Cited by 349Bariatric Surgery and OutcomesMinimally Invasive Surgical TechniquesBody Contouring and Surgery

Randomized Clinical Trial of Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Versus Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy for the Management of Patients with BMI < 50 kg/m2

Kehagias, Ioannis, Karamanakos, Stavros N., Argentou, Marianna, Kalfarentzos, Fotis·2011·Obesity Surgery

Abstract

Background Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is currently the gold standard bariatric procedure for the treatment of morbid obesity. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is a relatively innovative procedure which has been increasingly applied lately as a sole bariatric procedure. A randomized trial was conducted in a Greek population to evaluate perioperative safety and 3-years results. Methods Sixty patients with body mass index (BMI) ≤ 50 Kg/m(2) were randomized to LRYGB or LSG. Patients were monitored for 3 years postoperatively and throughout the study period weight loss, in terms of percent excess weight loss (%EWL), early and late complications, improvement of obesity related comorbidities and nutritional deficiencies were compared between groups. Results There was no death in either group and there was no significant difference in early (10% after LRYGB and 13% after LSG, P > 0.05) and late morbidity (10% in each group). Weight loss was significantly better after LSG in the first years of the study and at 3 years %EWL reached 62% after LRYGB and 68% after LSG (p = 0.13). There was no significant difference in the overall improvement of comorbidities. Nutritional deficiencies occurred at the same rate in the two groups except to vitamin B(12) deficiency which was more common after LRYGB (P = 0.05). Conclusion LSG and LRYGB are equally safe and effective in the amelioration of comorbidities, while LSG is associated with fewer postoperative metabolic deficiencies, without the need of supplementation. Furthermore, LSG is a promising bariatric procedure, equally effective to LRYGB at 3 years follow up on weight reduction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11695-011-0479-x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • A total of 10 studies (12 articles) met the inclusion criteria, were rated as good or fair quality, and are included in the summary table.

    “A total of 10 studies (12 articles) met the inclusion criteria, were rated as good or fair quality, and are included in the summary table.141,142,144,148,151,155,156,159,161,168,169,172”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 45 · Cited by 349

Authors
Kehagias, I., Karamanakos, S. N., Argentou, M., & Kalfarentzos, F.
Affiliations
University of Patras (GR)
Corresponding author
Kalfarentzos, Fotis
Venue
Obesity Surgery
Published
2011-08-05
Volume
21
Issue
11
Pages
1650-1656
ISSN
  • 0960-8923 (ISSN-L)
  • 1708-0428
OpenAlex
W2029346223
Cited by
349
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 21 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 33 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 37 · 2013: 50 · 2012: 22
FWCI
35.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Obesity Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Body Contouring and Surgery
Keywords
laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy
MeSH terms
Adult, Double-Blind Method, Female, Gastrectomy, Humans, Male, Obesity, Morbid, Laparoscopy, Gastric Bypass, Body Mass Index

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review