Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Does pouch size matter?

Atul K Madan1, David S Tichansky, Jerry C Phillips

  • 1Section of Minimally Invasive Surgery, Associate Professor, Department of Surgery, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, 956 Court Avenue, Room G210, Memphis, Tennessee 38163, USA. amadan@utmem.edu

Obesity Surgery
|June 6, 2007
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Surgical society committee members disclosure of conflict of interest: show me the money.

Surgical endoscopy·2026
Same author

Potential conflict of interest of SAGES annual meeting presentations: can we do better?

Surgical endoscopy·2026
Same author

Disclosure of Conflict of Interest at a Professional Surgical Society Annual Meeting.

Cureus·2026
Same author

The Use of Transient Elastography Technology in the Bariatric Patient: a Review of the Literature.

Obesity surgery·2020
Same author

Update regarding the society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) grant distribution and impact on recipient's academic career.

Surgical endoscopy·2018
Same author

Conserved Metabolic Changes in Nondiabetic and Type 2 Diabetic Bariatric Surgery Patients: Global Metabolomic Pilot Study.

Journal of diabetes research·2016
Same journal

Correction to: Global 30-Day Morbidity and Mortality of Primary Bariatric Surgery Combined with Another Procedure: The BLEND Study.

Obesity surgery·2026
Same journal

Revisional Laparoscopic One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass for Weight Loss Failure after Restrictive Procedures.

Obesity surgery·2026
Same journal

Correction: Predictive Effect of Preoperative Bone Marrow Fat Fraction on Postoperative Bone Mineral Density After Bariatric Surgery: a Prospective Cohort Study.

Obesity surgery·2026
Same journal

Paired Editorials: Patient Satisfaction and Experience with Same-day Discharge After Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Mixed-methods Study.

Obesity surgery·2026
Same journal

Better Prepared Than Surprised: A Call to Routinize Preparedness - Essentials of Pre- and Post-Operative Counselling on Psychological Challenges After Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.

Obesity surgery·2026
Same journal

Associations Between Opioid Timing and Postoperative Desaturation Burden Following Metabolic Bariatric Surgery.

Obesity surgery·2026
See all related articles

Small gastric pouches after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) did not significantly improve weight loss outcomes. Pouch size and fundus presence had no statistically significant impact on excess weight loss success in this study.

Area of Science:

  • Bariatric surgery
  • Gastrointestinal surgery
  • Obesity treatment

Background:

  • Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) induces weight loss through mechanical restriction, malabsorption, and hormonal changes.
  • The restrictive role of gastric bypass, specifically pouch size, was investigated.
  • A hypothesis proposed smaller pouches and absence of the fundus would enhance weight loss success.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the impact of gastric pouch size and fundus presence on weight loss outcomes after laparoscopic RYGBP (LRYGBP).
  • To determine if smaller pouch size and no fundus correlate with greater excess weight loss (%EWL) and weight loss success.

Main Methods:

  • Retrospective review of upper gastrointestinal (UGI) radiological studies by three blinded experts.
  • Assessment of gastric pouch and fundus size using a defined grading system (Size I-IV, Fundus 0-IV).

Related Experiment Videos

  • Calculation of %EWL and weight loss success criteria (e.g., >50% EWL).

    • Main Results:

    • Study included 59 patients with over 1-year follow-up for 97%.
    • No statistically significant differences in %EWL or success rates were found between different pouch sizes or fundus sizes.
    • No extreme pouch (Size IV) or fundus (Fundus IV) sizes were observed.

    Conclusions:

    • Larger gastric pouches and the presence of fundus (within limits) are associated with high success rates after LRYGBP.
    • While a trend suggested lower %EWL with larger pouches/fundus, no significant differences were detected.
    • Gastric pouch size and fundus presence do not appear to be critical determinants of weight loss success in LRYGBP.