Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Clin Gastroenterol ; 54(6): 528-535, 2020 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32301829

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Treatment with a duodenal-jejunal bypass sleeve (DJBS) induces clinically significant weight loss, but little is known about the mechanisms of action of this device. AIM: The aim of this study was to characterize the mechanisms of action of the DJBS and determine the durability of weight loss and metabolic improvements. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We studied a cohort of 19 subjects with severe obesity and type 2 diabetes (baseline body mass index: 43.7±5.3 kg/m). Anthropometry, body composition, blood pressure, biochemical measures, and dietary intake were monitored for 48 weeks after DJBS implantation, and then for 1 year after device removal. Gastric emptying and triglyceride absorption were measured at baseline, 8 weeks after implant, and within 3 weeks of device explant. Visceral sensory function was assessed at baseline, 4 weeks after implant, and within 3 weeks after explant. RESULTS: Significant weight loss (P<0.01) occurred following DJBS placement, with a mean weight reduction of 17.0±6.5% at 48 weeks. The symptom burden following a standardized nutrient challenge was increased after DJBS implantation (P<0.05), returning to baseline after DJBS removal. Neither gastric emptying nor triglyceride absorption changed with the device in situ. A significant reduction in energy intake was observed [baseline: 7703±2978 kJ (1841±712 kcal), 24 weeks: 4824±2259 kJ (1153±540 kcal), and 48 weeks: 4474±1468 kJ (1069±351 kcal)]. After 1 year, anthropometry remained significantly improved, but there was no durable impact on metabolic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: DJBS treatment resulted in substantial weight loss. Weight loss is related to reduced caloric intake, which seems linked to an augmented upper gastrointestinal symptom response, but not altered fat absorption.


Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Derivación Gástrica , Obesidad Mórbida , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/cirugía , Duodeno/cirugía , Humanos , Yeyuno/cirugía , Obesidad Mórbida/cirugía , Pérdida de Peso
2.
BMC Prim Care ; 23(1): 26, 2022 02 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35123409

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and the incisionless endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) weight loss procedures require further investigation of their efficacy, safety and patient-centered outcomes in the Australian setting. METHODS: The aim was to examine the 6- and 12-month weight loss efficacy, safety, and weight-related quality of life (QoL) of adults with obesity who received the ESG or LSG bariatric procedure with 12+ months of adjuvant multidisciplinary pre- and postprocedural support. Data were from a two-arm prospective cohort study that followed patients from baseline to 12-months postprocedure from a medical center in Queensland. Percent excess weight loss (%EWL) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were body composition (fat mass, fat-free mass, android:gynoid ratio, bone mineral content) via dual energy X-ray absorptiometry, weight-related QoL, lipid, glycemic, and hepatic biochemistry, and adverse events. RESULTS: 16 ESG (19% attrition; 81.2% female; aged:41.4 (SD: 10.4) years; BMI: 35.5 (SD: 5.2) kg/m2) and 45 LSG (9% attrition; 84.4% female; aged:40.4 (SD: 9.0) years; BMI: 40.7 (SD: 5.6) kg/m2) participants were recruited. At 12-months postprocedure, ESG %EWL was 57% (SD: 32%; p < 0.01) and LSG %EWL was 79% (SD: 24%; p < 0.001). ESG and LSG cohorts improved QoL (19.8% in ESG [p > 0.05]; 48.1% in LSG [p < 0.05]), liver function (AST: - 4.4 U/L in ESG [p < 0.05]; - 2.7 U/L in LSG [p < 0.05]), HbA1c (- 0.5% in ESG [p < 0.05]; - 0.1% in LSG [p < 0.05]) and triglycerides (- 0.6 mmol/L in ESG [p > 0.05]; - 0.4 mmol/L in LSG [P < 0.05]) at 12-months. Both cohorts reduced fat mass (p < 0.05). The ESG maintained but LSG decreased fat-free mass at 6-months (p < 0.05); and both cohorts lost fat-free mass at 12-months (p < 0.05). There were no adverse events directly related to the procedure. The ESG reported 25% mild-moderate adverse events possibly related to the procedure, and the LSG reported 27% mild-severe adverse events possibly related to the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: In this setting, the ESG and LSG were safe and effective weight loss treatments for obese adults alongside multidisciplinary support. Patients who elected the ESG maintained fat-free mass at 6-months but both cohorts lost fat-free mass at 12-months postprocedure. Patients who elected the LSG had large and significant improvements to weight-related quality of life. Further well-powered studies are required to confirm these findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered prospectively at the Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry on 06/03/2018, Registration Number ACTRN12618000337279 .


Asunto(s)
Gastroplastia , Laparoscopía , Obesidad Mórbida , Adyuvantes Inmunológicos , Adyuvantes Farmacéuticos , Adulto , Australia , Femenino , Gastrectomía/efectos adversos , Gastroplastia/efectos adversos , Humanos , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Masculino , Obesidad/etiología , Obesidad Mórbida/cirugía , Estudios Prospectivos , Calidad de Vida , Pérdida de Peso
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA