• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
    • Why Should You Support SAGES?
    • SAGES Swag
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Annual Meeting
      • 2027 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2027 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Lead Up Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • Innovative Surgical Trends
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Advanced Laparoscopy and Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
    • Foregut Video Atlas
  • Opportunities
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs
  • Learning Hub
You are here: Home / Abstracts / \”a Prospective Comparison of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy and Gastric Bypass\”

\”a Prospective Comparison of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy and Gastric Bypass\”

Francesco Stipa, MD PhD FACS, Valentina Giaccaglia, MD, Alessio Pigazzi, MD FACS, Antonio Burza, MD, Ettore Santini, MD. Department of Surgery, San Giovanni Hospital, Rome, Italy

 

Background. The aim of this study was to compare the effect on comorbidities and failure rates of two common bariatric surgical procedures performed laparoscopically: sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and gastric bypass (GBP), to define whether one operation is superior.

Methods. Between 2006 and 2011 we operated on 120 morbidly obese patients, performing SG (n=60) and GBP (n=60). The choice of the operation was based on patient/surgeon discussion. The analyses included the following variables: age, sex, body mass index (BMI), dietary history, the presence of eating disorder and comorbidities (depression, diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux, hypertension, obstructive sleep apnoea, hyperlipidemia, joint disease). The percentage of estimated weight loss (EWL) was assessed. The mean follow up was 30 months.

Results. In the two groups the mean preoperative and postoperative BMI were the following: SG group (mean age = 40) 44.5 and 32.8; GBP group (mean age = 43): 45.3 and 32.5. The %EWL for SG was 57.5% and for GBP 57.1% (p =0.65, NS ). Men responded slightly better than women with %EWL of 55.5% vs 53.7% respectively (p =0.048). Failure rates were 0% for SG and 5% for GBP (p =0.014). Resolution of comorbidities were 75% for SG and 85% for GBP (p = 0.044).

Conclusions. In our experience SG and GBP have similar short term effects. A longer follow up is necessary to confirm these results over a longer period of time. SG is technically simpler than GBP and may become the most common bariatric operation.
 


Session Number: SS09 – Obesity Surgery
Program Number: S059

Related



Hours & Info

15821 Ventura Blvd Ste 400
Encino, CA 91436

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2026 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals

Refine Search