Banded Versus Non-banded Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Banded Versus Non-banded Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Standard bariatric surgeries include biliopancreatic diversion (BPD), sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and adjustable gastric banding (AGB). Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is currently favored due to safety, efficacy, and shorter operation time. However, previous lite...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Curēus (Palo Alto, CA) Vol. 16; no. 1; p. e52799
Main Authors: Al-Juhani, Abdulkreem, Sharaf, Galal F, Alyaseen, Eman M, Alkurdi, Abdullah, Azhari, Ammar S, Alshaiban, Saleh Hussain, Otaif, Abdulelah A, Abumadian, Abdullah W, Alshawi, Alaa J, Aldarami, Yara A
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: United States Cureus Inc 23-01-2024
Cureus
Subjects:
Bias
Body mass index
Clinical trials
Cohort analysis
Diabetes
Gastroenterology
Gastrointestinal surgery
General Surgery
Handbooks
Laparoscopy
Meta-analysis
Metabolic disorders
Obesity
Other
Surgical outcomes
Systematic review
Weight control
Germany
Egypt
lbsg
laparoscopic band sleeve gastrectomy
laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy
bariatric surgery
systematic review and meta analysis
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Standard bariatric surgeries include biliopancreatic diversion (BPD), sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and adjustable gastric banding (AGB). Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is currently favored due to safety, efficacy, and shorter operation time. However, previous literature shows 75.6% weight regain post LSG. Introducing Laparoscopic band sleeve gastrectomy (LBSG) to maintain pouch size is proposed to improve outcomes and reduce weight regain. This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of LSG vs. LBSG in obese patients. A comprehensive search strategy was executed to identify pertinent literature comparing LBSG and LSG in obese patients. Eligible studies underwent independent screening, and pertinent data were systematically extracted. The analysis employed pooled risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous variables, each accompanied by their respective 95% confidence intervals (CI). Our systematic review and meta-analysis included 15 studies encompassing 3929 patients. Regarding body mass index (BMI), at six, 12, and 24 months, no substantial differences were found between LBSG and LSG groups (p < 0.05). Still, at 36 months, LBSG exhibited significantly lower BMI than LSG (MD = -2.07 [-3.84, -0.29], p = 0.02). Excess Weight Loss (EWL) favored LBSG at 12, 24, and 36 months with MD of 3.30 [0.42, 6.18], 4.13 [1.44, 6.81], and 18.43 [9.44, 27.42], p = 0.02, 0.003, < 0.00001, respectively). Operative time did not significantly differ between the procedures (MD = 2.95, 95%CI [-0.06, 5.95], p = 0.05). Resolution of comorbidities, overall complications, post-operative bleeding, reflux, and early complications did not significantly differ between LBSG and LSG. However, LBSG showed higher post-operative regurgitation than LSG (RR = 2.38, 95%CI [1.25, 4.54], p = 0.008). LBSG showed a substantial decrease in BMI at three-year follow-up and higher EWL at one, two, and three years. However, LBSG procedures exhibited a higher incidence of post-operative regurgitation symptoms than LSG. No substantial differences were noted in BMI at six, 12, or 24 months, EWL at six months, operative time, bleeding, reflux, or overall complications.
ISSN:2168-8184
2168-8184
DOI:10.7759/cureus.52799