Key result
LRYGB is linked to ~111% more early complications than LSG despite better short-term comorbidity resolution.
Why the study?
Differences between laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy in obese patients regarding comorbidities, weight loss, quality of life, and complications were not comprehensively evaluated.
Does laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass improve comorbidities, weight loss, and quality of life compared to sleeve gastrectomy in obese patients?
Meta-Analysis (n=7,443)
Does laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass improve comorbidities, weight loss, and quality of life compared to sleeve gastrectomy in obese patients?
Odds Ratio: 2.11 (95% CI 1.53–2.91)
p-value: p=<0.001
LRYGB provides better short-term comorbidity resolution and long-term weight loss than LSG in obese patients, but at the cost of higher complication rates.
Supports LRYGB over LSG for short-term outcomes in obesity; extends prior RCTs with pooled data from 23 studies.
PURPOSE: To systematically and comprehensively evaluate the differences between laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) versus sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in obese patients. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to December 2018. The meta-analysis was performed by the RevMan 5.3 software. RESULTS: Twenty-three articles with 7443 patients were included. In short term (< 3 years), LRYGB was superior to LSG in terms of improving comorbidities (T2D, odds ratio (OR) 1.93, 1.06-3.52, P < 0.05, hypertension, OR 1.59, 1.08-2.34, P < 0.05, dyslipidemia, OR 1.61, 1.05-2.46, P < 0.05), but there were no differences in the midterm and long term. Quality of life (QoL) after bariatric surgery was included, but no differences were observed in the QoL after LRYGB or LSG (gastrointestinal quality of life index (GIQLI) and Moorehead-Ardelt quality of life questionnaire (M-A-Q), P > 0.05). LRYGB achieved a higher EWL% than LSG (after 3 years, WMD 5.48, 0.13-10.84. P < 0.05; after 5 years, WMD 4.55, 1.04-8.05, P < 0.05) in long term, but no significant differences were found during 0.25- to 2.0-year follow-up. The rate of early and late complications was much higher in LRYGB than in LSG (early complications, OR = 2.11, 95% CI = 1.53-2.91, P < 0.001; late complications, OR = 2.60, 95% CI = 1.93-3.49, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis showed that LRYGB was more effective than LSG in comorbidities' resolution or improvement in short term. For weight loss, LRYGB had better long-term effects than LSG. In addition, no differences were observed in the quality of life after LRYGB or LSG. LRYGB was associated with more complications than LSG.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hu et al. (2019) conducted a meta-analysis in Obesity (n=7,443). Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) vs. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) was evaluated on Early complications (< 30 days) (OR 2.11, 95% CI 1.53-2.91, p=<0.001). Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was associated with a significantly higher rate of early complications compared to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (OR 2.11), despite better short-term comorbidity resolution.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: