Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Risk of Incident Cardiovascular Events Following Roux en Y Gastric Bypass versus Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Claims-Based Retrospective Cohort Study.
Lewis, Kristina H; Argetsinger, Stephanie; LeCates, Robert F; Zhang, Fang; Arterburn, David E; Ross-Degnan, Dennis; Fernandez, Adolfo; Wharam, James F.
Afiliação
  • Lewis KH; Department of Epidemiology & Prevention, Department of Implementation Science, Division of Public Health Sciences, Wake Forest University Health Sciences, Winston-Salem NC.
  • Argetsinger S; Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA.
  • LeCates RF; Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA.
  • Zhang F; Harvard Medical School, Boston MA.
  • Arterburn DE; Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA.
  • Ross-Degnan D; Harvard Medical School, Boston MA.
  • Fernandez A; Kaiser Permanente Washington Health Research Institute, Seattle WA.
  • Wharam JF; Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, MA.
Ann Surg ; 2024 Aug 23.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39177643
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To compare the risk of incident cardiovascular disease (CVD) events following sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux en Y gastric bypass (RYGB). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA Bariatric surgery is associated with reduced CVD risk but the differential effect of contemporary bariatric procedures is unclear.

METHODS:

We used insurance claims to conduct a retrospective cohort study of CVD outcomes for patients who underwent RYGB versus SG between 2010 and 2021. Patients were followed for up to 5 years for a primary composite major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) outcome as well as individual outcomes including myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, and arrhythmia. We compared cumulative risks of CVD events using multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling, in overall cohorts and in sub-cohorts of older adults and those with type 2 diabetes (T2D) or pre-existing CVD and elevated morbidity.

RESULTS:

Matched, weighted cohorts of 13,545 SG and RYGB patients were observed for an average of 2.5 years after surgery, with 26.2% not lost to follow-up by the end of 5 years. There was no difference in MACE risk between procedures (aHR 1.01 for RYGB vs. SG [95% CI 0.90, 1.12]) in the overall cohort or among the subgroup of older adults (aHR 0.97 for RYGB vs. SG [95% CI 0.85, 1.10]). Patients with T2D experienced lower risk of MACE following RYGB compared to SG (aHR 0.78 [95% CI 0.66, 0.92]), as did those with pre-existing CVD or elevated morbidity prior to surgery (aHR 0.81 [95% CI 0.70, 0.93]).

CONCLUSIONS:

These findings further support the preferential use of RYGB over SG for patients with T2D or who have pre-existing CVD. However, among other groups of patients, including older adults, we did not observe a relative benefit of RYGB during the time horizon in this study.

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article