RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the comparative effectiveness of sleeve gastrectomy (SG), laparoscopic gastric bypass (RYGB), and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) procedures. BACKGROUND: Citing limitations of published studies, payers have been reluctant to provide routine coverage for SG for the treatment of morbid obesity. METHODS: Using data from an externally audited, statewide clinical registry, we matched 2949 SG patients with equal numbers of RYGB and LAGB patients on 23 baseline characteristics. Outcomes assessed included complications occurring within 30 days, and weight loss, quality of life, and comorbidity remission at 1, 2, and 3 years after bariatric surgery. RESULTS: Matching resulted in cohorts of SG, RYGB, and LAGB patients that were well balanced on baseline characteristics. Overall complication rates among patients undergoing SG (6.3%) were significantly lower than for RYGB (10.0%, P < 0.0001) but higher than for LAGB (2.4%, P < 0.0001). Serious complication rates were similar for SG (2.4%) and RYGB (2.5%, P = 0.736) but higher than for LAGB (1.0%, P < 0.0001). Excess body weight loss at 1 year was 13% lower for SG (60%) than for RYGB (69%, P < 0.0001), but was 77% higher for SG than for LAGB (34%, P < 0.0001). SG was similarly closer to RYGB than LAGB with regard to remission of obesity-related comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: With better weight loss than LAGB and lower complication rates than RYGB, SG is a reasonable choice for the treatment of morbid obesity and should be covered by both public and private payers.
Asunto(s)
Investigación sobre la Eficacia Comparativa , Gastrectomía , Derivación Gástrica , Gastroplastia , Laparoscopía , Obesidad Mórbida/cirugía , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Gastrectomía/métodos , Gastroplastia/métodos , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Michigan , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Puntaje de Propensión , Calidad de Vida , Sistema de Registros , Resultado del Tratamiento , Pérdida de PesoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To develop a risk prediction model for serious complications after bariatric surgery. BACKGROUND: Despite evidence for improved safety with bariatric surgery, serious complications remain a concern for patients, providers and payers. There is little population-level data on which risk factors can be used to identify patients at high risk for major morbidity. METHODS: The Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative is a statewide consortium of hospitals and surgeons, which maintains an externally-audited prospective clinical registry. We analyzed data from 25,469 patients undergoing bariatric surgery between June 2006 and December 2010. Significant risk factors on univariable analysis were entered into a multivariable logistic regression model to identify factors associated with serious complications (life threatening and/or associated with lasting disability) within 30 days of surgery. Bootstrap resampling was performed to obtain bias-corrected confidence intervals and c-statistic. RESULTS: Overall, 644 patients (2.5%) experienced a serious complication. Significant risk factors (P < 0.05) included: prior VTE (odds ratio [OR] 1.90, confidence interval [CI] 1.41-2.54); mobility limitations (OR 1.61, CI 1.23-2.13); coronary artery disease (OR 1.53, CI 1.17-2.02); age over 50 (OR 1.38, CI 1.18-1.61); pulmonary disease (OR 1.37, CI 1.15-1.64); male gender (OR 1.26, CI 1.06-1.50); smoking history (OR 1.20, CI 1.02-1.40); and procedure type (reference lap band): duodenal switch (OR 9.68, CI 6.05-15.49); laparoscopic gastric bypass (OR 3.58, CI 2.79-4.64); open gastric bypass (OR 3.51, CI 2.38-5.22); sleeve gastrectomy (OR 2.46, CI 1.73-3.50). The c-statistic was 0.68 (bias-corrected to 0.66) and the model was well-calibrated across deciles of predicted risk. CONCLUSIONS: We have developed and validated a population-based risk scoring system for serious complications after bariatric surgery. We expect that this scoring system will improve the process of informed consent, facilitate the selection of procedures for high-risk patients, and allow for better risk stratification across studies of bariatric surgery.