Laparoscopic gastric plication versus mini-gastric bypass surgery in the treatment of morbid obesity: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastric plication (LGP) is emerging as a safe and effective bariatric procedure. However, there are no reports on the comparison between the efficacy and complications of LGP and laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass (LMGB), which is still an investigational bariatric procedure. The objective of this study was to compare safety and efficacy of LGP and LMGB in the treatment of morbid obesity in a one-year follow-up study.

METHODS

Forty patients met the National Institutes of Health criteria and were randomly assigned to receive either LGP (n = 20) or LMGB (n = 20) by a block randomization method. Early and late complications, body mass index (BMI), excess weight loss, and obesity-related co-morbidities were determined at the 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Operative time and mean length of hospitalization were shorter in the LGP group (71.0 minutes versus 125.0 minutes, P<.001, and 1.6 days versus 5.2 days; P<.001, respectively). The mean percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) at 12 months follow-up was 66.9% in the LMGB group and 60.8% in the LGP group (P = .34). Improvement was observed in all co-morbidities in both groups, with the exception of hyperlipidemia, which remained unresolved in 4 patients. Lower incidence of iron deficiency occurred in the LGP group (P = .035). Rehospitalization and reoperation were not required in any cases. Considering the cost of instruments used in the LMGB procedure and operative time, LGP saved approximately $2,500 per case compared with LMGB.

CONCLUSION

Both LGP and LMGB are effective weight loss procedures. LGP proved to be a simpler and less costly procedure compared with LMGB with a lower risk of iron deficiency during a 1-year follow-up study.