• 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 / Short and Mid term outcomes comparing morbidity and weight loss after Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy vs. Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass in patients over 65 years of age and older.

Short and Mid term outcomes comparing morbidity and weight loss after Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy vs. Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass in patients over 65 years of age and older.

Joel S Frieder, MD, Camila Ortiz Gomez, MD, Rene Aleman, MD, Maria C Fonseca, MD, David Romero Funes, MD, Emanuele Lo Menzo, MD, PhD, FACS, FASMBS, Samuel Szomstein, MD, FACS, FASMBS, Raul J Rosenthal, MD, FACS, FASMBS. Cleveland Clinic Florida

Background: Bariatric surgery in the elderly population has been reported as feasible and safe. Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG) seems to have fewer complications than Laparoscopic Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB), even in the over 65 age group. We analyzed the difference in weight loss between LSG and RYGB in patients ≥65 years of age. 

Methods: After IRB approval we retrospectively reviewed 2,486 patients, who underwent either LSG or RYGB between 2005 and 2018 at our institution. Basic demographics, preoperative BMI and comorbidities were described. We identified all patients ≥65 years old and subsequently divided them in two groups depending on the type of bariatric procedure performed. Analysis and comparison of outcomes between these groups were done. Post-operative BMI was reviewed at 6, 12 and 24 months and %EBMIL was calculated accordingly. T-test and Chi2 analysis were performed for nominal and categorical variables, respectively.

Results: From 2,486 patients reviewed, 22.73%(n=565) were ≥65 years old. From these, 43.19%(n=244) underwent LSG and 56.81%(n=321) RYGB (Table 1). Caucasians and females were predominant in both groups. Mean age was similar for both populations (LSG:71.10±3.96, RYGB:71.67±4.54). Pre-procedure mean BMI was similar in both groups (40.46±5.48 for LSG vs. 43.68±7.22 for RYGB). Postoperative follow-up rates were similar in both groups at 12 and 24 months (LSG:51.23% and 31.56%; RYGB:48.29% and 34.27%; p=0.4883 and p=0.4976).  The %EBMIL at 6, 12 and 24 months was higher for the RYGB group vs. the LSG group (59.27±27.91, 72.10±29.51, 77.35±26.11 vs. 50.16±21.85, 55.21±25.58, 43.85±32.23; p=0.0006, p<0.0001 and p<0.0001; respectively). Complication rates were significantly higher in RYGB vs. LSG (27.73% vs 9.43%; p<0.0001). We observed significantly higher anastomotic ulcer and stricture rates for RYGB vs. LSG (7.17% and 5.92% vs. 0% and 0%; p<0.0001 and p=0.0015, respectively). RYGB had a higher rate for GI obstruction requiring intervention (2.18% vs. 0.41%; p=0.0776). A similar De Novo GERD rate was noted in both procedures (3.74% vs. 3.69%; p=0.9753). No leaks were reported in either group (Table 2).

Conclusions: Both LSG and RYGB are effective weight loss procedures for patients ≥65 years of age. RYGB seems to have higher %EBMIL at 1 and 2 years, however it has almost three times higher complication rate than LSG. 


Presented at the SAGES 2017 Annual Meeting in Houston, TX.

Abstract ID: 95219

Program Number: P138

Presentation Session: Poster Session (Non CME)

Presentation Type: Poster

View this Poster

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