One anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a 30-day follow-up review

Abstract

Background: One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) type procedures have been widely adopted outside the United States. International experience of OAGB commonly suggests improved early postoperative safety with OAGB over Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). This study aims to report on the early experience with OAGB in Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) accredited centers, and compare with RYGB in terms of complication rates.

Methods: The MBSAQIP public use files from 2015 to 2018 were used to identify adult patients who underwent primary OAGB and RYGB. Propensity score analysis was used to estimate the marginal population-average differences between OAGB and RYGB patients. Based on the matched samples, McNemar's tests and Wilcoxon signed rank test were carried out for binary and continuous outcomes. P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results: Propensity score matching analysis resulted in 279 matched pairs for OAGB and RYGB. Twelve OAGB patients (4.3%) experienced a complication; 3 of them (1.1%) were diagnosed with anastomotic leaks. Compared to 14 (5%) of RYGB patients experiencing a complication; 5 (1.8%) were diagnosed with anastomotic leaks. Reintervention, reoperation and readmission rates for OAGB were 2.5%, 3.2% and 5%, compared to 1.8%, 1.8%, and 3.2% for RYGB.

Discussion: Our study supports previous data that suggests OAGB has a similar early safety profile compared to RYGB and perioperative risks of OAGB should not be of a concern regarding its adoption. Conversely, OAGB does not seem to be associated with an improved safety profile over RYGB.

Keywords: Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP); One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB); Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).