Bariatric surgery: Clinical outcomes in terms of weight loss and resolution of comorbidities

3Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Introduction. Bariatric surgery is a valid strategy of treatment for severe obesity. The aim of this study is to evaluate weight loss and resolution of comorbidities comparing two procedures, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy. Methods. Descriptive study of analytical type that included patients with obesity grades II and III. Demographic and perioperative variables were analyzed. The weight reduction was evaluated among others with the percentage of excess of body weight loss. Comorbidities associated with obesity were also analyzed. A univariate descriptive analysis was performed, using medians, interquartile ranges, frequencies, and proportions. The Mann-Whitney U and Chi squared tests were used for analysis of groups. A value of p <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Median follow-up was 28 months. Results. A total of 201 patients were included in the analysis. The median percentage of excess of body weight loss at 18 months was 77.4% for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass group vs 69.5% for sleeve gastrectomy group (p=0.14). The majority of patients presented resolution or improvement of hypertension (76%), diabetes mellitus (80%), dyslipidemia (73%), sleep apnea (79%), and arthropathy (94%), without significant differences according to the surgical technique used. Major complication rate was 1.9%. There was not mortality. The median follow-up was 28 months. Conclusion. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy are both very safe and effective procedures for excess weight reduction and resolution of comorbidities associated with obesity.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Toro-Vásquez, J. P., Moncada-Osorio, V., & Morales-Uribe, C. H. (2023). Bariatric surgery: Clinical outcomes in terms of weight loss and resolution of comorbidities. Revista Colombiana de Cirugia, 38(4), 642–655. https://doi.org/10.30944/20117582.2331

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free