Ten-Year Outcomes Following Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass vs Duodenal Switch for High Body Mass Index: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: American Medical Association Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101729235 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2574-3805 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 25743805 NLM ISO Abbreviation: JAMA Netw Open Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Original Publication: Chicago, IL : American Medical Association, [2018]-
    • Subject Terms:
      Gastric Bypass*/methods ; Body Mass Index* ; Obesity, Morbid*/surgery ; Weight Loss* ; Quality of Life*; Humans ; Female ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Adult ; Treatment Outcome ; Sweden ; Norway ; Duodenum/surgery ; Laparoscopy/methods ; Biliopancreatic Diversion/methods
    • Abstract:
      Importance: Results from long-term follow-up after biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (DS) are scarce.
      Objective: To compare weight loss, health outcomes, and quality of life 10 years or more after Roux-en-Y-gastric bypass (RYGB) and DS surgery in patients with severe obesity-that is, a body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) of 50 to 60.
      Design, Setting, and Participants: This open-label randomized clinical trial was conducted at 2 academic bariatric centers in Sweden and Norway. Sixty patients with a BMI of 50 to 60 were included from March 1, 2006, to August 31, 2007. Data were analyzed from August 12, 2022, to January 25, 2023.
      Interventions: Laparoscopic RYGB or laparoscopic DS.
      Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was change in BMI after 10 or more years. Secondary outcomes included anthropometric measures, lipid and glycemic profiles, bone mass density, adverse events, gastrointestinal tract symptoms, and health-related quality of life.
      Results: Forty-eight of the original 60 patients (80%) were assessed after a median of 12 (range, 9-13) years (mean [SD] age, 48.0 [6.0] years; 35 women [73%]). At follow-up, the mean BMI reductions were 11.0 (95% CI, 8.3-13.7) for RYGB and 20.3 (95% CI, 17.6-23.0) for DS, with a mean between-group difference of 9.3 (95% CI, 5.4-13.1; P < .001). Total weight loss was 20.0% (95% CI, 15.3%-24.7%) for RYGB and 33.9% (95% CI, 27.8%-40.0%) for DS (P = .001). Mean serum lipid levels, except high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and hemoglobin A1c, improved more in the DS group during follow-up. Bone mass was reduced for both groups from 5 to 10 years, with lower bone mass after DS at 10 years. Quality-of-life scores (Obesity-Related Problem Scale and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey) were comparable across groups at 10 years. The total number of adverse events was higher after DS (135 vs 97 for RYGB; P = .02). More patients in the DS group developed vitamin deficiencies (21 vs 11 for RYGB; P = .008) including 25-hydroxyvitamin D deficiency (19 for DS vs 9 for RYGB; P = .005). Four of 29 patients in the DS group (14%) developed severe protein-caloric malnutrition, of whom 3 (10%) underwent revisional surgery.
      Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, BMI reduction was greater after DS, but RYGB had a better risk profile over 10 years. Biliopancreatic diversion with DS may not be a better surgical strategy than RYGB for patients with a BMI of 50 to 60.
      Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00327912.
    • References:
      Obes Surg. 2017 Jul;27(7):1709-1718. (PMID: 28155056)
      N Engl J Med. 2020 Oct 15;383(16):1535-1543. (PMID: 33053284)
      Obes Surg. 2009 Feb;19(2):158-165. (PMID: 18566869)
      Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008 Jan 31;6:12. (PMID: 18237386)
      Ann Intern Med. 2011 Sep 6;155(5):281-91. (PMID: 21893621)
      Gastroenterology. 2021 Dec;161(6):2044-2046.e4. (PMID: 34419459)
      Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2000 Dec;24(12):1715-25. (PMID: 11126230)
      JAMA. 2020 Sep 1;324(9):879-887. (PMID: 32870301)
      JAMA Surg. 2015 Apr;150(4):352-61. (PMID: 25650964)
      Eur J Clin Nutr. 2015 Nov;69(11):1249-55. (PMID: 26081488)
      Surg Endosc. 2022 Jul;36(7):4946-4955. (PMID: 34731300)
      Obes Rev. 2014 Jul;15(7):555-63. (PMID: 24666623)
      Obes Surg. 2017 Sep;27(9):2308-2316. (PMID: 28439748)
      Ann Surg. 2006 Oct;244(4):611-9. (PMID: 16998370)
      BJS Open. 2019 Mar 04;3(3):317-326. (PMID: 31183448)
      Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2020 Jan;16(1):17-23. (PMID: 31711945)
      Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Dec 15;25(24):3130-9. (PMID: 11124729)
      Obes Surg. 2023 Oct;33(10):2981-2990. (PMID: 37584851)
      Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Jul;90(1):15-22. (PMID: 19439456)
      Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017 May;13(5):727-741. (PMID: 28392254)
      Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2023 Feb;19(2):83-90. (PMID: 36443216)
      Scand J Soc Med. 1998 Dec;26(4):250-8. (PMID: 9868748)
      Arch Surg. 2012 Sep;147(9):847-54. (PMID: 22987179)
      Obes Surg. 2006 Apr;16(4):488-95. (PMID: 16608616)
      Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2003 May;27(5):617-30. (PMID: 12704406)
      Obes Facts. 2011;4(5):346-51. (PMID: 22166753)
      Scand J Gastroenterol. 1996 Jun;31(6):575-80. (PMID: 8789896)
      Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2010 Jul-Aug;6(4):408-14. (PMID: 20655023)
      Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2012 May-Jun;8(3):338-43. (PMID: 22425057)
    • Molecular Sequence:
      ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00327912
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20240603 Date Completed: 20240603 Latest Revision: 20240717
    • Publication Date:
      20240717
    • Accession Number:
      PMC11148687
    • Accession Number:
      10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.14340
    • Accession Number:
      38829616