 years follow-up. RESULTS: Follow-up was achieved in 93 MGB-OAGB vs 92 LSG patients for 3-year period. The average %EWL for MGB-OAGB vs LSG was 66.48 vs 61.15% at the end of 3 years respectively, which was statistically insignificant. Diabetes remission was seen in 89.13% of MGB-OAGB patients and 81.82% of LSG patients. Remission of hypertension was seen in 74% of MGB-OAGB patients and 72.22% of LSG patients. Bariatric analysis reporting and outcome system (BAROS) with comorbidity in LSG patients and MGB-OAGB patients was 6.03 and 6.96 respectively, whereas in patients without comorbidity, BAROS score was 3.86 in LSG group and 4.34 in MGB-OAGB group. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, at 36 months follow up, there was no significant difference between LSG and MGB-OAGB in %EWL and remission of HTN. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remission rates were higher after MGB-OAGB as compared to LSG but the difference was statistically insignificant. MGB-OAGB patients with comorbidities have a better quality of life and BAROS score compared to LSG patients.