Suppr超能文献

美国一项研究比较了 One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass 与 Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass 和 Sleeve Gastrectomy 短期安全性:来自 MBSAQIP 认证中心的 341 例病例

Comparison of Short-term Safety of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy in the United States: 341 cases from MBSAQIP-accredited Centers.

机构信息

Division of Gastrointestinal and Oncologic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Division of Gastrointestinal and Oncologic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.

出版信息

Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2022 Mar;18(3):326-334. doi: 10.1016/j.soard.2021.11.009. Epub 2021 Nov 13.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is the third most common (4%) primary bariatric procedure worldwide but is seldom performed in the United States and is currently under consideration for endorsement by the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. Evidence from the United States on safety of OAGB compared to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the short-term safety outcomes of the three primary bariatric procedures.

SETTING

Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP)-accredited hospitals in the United States and Canada.

METHODS

Using the 2015-2019 MBSAQIP database, we compared the safety outcomes of adult patients who underwent primary laparoscopic OAGB, RYGB, and SG. Exclusion criteria included age over 80 years, emergency operation, conversion, and incomplete follow-up. The primary outcome was 30-day overall complication. Secondary outcomes were 30-day surgical and medical complications and hospitalization length.

RESULTS

A total of 341 patients underwent primary OAGB. Using propensity scores, we matched the OAGB cohort 1:1 with two cohorts of similar baseline characteristics who underwent RYGB and SG, respectively. The OAGB cohort had a lower overall complication rate than the RYGB cohort (6.7% versus12.3%, P = .02) and a similar rate to the SG cohort (5.0%, P = .43). The OAGB cohort had a similar rate of surgical complication to the RYGB cohort (5.0% versus 8.5%, P = .1) and a higher rate than the SG group (1.2%, P = .009). The OAGB cohort had a shorter median hospitalization than the RYGB cohort (1 d [interquartile range (IQR) 1-2 d] versus 2 d [IQR 1-2 d], P < .001) and a similar hospitalization length to the SG cohort ([1-2 d], P = .46).

CONCLUSION

Using the largest and the most current U.S. data, this study demonstrated that the short-term safety profile of primary OAGB is acceptable, but future studies should determine the long-term safety.

摘要

背景

单吻合口胃旁路术(OAGB)是全球范围内第 3 种最常见的(4%)主要减重手术,但在美国很少实施,目前正被美国代谢和减重外科学会考虑认可。美国关于 OAGB 与 Roux-en-Y 胃旁路术(RYGB)和袖状胃切除术(SG)安全性的证据有限。

目的

比较三种主要减重手术的短期安全性结果。

设置

美国和加拿大的代谢和减重外科学术认证和质量改进计划(MBSAQIP)认证医院。

方法

使用 2015-2019 年 MBSAQIP 数据库,我们比较了接受原发性腹腔镜 OAGB、RYGB 和 SG 的成年患者的安全性结果。排除标准包括年龄超过 80 岁、急诊手术、转换和随访不完整。主要结局是 30 天的总体并发症。次要结局是 30 天的手术和医疗并发症及住院时间。

结果

共有 341 名患者接受了原发性 OAGB。通过倾向评分,我们将 OAGB 队列与接受 RYGB 和 SG 的两个具有相似基线特征的队列进行了 1:1 匹配。OAGB 队列的总并发症发生率低于 RYGB 队列(6.7%比 12.3%,P =.02),与 SG 队列相似(5.0%,P =.43)。OAGB 队列的手术并发症发生率与 RYGB 队列相似(5.0%比 8.5%,P =.1),高于 SG 组(1.2%,P =.009)。OAGB 队列的中位住院时间短于 RYGB 队列(1 天[四分位间距(IQR)1-2 天]比 2 天[IQR 1-2 天],P <.001),与 SG 队列的住院时间相似[1-2 天],P =.46)。

结论

本研究使用最大和最新的美国数据表明,原发性 OAGB 的短期安全性良好,但未来的研究应该确定其长期安全性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验