Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 6, 2026
Single-Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass with Sleeve Gastrectomy Model in Mice
Published on: February 10, 2023
Laparoscopic repeat sleeve gastrectomy versus duodenal switch after isolated sleeve gastrectomy for obesity
Giovanni Dapri1, Guy Bernard Cadière, Jacques Himpens
1Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, European School of Laparoscopic Surgery, Saint-Pierre University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium. giovanni@dapri.net
Background:
Repeat sleeve gastrectomy (re-SG) and the addition of the duodenal switch (DS) are possible options to increase weight loss after isolated SG (ISG). We report the feasibility, safety, and outcomes of laparoscopic re-SG versus DS in patients presenting with insufficient weight loss or weight regain after ISG.
Methods:
From November 2003 to December 2009, 7 and 19 patients underwent laparoscopic re-SG and DS, respectively, mainly because of the patients' dietary habits: volume eating (hyperphagia) was treated by re-SG and eating meals too frequently (polyphagia) by DS.
Results:
At ISG, the mean weight and BMI was 127.7 ± 31.4 kg, and 45.1 ± 11.8 kg/m(2) for the re-SG group and 119.8 ± 20.9 kg and 41.2 ± 5.5 kg/m(2) for the DS group, respectively. The mean interval between ISG and reoperation was 37.1 ± 20.3 months for the re-SG group and 29.8 ± 24.9 months for the DS group. At reoperation, the mean weight, BMI, and percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) was 109.7 ± 21 kg, 38.9 ± 8.7 kg/m(2), 24.3 ± 16.6% for the re-SG group and 107.6 ± 19.6 kg, 36.9 ± 4.2 kg/m(2), and 19.5 ± 19.9% for the DS group, respectively. The mean operative time was 137.5 ± 75.5 minutes for the re-SG group and 152.6 ± 54.3 minutes for the DS group. No conversion to open surgery was required, and no mortality occurred. One patient in the re-SG group developed a leak at the angle of His. In the DS group, 1 patient presented with bleeding, 1 patient with a duodenoileostomy leak, and 1 patient with a duodenoileostomy stenosis. The mean hospital stay was 11.5 ± 20.5 days for the re-SG group and 4.7 ± 2.7 days for the DS group. The mean follow-up was 23.2 ± 11.1 months for the re-SG group and 24.9 ± 20.1 months for the DS group. The mean weight, BMI, and %EWL was 100 ± 21.1 kg, 35.3 ± 8.3 kg/m(2), 43.7 ± 24.9% for the re-SG group and 80.7 ± 22.5 kg, 27.3 ± 5.2 kg/m(2), 73.7 ± 27.7% for the DS group, respectively. During follow-up, 3 patients in the DS group required corrective surgery for late complications.
Conclusion:
The results of the present study have shown that laparoscopic re-SG is feasible but carries the risk of fistula development, which is difficult to treat. Laparoscopic DS was also shown to be feasible at a cost of not negligible complications, which are easier to manage than with re-SG. The efficacy seemed greater after DS than after re-SG.
