Comparative analysis of 5-year efficacy and outcomes of single anastomosis procedures as revisional surgery for weight regain following sleeve gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: It is imperative to assess the results of revisional procedures following Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG), given the substantially growing population of patients who experience weight regain within a few years after undergoing this procedure. OBJECTIVE: Examine the comparative effectiveness of the Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass (SADI-S) and the One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB-MGB) as revisional procedures, with respect to their impact on weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, incidence of complications, and rates of reoperation in patients who had weight regain after SG with up to or more than 5 years of follow-up. SETTING: Hamad General Hospital, Academic tertiary referral center, Qatar. METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed a database of patients who underwent the Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Switch (SADI-S) or the One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass - Mini Gastric Bypass- (OAGB-MGB) as revisional procedures for weight recidivism after a primary Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG). The follow-up period was at least 5 years, during which the impact of both procedures on weight loss, comorbidities, nutritional deficiencies, complications, and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: The study comprised 91 patients, with 42 and 49 in the SADI-S and OAGB-MGB groups, respectively. Significant weight loss (measured by total weight loss percentage, TWL%) was observed at the 5-year follow-up for the SADI-S group compared to the OAGB-MGB group (30.0 ± 18.4 vs. 19.4 ± 16.3, p = 0.008). Remission of comorbidities, specifically diabetes mellitus and hypertension, was more prevalent in the SADI-S group. Notably, the OAGB-MGB group had a higher incidence of complications (28.6% vs. 21.42%) and reoperations (5 patients vs. 1 in the SADI-S group). No mortality events were reported in either group. CONCLUSION: While both the OAGB-MGB and SADI-S have demonstrated efficacy as revisional procedures for weight regain following SG, the SADI-S exhibits superior outcomes compared to the OAGB-MGB with regard to weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, complication rates, and reoperation rates.

Single Anastomosis Duodeno-ileostomy (SADI-S) Versus One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB-MGB) as Revisional Procedures for Patients with Weight Recidivism After Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Comparative Analysis of Efficacy and Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Many revisional procedures are available for unsuccessful laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients with complications or weight recidivism. Single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI-S) and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB-MGB) are two revisional procedures to address the problem of weight recidivism. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of the 2 revisional approaches (SADI-S vs. OAGB-MGB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected database of patients who underwent SADI-S or OAGB-MGB as a revisional procedure for weight recidivism after primary LSG with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Weight loss, comorbidities, nutritional deficiencies, complications, and outcomes were compared in the 2 procedures. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients were included in the study (42 SADI-S and 49 OAGB-MGB). There was a significant weight loss (total weight loss percentage, TWL%) at 1-year follow-up observed for SADI-S when compared to OAGB-MGB (23.7 ± 5.7 vs. 18.7 ± 8.5, p = 0.02). However, this difference was not statistically significant at 18 months (26.4 ± 7.3 vs. 21.2 ± 11.0, p = 0.25). Remission of comorbidities (diabetes mellitus and hypertension) was comparable. Although OAGB-MGB had higher complication rate than SADI-S, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.39). No mortality was reported in the study groups. CONCLUSION: Both SADI-S and OAGB-MGB are effective and safe revisional procedures for weight regain after LSG. The short-term outcomes are comparable; however, SADI-S is associated with less upper gastrointestinal complications and could be a better option for patients suffering from GERD post-LSG. Moreover, the underlying bile reflux may get worse with OAGB-MGB. However, further prospective larger studies are needed.