Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with ileal transposition (SGIT)

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorBoza, Camilo
dc.contributor.authorGagner, Michel
dc.contributor.authorDevaud, Nicolas
dc.contributor.authorEscalona, Alex
dc.contributor.authorMunoz, Rodrigo
dc.contributor.authorGandarillas, Monica
dc.date.accessioned2025-01-21T01:05:08Z
dc.date.available2025-01-21T01:05:08Z
dc.date.issued2008
dc.description.abstractIroduction ariatric surgery has evolved into multiple forms in the last decades, combining food restriction and malabsorption. The aim of this study was to develop a new technique based on food restriction and early stimulation of the distal gut, thus maintaining the alimentary tract continuity.
dc.description.abstractMethods hirty-two Yorkshire pigs, weight 22.2 +/- 5.4 kg (mean +/- SD) were randomly assigned to four laparoscopic procedures: ileal transposition (IT, n = 8); sleeve gastrectomy with ileal transposition (SGIT, n = 8); Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (GBP, n = 8); sham operation (SHAM, n = 8). Firing 45-mm linear staplers over a 60-F bougie, resecting the greater curvature and fundus, constituted a sleeve gastrectomy. Ileal transposition was performed by isolating a 100-cm ileal segment proximal to the ileocecal valve and by dividing the proximal jejunum 15 cm distal to the ligament of Treitz and performing re-anastomosis. Gastric bypass consisted of creating a proximal gastric pouch and a 300 cm alimentary limb. Sham operation was performed by bowel transections and re-anastomosis in the ileum and proximal jejunum together with gastrotomy and closure. Animals were evaluated weekly for weight increase and food intake. We performed a logistic regression analysis to compare weight progression curves, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Bonferroni (Dunn) tests to detect differences in weight and food intake.
dc.description.abstractResults We observed significant differences in mean weight after 18 weeks between SGIT (30.9 +/- 13.4 kg) and SHAM (72.5 +/- 10.7 kg) (p = 0.0002), and GBP (28.6 +/- 2.5 kg) and SHAM (p = 0.0001), and IT (56.1 +/- 13.4 kg) and SHAM (p = 0.0081). No differences were observed between RYGB and SGIT. We also observed significant differences in food intake (grams per day) in the third month between SGIT (1668 +/- 677 g) versus SHAM (3252 +/- 476 g) (p = 0.0006), and GBP (2011 +/- 565 g) versus SHAM (p = 0.039). No differences were observed in food intake between SGIT and GBP.
dc.description.abstractConclusion SGIT proved to be as effective in the short term as GBP on weight progression with no bypass of the proximal gut.
dc.fuente.origenWOS
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00464-007-9685-y
dc.identifier.issn0930-2794
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-007-9685-y
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositorio.uc.cl/handle/11534/95830
dc.identifier.wosidWOS:000254939900031
dc.issue.numero4
dc.language.isoen
dc.pagina.final1034
dc.pagina.inicio1029
dc.revistaSurgical endoscopy and other interventional techniques
dc.rightsacceso restringido
dc.subjectileal transposition
dc.subjectmorbid obesity
dc.subjectgastric bypass
dc.subjectsleeve gastrectomy
dc.subjectbariatric surgery
dc.subjectgut hormones
dc.subject.ods03 Good Health and Well-being
dc.subject.odspa03 Salud y bienestar
dc.titleLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with ileal transposition (SGIT)
dc.typeartículo
dc.volumen22
sipa.indexWOS
sipa.trazabilidadWOS;2025-01-12
Files
Collections
Artículos de revistas