ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Analysis of reoperations after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding.
Article in JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computed Tomography Assessment of Gastric Band Slippage.Visceral medicine · 2022Article
- Reoperations After Bariatric Surgery in 26 Years of Follow-up of the Swedish Obese Subjects Study.JAMA surgery · 2019Article
- Revision Procedures After Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding: Comparison of Efficacy and Safety.Obesity surgery · 2017Article
- Diagnosis and management of early gastric band slip after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2016Article
- The impact of laparoscopic diverted sleeve gastrectomy with ileal transposition (DSIT) on short term diabetic medication costs.SpringerPlus · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesLaparoscopic adjustable gastric banding is considered the least invasive surgical option for the treatment of morbid obesity. Its initial popularity has been marred by recent long-term studies showing high complication rates. We sought to examine our experience with gastric banding and factors leading to reoperation.
methodsWe reviewed retrospective data of 305 patients who underwent laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding between 2004 and 2011 at a single institution, 42 patients of whom required a reoperation, constituting 13.8%. Patients undergoing elective reoperations for port protrusion from weight loss as a purely cosmetic issue were excluded (n = 10). Patients' demographic data, weight loss, time to reoperation, and complications were analyzed.
resultsOf 305 patients, 42 (13.8%) required reoperations: 26 underwent band removal (8.5%) and 16 underwent port revision (5.2%). The mean weight and body mass index for all patients who underwent reoperations were 122.6 kg and 45.0 kg/m(2), respectively. The most common complication leading to band removal was gastric prolapse (n = 14, 4.6%). The most common indication for port revision was a nonfunctioning port (n = 10, 3.3%).
conclusionLaparoscopic adjustable gastric banding was initially popularized as a minimally invasive gastric-restrictive procedure with low morbidity. Our study showed a 13.8% reoperation rate at 3 years' follow-up. Most early reoperations (<2 years) were performed for port revision, whereas later reoperations (>2 years) were likely to be performed for band removal. Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding is associated with high reoperation rates; therefore bariatric surgeons should carefully consider other surgical weight-loss options tailored to the needs of the individual patient that may have lower complication and reoperation rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.