TY - JOUR
T1 - Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty, Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy, and Laparoscopic Band for Weight Loss
T2 - How Do They Compare?
AU - Novikov, Aleksey A.
AU - Afaneh, Cheguevara
AU - Saumoy, Monica
AU - Parra, Viviana
AU - Shukla, Alpana
AU - Dakin, Gregory F.
AU - Pomp, Alfons
AU - Dawod, Enad
AU - Shah, Shawn
AU - Aronne, Louis J.
AU - Sharaiha, Reem Z.
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr. Sharaiha receives grant support from Apollo Endosurgery. The remaining authors have no relevant disclosures.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2017, The Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract.
PY - 2018/2/1
Y1 - 2018/2/1
N2 - Background: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a novel endobariatric procedure. Initial studies demonstrated an association of ESG with weight loss and improvement of obesity-related comorbidities. Our aim was to compare ESG to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). Methods: We included 278 obese (BMI > 30) patients who underwent ESG (n = 91), LSG (n = 120), or LAGB (n = 67) at our tertiary care academic center. Primary outcome was percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Secondary outcome measures included adverse events (AE), length of stay (LOS), and readmission rate. Results: At 12-month follow-up, LSG achieved the greatest %TBWL compared to LAGB and ESG (29.28 vs 13.30 vs 17.57%, respectively; p < 0.001). However, ESG had a significantly lower rate of morbidity when compared to LSG or LAGB (p = 0.01). The LOS was significantly less for ESG compared to LSG or LAGB (0.34 ± 0.73 vs 3.09 ± 1.47 vs 1.66 ± 3.07 days, respectively; p < 0.01). Readmission rates were not significantly different between the groups (p = 0.72). Conclusion: Although LSG is the most effective option for weight loss, ESG is a safe and feasible endobariatric option associated with low morbidity and short LOS in select patients.
AB - Background: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a novel endobariatric procedure. Initial studies demonstrated an association of ESG with weight loss and improvement of obesity-related comorbidities. Our aim was to compare ESG to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). Methods: We included 278 obese (BMI > 30) patients who underwent ESG (n = 91), LSG (n = 120), or LAGB (n = 67) at our tertiary care academic center. Primary outcome was percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Secondary outcome measures included adverse events (AE), length of stay (LOS), and readmission rate. Results: At 12-month follow-up, LSG achieved the greatest %TBWL compared to LAGB and ESG (29.28 vs 13.30 vs 17.57%, respectively; p < 0.001). However, ESG had a significantly lower rate of morbidity when compared to LSG or LAGB (p = 0.01). The LOS was significantly less for ESG compared to LSG or LAGB (0.34 ± 0.73 vs 3.09 ± 1.47 vs 1.66 ± 3.07 days, respectively; p < 0.01). Readmission rates were not significantly different between the groups (p = 0.72). Conclusion: Although LSG is the most effective option for weight loss, ESG is a safe and feasible endobariatric option associated with low morbidity and short LOS in select patients.
KW - Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty
KW - Laparoscopic adjustable gastric band
KW - Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy
KW - Weight loss
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85033433684&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85033433684&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s11605-017-3615-7
DO - 10.1007/s11605-017-3615-7
M3 - Article
C2 - 29110192
AN - SCOPUS:85033433684
SN - 1091-255X
VL - 22
SP - 267
EP - 273
JO - Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
JF - Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery
IS - 2
ER -