Surgical outcome of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for resolution of type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass
Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy
Morbid obesity
Type 2 diabetes mellitus
Journal
World journal of gastroenterology
ISSN: 2219-2840
Titre abrégé: World J Gastroenterol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100883448
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
28 Feb 2020
28 Feb 2020
Historique:
received:
24
09
2019
revised:
23
12
2019
accepted:
19
01
2020
entrez:
10
3
2020
pubmed:
10
3
2020
medline:
15
12
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Bariatric procedures are considered superior to medical therapies in managing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) are the most commonly used procedures for weight loss and comorbidity resolution worldwide. However, it is not yet known whether the degree of T2DM is influenced by the choice of bariatric procedure. To quantitatively compare T2DM resolution over 1-5 years follow-up by LRYGB and LSG in morbidly obese patients. We searched the selected databases for full-text English language clinical studies that compared the effectiveness of LRYGB and LSG for T2DM resolution. Review manager 5.3 was used for data analysis, and the overall effect summary was represented in a forest plot. From 1,650 titles retrieved by an initial search, we selected nine studies for this research. We found insignificant differences for T2DM resolution by LRYGB and LSG, with an odds ratio of 0.93 (95%CI: 0.64-1.35, This study reports similar T2DM resolution rates by both LRYGB and LSG during 1-5 years of follow-up. However, long-term follow-up of 10 years is needed to further substantiate these findings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Bariatric procedures are considered superior to medical therapies in managing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) are the most commonly used procedures for weight loss and comorbidity resolution worldwide. However, it is not yet known whether the degree of T2DM is influenced by the choice of bariatric procedure.
AIM
OBJECTIVE
To quantitatively compare T2DM resolution over 1-5 years follow-up by LRYGB and LSG in morbidly obese patients.
METHODS
METHODS
We searched the selected databases for full-text English language clinical studies that compared the effectiveness of LRYGB and LSG for T2DM resolution. Review manager 5.3 was used for data analysis, and the overall effect summary was represented in a forest plot.
RESULTS
RESULTS
From 1,650 titles retrieved by an initial search, we selected nine studies for this research. We found insignificant differences for T2DM resolution by LRYGB and LSG, with an odds ratio of 0.93 (95%CI: 0.64-1.35,
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
This study reports similar T2DM resolution rates by both LRYGB and LSG during 1-5 years of follow-up. However, long-term follow-up of 10 years is needed to further substantiate these findings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32148383
doi: 10.3748/wjg.v26.i8.865
pmc: PMC7052530
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
865-876Informations de copyright
©The Author(s) 2020. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors deny any conflicts of interest.
Références
Saudi Med J. 2005 Jul;26(7):1058-60
pubmed: 16047052
Med Teach. 2016 Jun;38(6):630-2
pubmed: 27007746
Ann Surg. 2007 Nov;246(5):780-5
pubmed: 17968169
Surg Endosc. 2017 Apr;31(4):1952-1963
pubmed: 27623997
Obes Surg. 2016 Aug;26(8):1814-20
pubmed: 26718983
Pak J Med Sci. 2016 Nov-Dec;32(6):1562-1567
pubmed: 28083065
Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2018 Sep;14(9):1261-1268
pubmed: 30001889
J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2015 Jan;25(1):37-42
pubmed: 25469662
Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2006 Jul;9(4):497-507
pubmed: 16778583
Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2018 Sep;14(9):1348-1356
pubmed: 29980464
BMC Surg. 2015 Jul 22;15:88
pubmed: 26198306
Obes Surg. 2012 May;22(5):740-8
pubmed: 22354457
Arch Surg. 2011 Feb;146(2):143-8
pubmed: 21339423
JAMA. 2018 Jan 16;319(3):255-265
pubmed: 29340679
Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2018 Feb;14(2):88-98
pubmed: 29219149
J Obes. 2014;2014:638203
pubmed: 24967099
Obes Surg. 2014 May;24(5):712-7
pubmed: 24352748
Obes Surg. 2016 Feb;26(2):276-81
pubmed: 26033435
World J Gastroenterol. 2015 Nov 28;21(44):12612-9
pubmed: 26640337
Saudi Med J. 2004 Sep;25(9):1226-8
pubmed: 15448771
Obes Surg. 2019 Jan;29(1):221-229
pubmed: 30251094
Pharmacol Res. 2016 Nov;113(Pt A):600-609
pubmed: 27697647
Updates Surg. 2017 Mar;69(1):101-107
pubmed: 28266000
Hepatogastroenterology. 2014 Mar-Apr;61(130):319-22
pubmed: 24901132
Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017 Feb;13(2):189-197
pubmed: 27720418
Int J Surg. 2019 Oct;70:35-43
pubmed: 31408745
Obes Surg. 2008 Sep;18(9):1077-82
pubmed: 18521701
Obes Surg. 2018 Mar;28(3):636-642
pubmed: 28852955
Obes Surg. 2018 Jun;28(6):1461-1472
pubmed: 29264780
Surg Endosc. 2010 May;24(5):1005-10
pubmed: 19866235
J Minim Access Surg. 2016 Jul-Sep;12(3):220-5
pubmed: 27279392
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013 Nov;98(11):4391-9
pubmed: 24057293
Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2018 Mar;34(3):160-165
pubmed: 29475463
Obes Surg. 2015 Jul;25(7):1110-8
pubmed: 25408433
World J Gastrointest Endosc. 2017 Apr 16;9(4):162-170
pubmed: 28465782
Diabetes Obes Metab. 2013 Oct;15(10):963-6
pubmed: 23679188
Diabetologia. 2013 Sep;56(9):1914-8
pubmed: 23765186
World J Gastroenterol. 2015 May 21;21(19):6026-31
pubmed: 26019469
Obes Surg. 2016 Sep;26(9):2161-2167
pubmed: 26843084
Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017 Apr;13(4):575-580
pubmed: 28214166
Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol. 2011 Jul;301(1):R15-27
pubmed: 21474429