a useful comparison table
http://gastricbypass.netfirms.com/terry-comparison.htm
edited to add: I fully accept comments below - I have no reason to suppose he is not biased!! But his views do chime with the views of many European surgeons who seem to like the band over other surgeries.
Kate
Highest 290, Banded - 248 Lowest 139 (too thin!). Comfort zone 155-165.
Happily banded since May 2006. Regain of 28lbs 2013-14. ALL GONE!
But some has returned! Up to 175, argh! Off we go again,
Here's a recent study showing how the lapband procedures are already sucking at 3 years out:
Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2008 May-Jun;4(3 Suppl):S47-55.
Review of meta-analytic comparisons of bariatric surgery with a focus on laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding.
Cunneen SA.Center for Weight Loss, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA. [email protected]
BACKGROUND: In a prior systematic review and meta-analysis of the large body of literature describing the laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB), outcomes for the Swedish Adjustable Gastric Band (SAGB) and Lap-Band (LB), in particular, were reviewed. This article summarizes those results and discusses them in relation to the 3 other published bariatric surgery meta-analyses (JAMA 2004;292:1724-37; Ann Intern Med 2005;142:547-59; and Surgery 2007;142:621-32). METHODS: In the gastric banding meta-analysis, systematic review included screening of 4,594 studies published in any language (Jan 1, 1998-April 30, 2006). Studies with at least 10 SAGB or LB patients reporting > or =30-day efficacy or safety outcomes were eligible for review; data were extracted from accepted studies. Weighted means analysis and random-effects meta-analysis of efficacy outcomes of interest were conducted. RESULTS: In the gastric banding meta-analysis, 129 studies (patients n = 28,980) were accepted (33 SAGB/104 LB studies). In 4,273 patients (36 treatment groups) in 33 SAGB studies, and in 24,707 patients (111 groups) in 104 LB studies, mean baseline age (39.1-40.2 yrs), body mass index ([BMI] 43.8-45.3 kg/m2), and sex (females 79.2%-82.5%) were similar. Three-year mean SAGB/LB excess weight loss (56.36%/50.20%) was significant, as was resolution of type 2 diabetes (61.45%/60.29%) and hypertension (62.95%/43.58%) (P < .05). Adverse event (AE) rates appeared comparable, and early mortality was equivalent (< or =.1%). DISCUSSION: In the SAGB and LB meta-analysis at 1, 2, and 3 years, weight loss, resolution of diabetes and hypertension, and adverse events appeared equivalent. All meta-analyses that assessed weight loss found that bariatric surgery produced clinically significant reductions in excess weight across procedures in the short term. One meta-analysis found that bariatric surgery produced significantly more weight loss than medical treatment in patients with BMI >40 kg/m2 in the short term, with malabsorptive procedures producing the greatest weight loss. All studies reporting on comorbidities showed significant resolution or improvement of type 2 diabetes mellitus ([T2DM] > or =60%), hypertension (> or =43%), and dyslipidemia (> or =70%). In one meta-analysis, surgery was found to be superior to medical therapy in resolving T2DM, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. Sleep apnea was significantly resolved/improved in > or =85% across procedures in the one meta-analysis that addressed this comorbidity. One meta-analysis found no differences in AEs between procedures; however, the laparoscopic approach was associated with significantly reduced AEs. In the 4 meta-analyses, mortality was low (.1%-1.11%) for all procedures. Bariatric surgery was observed to be a safe and highly effective therapy for morbid obesity. Heterogeneity in nomenclature, study methods, statistical detail, definitions of weight-loss success and comorbid disease resolution, and completeness of data sets did not allow for comparison of some variables. Initiatives including the Iowa Bariatric Surgery Registry (IBSR), the Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery (LABS) consortium, the Surgical Review Corporation (SRC) Center of Excellence initiative, and the Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database [BOLD] are working to improve data standardization, which, in turn, will facilitate summary and comparison of bariatric surgery outcomes.
And this one:
Am J Med. 2008 Oct;121(10):885-93
Gastric banding or bypass? A systematic review comparing the two most popular bariatric procedures.
Tice JA, Karliner L, Walsh J, Petersen AJ, Feldman MD.
Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-1732, USA. [email protected]
OBJECTIVE: Bariatric surgical procedures have increased exponentially in the United States. Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding is now promoted as a safer, potentially reversible and effective alternative to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, the current standard of care. This study evaluated the balance of patient-oriented clinical outcomes for laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. METHODS: The MEDLINE database (1966 to January 2007), Cochrane clinical trials database, Cochrane reviews database, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects were searched using the key terms gastroplasty, gastric bypass, laparoscopy, Swedish band, and gastric banding. Studies with at least 1 year of follow-up that directly compared laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass were included. Resolution of obesity-related comorbidities, percentage of excess body weight loss, quality of life, perioperative complications, and long-term adverse events were the abstracted outcomes. RESULTS: The search identified 14 comparative studies (1 randomized trial). Few studies reported outcomes beyond 1 year. Excess body weight loss at 1 year was consistently greater for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass than laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (median difference, 26%; range, 19%-34%; P < .001). Resolution of comorbidities was greater after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. In the highest-quality study, excess body weight loss was 76% with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus 48% with laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding, and diabetes resolved in 78% versus 50% of cases, respectively. Both operating room time and length of hospitalization were shorter for those undergoing laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding. Adverse events were inconsistently reported. Operative mortality was less than 0.5% for both procedures. Perioperative complications were more common with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (9% vs 5%), whereas long-term reoperation rates were lower after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (16% vs 24%). Patient satisfaction favored Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (P=.006). CONCLUSION: Weight loss outcomes strongly favored Roux-en-Y gastric bypass over laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding. Patients treated with laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding had lower short-term morbidity than those treated with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, but reoperation rates were higher among patients *****ceived laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding. Gastric bypass should remain the primary bariatric procedure used to treat obesity in the United States.
And of course, the DS is best of all!
Fair enough - he may be biased! I didn't check him out ! Mind you, I help the stats along with my 100% lost excess weight in 16 months, maintained now for over a year! In fact, the band grads board on OH has a lot of us who must make any average qutie high!
Kate
Highest 290, Banded - 248 Lowest 139 (too thin!). Comfort zone 155-165.
Happily banded since May 2006. Regain of 28lbs 2013-14. ALL GONE!
But some has returned! Up to 175, argh! Off we go again,
EWL is more like 40 - 60 %.
Plus the long-term complication rate for the band is *high*. Anywhere from 10 to 40% requiring a re-surgery by 10 years out depending on what study you look at.
So saying it's as effective as the others but safer is also misleading.
HW - 225 SW - 191 GW - 132 CW - 122
Visit my blog at Fatty Fights Back Become a Fan on Facebook!
Starting BMI 40-ish or less? Join the LightWeights
Batwingsman · 5 replies · 2551 views