Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Jan;24(1):9-14.
doi: 10.1007/s11695-013-1068-y.

Is a one-step sleeve gastrectomy indicated as a revision procedure after gastric banding? Data analysis from a quality assurance study of the surgical treatment of obesity in Germany

Christine Stroh  1 , D Benedix, R Weiner, F Benedix, S Wolff, C Knoll, T Manger; Obesity Surgery Working Group, Competence Network Obesity
Affiliations

Is a one-step sleeve gastrectomy indicated as a revision procedure after gastric banding? Data analysis from a quality assurance study of the surgical treatment of obesity in Germany

Christine Stroh et al. Obes Surg. 2014 Jan.

Abstract

Background: Since 1 January 2005, the outcomes of bariatric surgeries have been examined in Germany. All data are registered prospectively in cooperation with the Institute of Quality Assurance in Surgery at Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg.

Methods: Data are collected in an online data bank. Data collection began in 2005 for the results of gastric banding (GB) and in 2006 for sleeve gastrectomies (SGs). In addition to primary bariatric operations, data regarding the complications of revision procedures and redo operations have been analyzed. Participation in the quality assurance study is required for all certified centers in Germany.

Results: SGs are a popular redo operation after failed gastric banding. Using the German Bariatric Surgery Registry, we analyzed data from 137 SGs that were used in a one-step approach after GB and 37 SGs that were used in a two-step approach. Leakage rates for primary SGs dropped to 1.9 %. The incidence of leakage after a one-step SG after GB is significantly higher (4.4 %) than for a two-step approach (0 %).

Conclusion: SGs are popular procedures after failed GB in Germany, but the complication rates for one-step band removal are higher than for a two-step approach. After examining the data, we suggest performing band removal and SG as a two-step procedure. Further analysis is necessary to evaluate the optimal time period between band removal and SG. Follow-up investigations must be performed to determine if SG is an effective and safe option after GB.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Surg Endosc. 2011 Aug;25(8):2626-30 - PubMed
    1. Obes Surg. 2009 Dec;19(12):1612-6 - PubMed
    1. Obes Surg. 2012 Aug;22(8):1214-9 - PubMed
    1. Obes Surg. 2012 Feb;22(2):330-4 - PubMed
    1. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2010 Mar 4;6(2):146-51 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources