Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Typ-2-Diabetes und Adipositas Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende Patientenratgeber
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Obesity Surgery
Erschienen in:

08.08.2017 | Review Article

Reoperative Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review of the Reasons for Surgery, Medical and Weight Loss Outcomes, Relevant Behavioral Factors

verfasst von: Ana Pinto-Bastos, Eva M. Conceição, Paulo P. P. Machado

Erschienen in: Obesity Surgery | Ausgabe 10/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Reoperative surgery following the failure of primary bariatric surgery is increasing due to the significant rates of patients experiencing poor weight loss or medical complications. This literature review was conducted to organize the emerging, but scattered, literature regarding the reasons for undergoing surgery, the best available options, the predictors of success, and the psychological characteristics of patients submitted to reoperative surgeries. Reoperative procedures are technically challenging, but the possible benefits of reoperation supplant the increased risks associated with these procedures. The etiology of reasons for undergoing a second surgery includes medical (e.g., fistula, ulcer disease) and behavioral aspects. Factors that may compromise outcomes have not been much studied. Particular attention should be paid to candidates with a history of difficulties in engaging in healthy eating patterns.
Literatur
1.
Buchwald H, Avidor Y, Braunwald E, et al. Bariatric surgery. JAMA. 2004;292:1724–37. https://​www.​ncbi.​nlm.​nih.​gov/​pubmed/​15479938CrossRefPubMed
2.
Sjöström L, Lindroos AK, Peltonen M, et al. Lifestyle, diabetes, and cardiovascular risk factors 10 years after bariatric surgery. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:1045–57.CrossRef
3.
4.
Augustin T, Aminian A, Romero-Talamás H, et al. Reoperative surgery for management of early complications after gastric bypass. Obes Surg. 2016;26:345–9.CrossRefPubMed
5.
6.
Zhang L, Tan WH, Chang R, et al. Perioperative risk and complications of revisional bariatric surgery compared to primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Endosc. 2015;29:1316–20.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Lo Menzo E, Szomstein S, Rosenthal RJ. The ASMBS textbook of bariatric surgery: bariatric surgery. In: Nguyen NT, Blackstone RP, Morton JM, Ponce J, Rosenthal RJ, editors. . New York: Springer; 2015.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Gagner M, Gentileschi P, De Csepel J, et al. Laparoscopic reoperative bariatric surgery: experience from 27 consecutive patients. Obes Surg. 2002;12:254–60.CrossRefPubMed
12.
13.
Sanchez H, Cabrera A, Cabrera K, et al. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass as a revision procedure after restrictive bariatric surgery. Obes Surg. 2008;18:1539–43.CrossRefPubMed
14.
15.
16.
17.
Mahawar KK, Graham Y, Carr WRJ, et al. Revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy: a systematic review of comparative outcomes with respective primary procedures. Obes Surg. 2015;25:1271–80.CrossRefPubMed
18.
van Wageningen B, Berends F, Van Ramshorst B, et al. Revision of failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Obes Surg. 2006;16:137–41.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Nesset EM, Kendrick ML, Houghton SG, et al. A two-decade spectrum of revisional bariatric surgery at a tertiary referral center. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2007;3:25–30.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Spyropoulos C, Kehagias I, Panagiotopoulos S, et al. Revisional bariatric surgery—13-year experience from a tertiary institution. Arch Surg. 2010;145:173–7.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Deylgat B, Hondt MD, Pottel H, et al. Indications, safety, and feasibility of conversion of failed bariatric surgery to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a retrospective comparative study with primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Endosc. 2012;26:1997–2002.CrossRefPubMed
22.
23.
Kuesters S, Grueneberger JM, Baumann T, et al. Revisionary bariatric surgery: indications and outcome of 100 consecutive operations at a single center. Surg Endosc Interv Technol. 2012;26:1718–23.CrossRef
24.
Mor A, Keenan E, Portenier D, et al. Case-matched analysis comparing outcomes of revisional versus primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Endosc. 2013;27:548–52.CrossRefPubMed
25.
26.
Coblijn UK, de Raaff CAL, Lagarde SM, et al. Do complications alter postoperative weight loss 1 year after primary and revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass? Obes Surg. 2016;26:2213–20.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Khoursheed M, Al-Bader I, Mouzannar A, et al. Sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass as revisional bariatric procedures: retrospective evaluation of outcomes. Surg Endosc Interv Technol. 2013;27:4277–83.CrossRef
28.
Abdelgawad M, de Angelis F, Iossa A, et al. Management of complications and outcomes after revisional bariatric surgery: 3-year experience at a bariatric center of excellence. Obes Surg. 2016;26:1–6.CrossRef
29.
30.
te Riele WW, Sze YK, Wiezer MJ, et al. Conversion of failed laparoscopic gastric banding to gastric bypass as safe and effective as primary gastric bypass in morbidly obese patients. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2008;4:735–9.CrossRef
31.
32.
Ardestani A, Lautz DB, Tavakkolizadeh A. Band revision versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass conversion as salvage operation after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2011;7:33–7.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Ee E, Nottle PD. Outcomes of revision laparoscopic gastric banding: a retrospective study. ANZ J Surg. 2013;83:571–4.
34.
35.
36.
Ortega J, Sala C, Flor B, et al. Vertical banded gastroplasty converted to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: little impact on nutritional status after 5-year follow-up. Obes Surg. 2004;14:638–43.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Abu-Gazala S, Keidar A. Conversion of failed gastric banding into four different bariatric procedures. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2012;8:400–7.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
Gobble RM, Parikh MS, Greives MR, et al. Gastric banding as a salvage procedure for patients with weight loss failure after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2011;7:219–24.CrossRef
43.
44.
45.
Conceição EM, Mitchell JE, Pinto-Bastos A, et al. Stability of problem eating behaviors and weight loss trajectories following bariatric surgery: a longitudinal observational study. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2016a;13:1063–70.CrossRefPubMed
46.
47.
Conceição E, Mitchell J, Engle S, et al. What is “grazing”? Reviewing its definition, frequency, clinical characteristics and impact on bariatric surgery outcomes, and proposing a standardized definition. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2014;10:973–82.CrossRefPubMed
48.
De Zwaan M, Marschollek M, Allison KC. The night eating syndrome (NES) in bariatric surgery patients. Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2015;23:426–34.CrossRefPubMed
49.
50.
Mathus-Vliegen EMH. Long-term health and psychosocial outcomes from surgically induced weight loss: results obtained in patients not attending protocolled follow-up visits. Int J Obes. 2007;31:299–307.CrossRef
51.
52.
Ryden A, Klarksson J, Sullivan M, et al. Coping and distress: what happens after intervention? A 2-year follow-up from the Swedish Obese Subjects (SOS) study. Psychosom Med. 2003;65:435–42.CrossRefPubMed
53.
54.
Schag K, Mack I, Giel KE, et al. The impact of impulsivity on weight loss four years after bariatric surgery. Nutrients. 2016;8:1–9.CrossRef
55.
Karlsson J, Taft C, Rydén A, et al. Ten-year trends in health-related quality of life after surgical and conventional treatment for severe obesity: the SOS intervention study. Int J Obes. 2007;31:1248–61.CrossRef
56.
57.
58.
Metadaten
Titel
Reoperative Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review of the Reasons for Surgery, Medical and Weight Loss Outcomes, Relevant Behavioral Factors
verfasst von
Ana Pinto-Bastos
Eva M. Conceição
Paulo P. P. Machado
Publikationsdatum
08.08.2017
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Obesity Surgery / Ausgabe 10/2017
Print ISSN: 0960-8923
Elektronische ISSN: 1708-0428
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-017-2855-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 10/2017

Reply to Letter to the Editor “Staple Line Reinforcement in Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Experience in 1023 Consecutive Cases” Obesity Surgery June 2017 Issue 6: 1474–80 by Sepúlveda et al.

  • Letter to Editor/LED Reply

Comparison of Effects of Sleeve Gastrectomy and Gastric Bypass on Lipid Profile Parameters in Indian Obese: a Case Matched Analysis

  • Original Contributions

Erratum to: Long-term Effect of Ileal Transposition on Adipokine Serum Level in Zucker (Orl)-Lepr fa Fatty Rats

  • Erratum

Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty for Obesity: a Multicenter Study of 248 Patients with 24 Months Follow-Up

  • Original Contributions

Efficacy of Intragastric Balloon Treatment for Adolescent Obesity

  • Original Contributions

Reply to the Letter “Gastric Remnant Dilatation: a Rare Technical Complication Following Laparoscopic One Anastomosis (Mini) Gastric Bypass”

  • Letter to the Editor

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Mit Lidocain kommt der Darm nicht schneller in Schwung

Verzögertes Wiederanspringen der Darmfunktion ist ein Hauptfaktor dafür, wenn Patientinnen und Patienten nach einer Kolonresektion länger als geplant im Krankenhaus bleiben müssen. Ob man diesem Problem mit Lidocain vorbeugen kann, war Thema einer Studie.

Kein Unterschied bei inadäquaten Schocks zwischen ICD-Typen

Inadäquate Schockabgaben sind ein unerwünschter Effekt der Therapie mit implantierbaren Kardioverter-Defibrillatoren. Subkutanen Geräten haftet dabei der Ruf an, dafür besonders anfällig zu sein. Die PRAETORIAN-Forschungsgruppe ist dem nachgegangen.

DCIS: Ist ein Verzicht auf eine Operation möglich?

Die COMET-Studie zeigt, dass aktives Monitoring bei Patientinnen mit duktalem Carcinoma in situ (DCIS) hinsichtlich der kumulativen Zwei-Jahres-Rate an ipsilateralen invasiven Karzinomen der leitliniengerechten Standardbehandlung nicht unterlegen ist. Dennoch wird von einem Verzicht auf eine Operation abgeraten, wie in einem begleitenden Editorial betont wird.

Soll man bei Cholezystektomie routinemäßig cholangiografieren?

Eine US-Studie scheint den Befürwortern einer routinemäßigen intraoperativen Cholangiografie im Rahmen einer Cholezystektomie Recht zu geben. Die Studienkommentatoren in JAMA Surgery sparen jedoch nicht mit Kritik.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen
Bildnachweise