Department of Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, 82, Gumi-ro 173beon-gil, Bundang-gu, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, Republic of Korea, 13620.
Department of Surgery, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Sci Rep. 2021 Dec 6;11(1):23511. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-02999-1.
Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is the most frequently performed surgical intervention in patients with morbid obesity. Single-port sleeve gastrectomy (SPSG) and reduced-port sleeve gastrectomy (RPSG) are increasingly reported in the literature. This study compared the short-term outcomes of SPSG, RPSG, and conventional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (CLSG). This is a single-center retrospective study of 238 morbidly obese patients, of whom 148 (62.2%) patients completed follow-up one year after surgery. Propensity score matching was performed on factors influencing the choice of approach, and fifty patients from the SPSG + RPSG and CLSG groups were successfully matched. The groups were comparable in postoperative weight loss, morbidity, pain, and resolution of obesity-related comorbidities. The percentage of excess weight loss after one year was 90.0% in the SPSG + RPSG group and 75.2% in the CLSG group (P < 0.001). Complication rates showed no significant difference. The CLSG group was superior in dyslipidemia remission (17 [37.0%] vs. 28 [63.6%], P = 0.018) in the total cohort; however, this difference disappeared after matching. Our results suggest that single-port and reduced-port approaches could be alternative choices for selected patients. As our study was limited by its retrospective nature and potential selection bias, further studies are necessary to set standardized guidelines for SPSG.
腹腔镜袖状胃切除术是肥胖症患者最常进行的手术干预。单孔袖状胃切除术(SPSG)和小切口袖状胃切除术(RPSG)在文献中报道越来越多。本研究比较了 SPSG、RPSG 和传统腹腔镜袖状胃切除术(CLSG)的短期结果。这是一项单中心回顾性研究,共纳入 238 例病态肥胖患者,其中 148 例(62.2%)患者在术后一年完成了随访。对影响手术方式选择的因素进行了倾向性评分匹配,SPSG+RPSG 组和 CLSG 组各有 50 例患者成功匹配。两组在术后体重减轻、发病率、疼痛和肥胖相关合并症的缓解方面无差异。SPSG+RPSG 组一年后超重减轻百分比为 90.0%,CLSG 组为 75.2%(P<0.001)。并发症发生率无显著差异。在总队列中,CLSG 组在血脂异常缓解方面更优(17 [37.0%] vs. 28 [63.6%],P=0.018);但匹配后这种差异消失。我们的结果表明,单孔和小切口方法可能是选择患者的替代选择。由于本研究受到回顾性和潜在选择偏倚的限制,需要进一步研究来为 SPSG 制定标准化指南。