Comparison of Short-Term Effectiveness and Postoperative Complications: Laparoscopic Gastric Plication vs Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy
Abstract
Introduction
Bariatric surgeries are the only effective long-term treatment in obese patients. The innovation of laparoscopic gastric plication (LGP) raised some questions about its effectiveness compared to traditionally used techniques such as laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). We tried to answer some of these questions.
Materials and Methods
We investigated 70 patients in a randomized clinical trial (IRCT2013123012294N5) from 2012 to 2015. Thirty-five patients were randomly assigned to each LSG or LGP group, using sealed envelope method. The body mass index (BMI) reduction and the percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) along with %total body weight loss (%TWL) were primary endpoint and were assessed at follow-up periods. We recorded postoperative complications, as well.
Results
Two-year follow-up rate was 100%. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in means of preoperative BMI. Also, postoperative follow-ups were not suggestive for a significant difference in BMI (all p values > 0.05). The mean %EWL at follow-ups showed no significant difference at any point, except for 3 and 6 months after surgery (p value = 0.002 and 0.017, respectively). This finding was confirmed by %TWL trend in 12 months after surgery. LSG patients were readmitted more than LGP patients (seven cases vs one case, p value = 0.024). Postoperative complications such as nausea and vomiting, hair loss, iron deficiency, vitamin D deficiency, and cholelithiasis were not different between the two groups. There was one death in the LGP group due to pulmonary thromboembolism.
Conclusions
LGP showed to be efficient regarding %EWL and %TWL reduction in short-term follow-ups with comparable postoperative complications to LSG.
Publisher URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11695-017-2951-8
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-017-2951-8
Keeping up-to-date with research can feel impossible, with papers being published faster than you'll ever be able to read them. That's where Researcher comes in: we're simplifying discovery and making important discussions happen. With over 19,000 sources, including peer-reviewed journals, preprints, blogs, universities, podcasts and Live events across 10 research areas, you'll never miss what's important to you. It's like social media, but better. Oh, and we should mention - it's free.
Researcher displays publicly available abstracts and doesn’t host any full article content. If the content is open access, we will direct clicks from the abstracts to the publisher website and display the PDF copy on our platform. Clicks to view the full text will be directed to the publisher website, where only users with subscriptions or access through their institution are able to view the full article.