Cited by 479Bariatric Surgery and OutcomesMinimally Invasive Surgical TechniquesBody Contouring and Surgery

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Versus Mini-Gastric Bypass for the Treatment of Morbid Obesity: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Open access
Lee, Wei-Jei, Yu, Po-Jui, Wang, Weu, Chen, Tai-Chi, Wei, Po-Li, Huang, Ming-Te·2005·Annals of Surgery

Abstract

In Brief Objectives: This prospective, randomized trial compared the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGBP) and laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass (LMGBP) in the treatment of morbid obesity. Summary Background Data: LRYGBP has been the gold standard for the treatment of morbid obesity. While LMGBP has been reported to be a simple and effective treatment, data from a randomized trial are lacking. Methods: Eighty patients who met the NIH criteria were recruited and randomized to receive either LRYGBP (n = 40) or LMGBP (n = 40). The minimum postoperative follow-up was 2 years (mean, 31.3 months). Perioperative data were assessed. Late complication, excess weight loss, BMI, quality of life, and comorbidities were determined. Changes in quality of life were assessed using the Gastro-Intestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI). Results: There was one conversion (2.5%) in the LRYGBP group. Operation time was shorter in LMGBP group (205 versus 148, P < 0.05). There was no mortality in each group. The operative morbidity rate was higher in the LRYGBP group (20% versus 7.5%, P < 0.05). The late complications rate was the same in the 2 groups (7.5%) with no reoperation. The percentage of excess weight loss was 58.7% and 60.0% at 1 and 2 years, respectively, in the LPYGBP group, and 64.9% and 64.4% in the LMGBP group. The residual excess weight <50% at 2 years postoperatively was achieved in 75% of patients in the LRYGBP group and 95% in the LMGBP group (P < 0.05). A significant improvement of obesity-related clinical parameters and complete resolution of metabolic syndrome in both groups were noted. Both gastrointestinal quality of life increased significantly without any significant difference between the groups. Conclusion: Both LRYGBP and LMGBP are effective for morbid obesity with similar results for resolution of metabolic syndrome and improvement of quality of life. LMGBP is a simpler and safer procedure that has no disadvantage compared with LRYGBP at 2 years of follow-up. This randomized prospective study evaluated the surgical morbidity and results 2 years after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGBP) and laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass (LMGBP) to treat morbid obesity. LMGBP was simpler and safer with lower surgical morbidity than LRYGBP (7.5% versus 20.0%, P < 0.05). Both procedures were effective in weight reduction and resolution of metabolic syndrome in patients with morbid obesity and provided similar quality of life.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.sla.0000167762.46568.98

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. [3]NIH Conference: Gastrointestinal surgery for severe obesity. Ann Intern Med. 1991;115:959–961. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. [9]Schauer P, Ikranuddin S, Gourash W, et al. Outcomes after laparoscopic gastric bypass for morbid obesity. Ann Surg. 2000;232:515–529. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. [26]American Society for Bariatric Surgery. Membership Survey. Gainesville, FL: American Society for Bariatric Surgery, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  4. [35]Tikkanen MS, Tuomilehto J. Multiple metabolic syndrome(syndrome X). Ann Med. 1992;24:461–489. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lee, W.-J., Yu, P.-J., Wang, W., Chen, T.-C., Wei, P.-L., & Huang, M.-T.
Affiliations
  • En Chu Kong Hospital (TW)
  • National Taiwan University (TW)
Corresponding author
  • Lee, Wei-Jei
  • Wang, Weu
  • Chen, Tai-Chi
  • Wei, Po-Li
  • Huang, Ming-Te
Venue
Annals of Surgery
Published
2005-07
Volume
242
Issue
1
Pages
20-28
ISSN
0003-4932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2086051776
Cited by
479
References
42
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 29 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 25 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 12
FWCI
15.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of Surgery (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (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
morbid obesity, bariatric surgery, excess weight loss, metabolic syndrome, gastrointestinal quality of life, surgical morbidity, conversion to open surgery, operative time, long-term outcomes, quality of life, obesity-related comorbidities
MeSH terms
Adult, Anastomosis, Roux-en-Y, Female, Humans, Male, Obesity, Morbid, Postoperative Pain, Laparoscopy, Postoperative Complications, Probability, Prospective Studies, Quality of Life, Reference Values, Severity of Illness Index, Gastric Bypass, Weight Loss, Body Mass Index, Treatment Outcome, Patient Satisfaction, Risk Assessment, Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures

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