METHODS: RCTs comparing the early complication rates following LVSG and LRYGB between 2000 and 2015 were selected from PubMed, Medline, Embase, Science Citation Index, Current Contents, and the Cochrane database. The outcome variables analyzed included 30-day mortality, major and minor complications and interventions required for their management, length of hospital stay, readmission rates, operating time, and conversions from laparoscopic to open procedures.
RESULTS: Six RCTs involving a total of 695 patients (LVSG n = 347, LRYGB n = 348) reported on early major complications. A statistically significant reduction in relative odds of early major complications favoring the LVSG procedure was noted (p = 0.05). Five RCTs representing 633 patients (LVSG n = 317, LRYGB n = 316) reported early minor complications. A non-statically significant reduction in relative odds of 29 % favoring the LVSG procedure was observed for early minor complications (p = 0.4). However, other outcomes directly related to complications which included reoperation rates, readmission rate, and 30-day mortality rate showed comparable effect size for both surgical procedures.
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis and systematic review of RCTs suggests that fewer early major and minor complications are associated with LVSG compared with LRYGB procedure. However, this does not translate into higher readmission rate, reoperation rate, or 30-day mortality for either procedure.
METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 5-year postoperative GERD data comparing LVSG and LRYGB in adults were undertaken. Electronic databases were searched from January 2015 to March 2024 for publications meeting inclusion criteria. The Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model was applied to estimate pooled odds ratio where meta-analysis was possible. Bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2 and GRADE.
RESULTS: Five RCTs were analysed (LVSG n = 554, LRYGB n = 539). LVSG was associated with increased adverse GERD outcomes compared to LRYGB at 5 years. The odds for revisional surgery to treat GERD in LVSG patients were 11 times higher compared to LRYGB (OR 11.47, 95% CI 1.83 to 71.69; p = 0.02; I2 = 0% High level of certainty). Similarly pharmacological management for increasing GERD was significantly more frequent in LVSG patients compared to LRYGB (OR 3.89, 95% CI 2.31 to 6.55; p ≤ 0.01; I2 = 0% Moderate level of certainty). Overall, LVSG was associated with significantly more interventions (both medical and surgical) for either worsening GERD and/or development of de novo GERD compared to LRYGB (OR 5.98, 95% CI 3.48 to 10.29; p ≤ 0.01; I2 = 0%) Moderate level of certainty).
CONCLUSIONS: The development and worsening of GERD symptoms are frequently associated with LVSG compared to LRYGB at 5 years postoperatively requiring either initiation or increase of pharmacotherapy or failing that revisional bariatric surgery. Appropriate patient/surgical selection is crucial to reduce these postoperative risks of GERD.
METHODS: Participants were invited to an online cross-sectional survey from Aug-Sep 2020. The study assessed psychological distress using the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale, level of fear using the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, and coping strategies using the Brief Resilient Coping Scale. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to adjust for potential confounders.
RESULTS: The mean age (±SD) of the participants (N = 720) was 31.7 (±11.5) years, and most of them were females (67.1%). Half of the participants had an income source, while 216 (30%) identified themselves as frontline health or essential service workers. People whose financial situation was impacted due to COVID-19 (AOR 2.16, 95% CIs 1.54-3.03), people who drank alcohol in the last four weeks (3.43, 1.45-8.10), people who were a patient (2.02, 1.39-2.93), and had higher levels of fear of COVID-19 (2.55, 1.70-3.80) were more likely to have higher levels of psychological distress. Participants who self-isolated due to exposure to COVID-19 (3.12, 1.04-9.32) and who had moderate to very high levels of psychological distress (2.56, 1.71-3.83) had higher levels of fear. Participants who provided care to a family member/patient with a suspected case of COVID-19 were more likely to be moderately to highly resilient compared to those who did not.
CONCLUSION: Vulnerable groups of individuals such as patients and those impacted financially during COVID-19 should be supported for their mental wellbeing. Behavioural interventions should be targeted to reduce the impact of alcohol drinking during such crisis period.