PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 1, 2019The Lancet485 citationsOpen Access

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

View Full Paper
MRMaud RobertPEPhilippe EspalieuÉPÉlise Pelascini

Key Result

One anastomosis gastric bypass was noninferior to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for percentage excess BMI loss at 2 years (mean difference -3.3%; 95% CI -9.1 to 2.6).

Study Design

Type

RCT (n=253)

Blinding

Open-label

Randomization

1:1

Multicenter

Yes

Structured PICO

Does one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) provide non-inferior percentage excess BMI loss compared to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in adults with morbid obesity?

P
Population
253 adults aged 18-65 years with morbid obesity (BMI ≥40 kg/m2 or ≥35 kg/m2 with comorbidities) followed for 2 years.
I
Intervention
One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) consisting of a single gastrojejunal anastomosis with a 200 cm biliopancreatic limb
C
Comparator
Standard Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) consisting of a 150 cm alimentary limb and a 50 cm biliary limb
O
Outcome
Percentage excess BMI loss at 2 yearssurrogate

One anastomosis gastric bypass is non-inferior to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for weight loss at 2 years, but is associated with a significantly higher rate of serious adverse events and nutritional complications.

Main Result

Mean Difference: -3.3 (95% CI -9.1–2.6)

Absolute Event Rate: -87.9% vs -85.8%

Abstract

Background One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is increasingly used in the treatment of morbid obesity. However, the efficacy and safety outcomes of this procedure remain debated. We report the results of a randomised trial (YOMEGA) comparing the outcomes of OAGB versus standard Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Methods This prospective, multicentre, randomised non-inferiority trial, was held in nine obesity centres in France. Patients were eligible for inclusion if their body-mass index (BMI) was 40 kg/m 2 or higher, or 35 kg/m 2 or higher with the presence of at least one comorbidity (type 2 diabetes, high blood pressure, obstructive sleep apnoea, dyslipidaemia, or arthritis), and were aged 18–65 years. Key exclusion criteria were a history of oesophagitis, Barrett's oesophagus, severe gastro-oesophageal reflux disease resistant to proton-pump inhibitors, and previous bariatric surgery. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to OAGB or RYGB, stratified by centre with blocks of variable size; the study was open-label, with no masking required. RYGB consisted of a 150 cm alimentary limb and a 50 cm biliary limb and OAGB of a single gastrojejunal anastomosis with a 200 cm biliopancreatic limb. The primary endpoint was percentage excess BMI loss at 2 years. The primary endpoint was assessed in the per-protocol population and safety was assessed in all randomised participants. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02139813, and is now completed. Findings From May 13, 2014, to March 2, 2016, of 261 patients screened for eligibility, 253 (97%) were randomly assigned to OAGB (n=129) or RYGB (n=124). Five patients did not undergo their assigned surgery, and after undergoing their surgery 14 were excluded from the per-protocol analysis (seven due to pregnancy, two deaths, one withdrawal, and four revisions from OAGB to RYGB) In the per-protocol population (n=117 OAGB, n=117 RYGB), mean age was 43·5 years (SD 10·8), mean BMI was 43·9 kg/m 2 (SD 5·6), 176 (75%) of 234 participants were female, and 58 (27%) of 211 with available data had type 2 diabetes. After 2 years, mean percentage excess BMI loss was −87·9% (SD 23·6) in the OAGB group and −85·8% (SD 23·1) in the RYGB group, confirming non-inferiority of OAGB (mean difference −3·3%, 95% CI −9·1 to 2·6). 66 serious adverse events associated with surgery were reported (24 in the RYGB group vs 42 in the OAGB group; p=0·042), of which nine (21·4%) in the OAGB group were nutritional complications versus none in the RYGB group (p=0·0034). Interpretation OAGB is not inferior to RYGB regarding weight loss and metabolic improvement at 2 years. Higher incidences of diarrhoea, steatorrhoea, and nutritional adverse events were observed with a 200 cm biliopancreatic limb OAGB, suggesting a malabsorptive effect. Funding French Ministry of Health.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Robert et al. (2019) conducted an RCT in Morbid obesity (n=253). One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) was evaluated on Percentage excess BMI loss at 2 years (MD -3.3%, 95% CI -9.1 to 2.6). One anastomosis gastric bypass was noninferior to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for percentage excess BMI loss at 2 years (mean difference -3.3%; 95% CI -9.1 to 2.6).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aa03f1fc095911280c72aechttps://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(19)30475-1
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper