Cited by 67Bariatric Surgery and OutcomesBody Contouring and SurgeryMinimally Invasive Surgical Techniques

Management of failed adjustable gastric banding

Biertho, Laurent, Steffen, Rudolf, Branson, Ruth, Potoczna, Natascha, Ricklin, Thomas, Piec, Grazyna, Horber, Fritz F.·2005·Surgery

Abstract

Background About 100,000 adjustable gastric band placements have been performed worldwide, but more than 10% of patients have needed reoperation for insufficient weight loss or device-related complications. This study investigates the complications following gastric banding, and the outcome using a structured management strategy. Methods In the period April 1996 to January 2002, 824 severely obese patients (body mass index 43 +/- 1 kg/m 2 [mean +/- standard error under the mean], age 43 +/- 1 years; 77% women) underwent gastric banding in a single institution and were followed prospectively. Complications, insufficient weight loss, and subsequent management were analyzed. Results By the fifth treatment year, excess weight loss (EWL) was 54.8 +/- 1.7%; 72.8% of patients lost weight continuously or attained EWL of at least 50%. Insufficient weight loss occurred in 143 patients, and band-related complications occurred in 131 patients, with a mean annual rate of 5.0%. Major reoperation was necessary in 121 patients, and the annual reoperation rate was 4.7%. Following major reoperation, band- and bypass-related complication rates ranged from 6.3% to 11.7% per year. Three deaths occurred, 1 after reoperation and 2 due to preexisting cardiovascular disease. Conclusions Applying a structured reoperation algorithm, 5% annual failure after banding was corrected in most patients, and 72.8% of patients attained sufficient weight loss. Reoperation-related mortality was low (.8%), and its annual morbidity was acceptable (4.6%).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.surg.2004.06.007

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • The complication evidence base included those studies from the efficacy and predictors searches that included complication data, as well as those studies that met the expanded search criteria.

    “The complication evidence base included those studies from the efficacy and predictors searches that included complication data,141,156 as well as those studies that met the expanded search criteria.139,143,145,146,152,153,160,170,171”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Biertho, L., Steffen, R., Branson, R., Potoczna, N., Ricklin, T., Piec, G., & Horber, F. F.
Affiliations
Klinik Hirslanden (CH)
Corresponding author
Steffen, Rudolf
Venue
Surgery
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-01
Volume
137
Issue
1
Pages
33-41
ISSN
0039-6060 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2001480775
Cited by
67
References
2
Citations by year
2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 1
FWCI
4.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Bariatric Surgery and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Body Contouring and Surgery
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Minimally Invasive Surgical Techniques
Keywords
gastric banding, bariatric surgery, failed bariatric surgery, reoperation, insufficient weight loss, excess weight loss, morbid obesity, postoperative mortality
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Obesity, Postoperative Complications, Prospective Studies, Reoperation, Gastroplasty, Weight Loss, Treatment Failure

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