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
. 2017 Jan;27(1):38-43.
doi: 10.1007/s11695-016-2242-9.

Revisional Surgery Following Laparoscopic Gastric Plication

Affiliations

Revisional Surgery Following Laparoscopic Gastric Plication

Carlos Zerrweck et al. Obes Surg. 2017 Jan.

Abstract

Background: The laparoscopic gastric plication (LGP) is a relative new bariatric procedure that has gained popularity over the last few years, but no real consensus exists and the evidence is unclear, especially in its real efficacy, safety, and durability.

Methods: Retrospective study analyzing the records patients submitted to LGP between 2009 and 2010. The primary objective was to describe the characteristics and outcomes of patients submitted to revisional surgery. Baseline data and evolution were obtained and analyzed. Surgical analysis included revision cause, perioperative outcome, type of surgery, complications, and weight loss after 18 months. A comparison between gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy was performed.

Results: One hundred LGP were performed. After a mean time of 13.5 months, 42 patients presented an overall excess weight loss (EWL) <50 % and 38 had severe symptoms. Thirty patients accepted revisional surgery with BMI before conversion of 38.6 ± 4.2 kg/m2. There were 17 laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and 13 laparoscopic gastric bypass (LGBP) with comparable preoperative characteristics. The LSG group had lower pneumoperitoneum time and less hospital stay. At 18 months, the LGBP group had lower BMI (24.1 ± 1.1 vs. 25.8 ± 1.3 kg/m2 for the LSG; p = 0.006) and higher %EWL (75.7 ± 16.1 vs. 61.4 ± 14.5 % for the LSG; p = 0.008).

Conclusion: In our series, LGP presented a high failure rate and an increased number of symptomatic patients. Revisional surgery proved to be safe and effective. Revision to LSG was faster and had less hospital stay. Revision to LGBP showed better %EWL at 18 months.

Keywords: Conversion surgery; Laparoscopic gastric bypass; Laparoscopic gastric plication; Laparoscopic greater curve plication; Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy; Revisional surgery; Surgical failure.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2011 May-Jun;7(3):262 - PubMed
    1. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2013 Nov-Dec;9(6):901-7 - PubMed
    1. Ann Surg Innov Res. 2012 Aug 22;6(1):7 - PubMed
    1. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2007 Dec;17(6):793-8 - PubMed
    1. Obes Surg. 2013 Feb;23(2):179-83 - PubMed