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
. 2020 Sep;30(9):3528-3535.
doi: 10.1007/s11695-020-04681-3.

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass with One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass with a Biliopancreatic Limb of 200 or 160 cm: 1-Year Results of the Tehran Obesity Treatment Study (TOTS)

Affiliations

Comparing the Efficacy and Safety of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass with One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass with a Biliopancreatic Limb of 200 or 160 cm: 1-Year Results of the Tehran Obesity Treatment Study (TOTS)

Alireza Khalaj et al. Obes Surg. 2020 Sep.

Abstract

Purpose: One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) has raised concerns about nutritional complications possibly attributed to the biliopancreatic limb (BPL) length. We aimed to assess the results of a conservative approach of OAGB compared with the original OAGB and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in a 1-year follow-up study.

Materials and methods: This retrospective study was conducted based on prospectively maintained data in a cohort of patients who underwent either RYGB with a Roux limb of a 150 cm and a BPL of 50 cm (n = 145), OAGB with a 200-cm BPL (n = 272), or OAGB with a 160-cm BPL (n = 383), from March 2013 to 2017 at three university hospitals by a single surgical team.

Results: Groups were comparable regarding age and sex. Mean preoperative body mass indexes of the RYGB, OAGB-160, and OAGB-200 groups were 44.5 ± 5.8, 45.6 ± 6.3, and 46.7 ± 6.4 kg/m2, respectively. One-year follow-up rates were 83.4%, 85.3%, and 82.5% for the RYGB, OAGB-200, and OAGB-160 groups, respectively. One-year percent total weight loss values were 33.8 ± 6.7 after OAGB-160 and 35.3 ± 6.9 after OAGB-200 (P = 0.056), which were significantly greater compared with 30.9 ± 8.9 after RYGB (P < 0.001). All groups were comparable regarding remission of type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and fatty liver. Mean operative time was longer with RYGB than with either OAGB techniques. Groups were comparable for postoperative complications except for the incidence of protein-calorie malnutrition (PCM), occurring in 11 patients (4.7%) after OAGB-200, 7 of whom required revisional surgery, in one patient (0.3%) after OAGB-160 who responded to parenteral alimentation, but in no patients after RYGB.

Conclusion: After 1 year, OAGB with a 160-cm BPL was as effective as OAGB with a 200-cm BPL and RYGB, but safer than OAGB-200. This approach also avoided the need for revisional surgery following postoperative malnutrition.

Keywords: Biliopancreatic limb length; Complication; Effectiveness; One-anastomosis gastric bypass; Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; Safety.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Collaboration NRF. Trends in adult body-mass index in 200 countries from 1975 to 2014: a pooled analysis of 1698 population-based measurement studies with 19.2 million participants. Lancet. 2016;387(10026):1377–96. - DOI
    1. Sjöström L, Lindroos A-K, Peltonen M, et al. Lifestyle, diabetes, and cardiovascular risk factors 10 years after bariatric surgery. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(26):2683–93. - DOI
    1. Angrisani L, Santonicola A, Iovino P, et al. IFSO Worldwide Survey 2016: primary, endoluminal, and revisional procedures. Obes Surg. 2018;28(12):3783–94. - DOI
    1. Magouliotis DE, Tasiopoulou VS, Tzovaras G. One anastomosis gastric bypass versus roux-en-Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity: an updated meta-analysis. Obes Surg. 2019:1–10.
    1. Robert M, Espalieu P, Pelascini E, et al. Efficacy and safety of one anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for obesity (YOMEGA): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2019;393(10178):1299–309. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources