Systematic review of medium-term weight loss after bariatric operations.

BACKGROUND: Although bariatric surgery is known to be effective in the short term, the durability of that effect has not been convincingly demonstrated over the medium term (> 3 years) and the long term (> 10 years). The authors studied the durability of weight loss after bariatric surgery based on a systematic review of the published literature. METHODS: All reports published up to September, 2005 were included if they were full papers in refereed journals published in English, of outcomes after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP), and its hybrid procedures of banded bypass (Banded RYGBP) and longlimb bypass (LL-RYGBP), biliopancreatic diversion with or without duodenal switch (BPD+/-DS) or laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). All reports that had at least 100 patients at commencement, and provided > or = 3 years of follow-up data were included. RESULTS: From a total of 1,703 reports extracted, 43 reports fulfilled the entry criteria (18 RYGBP; 18 LAGB; 7 BPD). Pooled data from all the bariatric operations showed effective and durable weight loss to 10 years. Mean %EWL for standard RYGBP was higher than for LAGB at years 1 and 2 (67 vs 42; 67 vs 53) but not different at 3, 4, 5, 6 or 7 years (62 vs 55; 58 vs 55; 58 vs 55; 53 vs 50; and 55 vs 51). There was 59 %EWL for LAGB at 8 years, and 52 %EWL for RYGBP at 10 years. Both the BPD+/-DS and the Banded RYGBP appeared to show better weight loss than standard RYGBP and LAGB, but with statistically significant differences present at year 5 alone. The LL-RYGBP was not associated with improved %EWL. Important limitations include lack of data on loss to follow-up, failure to identify numbers of patients measured at each data point and lack of data beyond 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: All current bariatric operations lead to major weight loss in the medium term. BPD and Banded RYGBP appear to be more effective than both RYGBP and LAGB which are equal in the medium term.

Multiple sclerosis: disability profile and quality of life in an Australian community cohort.

The objective of this study was to determine the experience of disability and reported symptoms in multiple sclerosis in an Australian community sample, comparing the perceptions of patients, carers and treating doctors, and to examine effects on quality of life, carer stress and utilization of health services. The study design used a prospective cross sectional community survey. The participants were persons with a confirmed diagnosis of multiple sclerosis, with quantified neurological, mobility and cognitive deficits, from a tertiary hospital database (n=101), who lived at home, and their carers and doctors. The study method used demographic, diagnostic and disease severity data extracted from the database. Structured interviews conducted at home included: (1) open questionnaires for participant, carer and general practitioner, prioritizing symptoms/problems affecting daily living; and (2) standardized assessments for patient quality of life, caregiver strain and perceived burden of care. The mean age was 49 years (range 28-64). Those more severely affected had a significantly reduced quality of life and increased carer burden than those with milder disability, but discordance between patients, carers and doctors was noted in their perception of problems and symptom experience. Rates of depression (67%) and work-related problems were high, but vocational support was rarely provided. Forty persons used interferon, of whom 20 had secondary progressive multiple sclerosis; 39% reported difficulty in accessing rehabilitation services and only 10% were referred to medical rehabilitation units. In conclusion, the rates of disability and symptom experience were similar to other series; however, access and utilization of appropriate rehabilitation and support services appears to be lacking. There were higher reported rates of depression and poor quality of life. Opportunities may possibly exist to re-deploy resources to develop vocational support, counselling and rehabilitation.

Minimal reporting requirements for weight loss: current methods not ideal.

BACKGROUND: There is variety in the reporting of weight loss outcomes within the bariatric literature. Our aim is to compare methods of reporting weight loss in surgical and medical studies, and in addition look for a minimal reporting requirement that allows meaningful comparison. METHOD: A review of methods of reporting weight loss in studies published during 2004 was conducted. Bariatric surgical studies included all reports from MEDLINE-listed journals, and medical studies included reports of non-surgical weight loss from 9 leading journals. RESULTS: 65 surgical and 36 non-surgical reports were retrieved. There were 3 common (>20% of reports) methods of reporting in the surgical literature; mean weight, percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) and body mass index (BMI), and 4 in the medical literature; mean weight loss, weight, percentage weight loss and BMI. %EWL was reported in 2/3 of surgical reports and in none of the non-surgical. The origin of ideal weight for %EWL calculations was reported in 10 (23%) of these studies and included 5 differing definitions. All methods of reporting other than those using "ideal weight" can be calculated from mean weight and BMI at all time-points. CONCLUSION: There is complexity and confusion in the reporting of bariatric surgery weight outcomes when calculations are based on ideal weight. Providing weight (kg) and BMI (kg/m2) at all time-points allows the reader to interpret and compare the results in the context of the population of interest. These two measures should be provided as a minimum by all journals reporting on intentional weight loss.