Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Visit old site
Home Print this page Email this page Small font size Default font size Increase font size
Users Online: 793


 
 Table of Contents  
COMMENTARY
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 39-40

Biliopancreatic diversion is more effective than sleeve gastrectomy


Department of Surgery, Catholic University Medical School, Rome, Italy

Date of Web Publication27-Jan-2014

Correspondence Address:
Giuseppe Nanni
Department of Surgery, Catholic University Medical School, Rome
Italy
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/1947-2714.125866

Rights and Permissions

How to cite this article:
Nanni G. Biliopancreatic diversion is more effective than sleeve gastrectomy. North Am J Med Sci 2014;6:39-40

How to cite this URL:
Nanni G. Biliopancreatic diversion is more effective than sleeve gastrectomy. North Am J Med Sci [serial online] 2014 [cited 2019 Nov 22];6:39-40. Available from: http://www.najms.org/text.asp?2014/6/1/39/125866

The study by Sucandy and coworkers [1] deals with a frequently neglected topic in bariatric surgery, related to the importance of the results in terms of weight loss in the selection of the procedure to be performed. The recently developed and highly fashionable sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is compared to the time honored and successful biliopancreatic diversion in the duodenal switch version (BPD-DS).. The article presents two series each of 100 obese patients submitted to SG or BPD-DS. A significant percentage of patients have been lost to the follow-up; nevertheless data show that BPD-DS attains greater success in terms of body mass index (BMI) reduction 18 months after surgery. The effects of malabsorption appear very early, with differences between the two procedures already evident after 6 months. The great diffusion of SG is mainly due to its technical ease and to its "natural" ending in patients with inadequate weight loss: being SG the first step of BPD-DS, an eventual failure can be corrected performing the duodenal switch.

Several papers deal with the failure in weight loss after SG and disclose the related statistics. Patients in these reports often show young age and relatively low BMI values, and thus the results are quite good. [2] In the present paper [1] both group showed mean age and BMI values around 50. The treatment of the more severe cases of obesity actually emphasizes the more successful procedure.

A second relevant point concerns the presentation of the results. Bariatric surgery is expected to bring obese patients towards a condition of lower morbidity and mortality and possibly of a lower healthcare expenditure. [3],[4] reaching BMI values <30 or <35, that means absence of obesity or slight obesity, according to the definition of success of the surgical treatment. [5],[6] In the present article. [1] The authors show the percentage of patients reaching BMI < 35 after surgery. They found values of 60% after SG and 85% after BPD-DS. This allows a more readily understandable comparison of the results between the two different procedures.

It is very unusual to find in the literature universally accepted criteria to define success of bariatric operations and this paper shows the role of BMI, not only in selecting patients for surgery, as generally practiced, but also in checking the results of the treatment. [7] Moreover, the distribution of the BMI is not of the Gaussian type and thus the variations of mean values do not reflect the real clinical results. Generally, in presenting data, it is more significant the number of patients reaching a specific BMI during the follow-up, as the authors actually did.

This study [1] confirms the superiority of BPD-DS in dealing with obese patients with high BMI values. The role of SG has to be further investigated, particularly to identify in advance the population with low risk of weight loss failure to avoid reoperative surgery. It is highly desirable that, in clinical papers, authors present their data referring success of surgical procedures to the percentage of patients reaching a specific value of BMI during the follow - up.

 
  References Top

1.Sucandy I, Titano J, Bonanni F, Antanavicius G. Comparison of vertical sleeve gastrectomy versus biliopancreatic diversion. N Am J Med Sci 2014;6:7-11.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.Zachariah SK, Chang PC, Ooi AS, Hsin MC, Kin Wat JY, Huang CK. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity: 5 years experience from an Asian center of excellence. Obes Surg 2013;23:939-46.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.Sturm R, An R, Maroba J, Patel D. The effects of obesity, smoking, and excessive alcohol intake on healthcare expenditure in a comprehensive medical scheme. S Afr Med J 2013;103:840-4.  Back to cited text no. 3
[PUBMED]    
4.Thompson D, Edelsberg J, Colditz GA, Bird AP, Oster G. Lifetime health and economic consequences of obesity. Arch Intern Med 1999;159:2177-83.  Back to cited text no. 4
[PUBMED]    
5.Biron S, Hould FS, Lebel S, Marceau S, Lescelleur O, Simard S, et al. Twenty years of biliopancreatic diversion: What is the goal of the surgery? Obes Surg 2004;14:160-4.  Back to cited text no. 5
[PUBMED]    
6.MacLean LD, Rhode BM, Forse RA, Nohr R. surgery for obesity- an update of a randomized trial. Obes Surg 1995;5:145-50.  Back to cited text no. 6
[PUBMED]    
7.Nanni G, Familiari P, Mor A, Iaconelli A, Perri V, Rubino F, et al. Effectiveness of the Transoral Endoscopic Vertical Gastroplasty (TOGa® ): A good balance between weight loss and complications, if compared with gastric bypass and biliopancreatic diversion. Obes Surg 2012;22:1897-902.  Back to cited text no. 7
[PUBMED]    




 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1077    
    Printed38    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded222    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal