Comparison of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus surgical sleeve gastrectomy: a Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database analysis.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is an incisionless, transoral, restrictive bariatric procedure designed to imitate sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Comparative studies and large-scale population-based data are limited. Additionally, no studies have examined the impact of race on outcomes after ESG. This study aims to compare short-term outcomes of ESG with SG and evaluate racial effects on short-term outcomes after ESG. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed over 600,000 patients in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database from 2016 to 2020. We compared occurrences of adverse events (AEs), readmissions, reoperations, and reinterventions within 30 days after procedures. Multivariate regression evaluated the impact of patient factors, including race, on AEs. RESULTS: A total of 6054 patients underwent ESG and 597,463 underwent SG. AEs were low after both procedures with no significant difference in major AEs (SG vs ESG 1.1% vs 1.4%; P > .05). However, patients undergoing ESG had more readmissions (3.8% vs 2.6%), reoperations (1.4% vs .8%), and reinterventions (2.8% vs .7%) within 30 days (P < .05). Race was not significantly associated with AEs after ESG, with black race associated with a higher risk of AEs in SG. CONCLUSIONS: ESG demonstrates a comparable major AE rate with SG. Race did not impact short-term AEs after ESG. Further prospective studies long-term studies are needed to compare ESG with SG.