Sleeve vs. Bypass

(deactivated member)
on 6/29/09 5:41 am - arizona
i weighed 318 lbs at my highest...april 15th of this year...today, i weigh 241 lbs...

77 lbs in 2 1/2 months...kinda speaks for itself...

good luck!!
Amaythyst
on 6/29/09 5:49 am - AZ
I decided on the VSG because I wanted a permanent solution which didn't require a device to be inserted and I didn't want my intestinal tract to be rerouted and parts bypassed.  I wanted as much natural function as possible.  I also did not want any malabsorption issues. 

I have currently lose 90 of the 100 lbs. I originally planned and will probably stay where I am as I am happy with this weight (and my hubby is too!).

Only you can decide which procedure will work for your lifestyle.  Some ppl have gotten the VSG as the first part of a 2 part procedure then went back later to have the remainder (DS or RNY--forgot which it is) done if they needed it which might be an option you could talk to your doctor about.  Good luck with whichever procedure you choose.

 
"Women are like cell phones. They like to be held and talked to, but push the wrong button, and you'll be disconnected." ---Unknown
ms_kish
on 6/29/09 9:00 am
Thank you everyone - you have really helped me.  I didn't know you could still have NSAIDs as someone asked in one of my sessions and they said no so I'll ask again.  I feel much better now after hearing your stories and going with the sleeve.  I was really concerned that the weight loss was going to be something much slower than what you've all experienced.  Luckily my insurance will pay for the sleeve - not sure if they'll pay for DS though and I'm really not interested in the Mexico option.  Anyway, thank you all again for helping me to decide on the sleeve.
There is no testimony without a TEST
      
OldMedic
on 6/29/09 10:47 pm - Alvaton, KY
Ms Kish:

If your doctors office says no NSAIDS, ask them to contact the Center for Weight Loss Surgery at Vanderbilt Medical Center in Nashville, TN.  They can tell your doctor that NSAIDS work just fine in their patients (they do like to give your stomach time to heal a bit however).

I take 800mg of Motrin, three times a day for psoriatic arthritis.  I have no problems with it, so long as I take it as I always have, with either milk or food.

And I do want to clear up one thing about the surgeries that have intestinal bypass.  The ulceration from NSAIDS and other causes are showing up down near the end of the small bowel, not at the beginning.   

They are also having ulcerations of the small and large bowel show up, in some cases more than 10 years post op, and they just don't know what is causing that..

A former Army Medic (1959-1969), Registered Nurse (1969-2000), College Instructor (1984-1989) and a retired Rehabilitation Counselor.  I am also a dual citizen of the USA and Canada.

High Weight 412 lbs.                    Date of Surgery 360.5                                 Present  170 lbs   

        
Jen C.
on 6/29/09 11:38 pm
RNY patients are at risk for "marginal ulcers", which occur at the anastomosis of the "pouch" and the small bowel. I've pasted a research article from Yale showing the incidence can be as high as 10%. For that reason they can NEVER take Motrin or related medications, which for me would severely impact my quality of life.

Old Medic, I was unable to find any reports of ulcers at the end of the small bowel. If you have links to research articles can you PM me?

Here is the abstract, this is just one of many showing the dangers of RNY and ulcers.

Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2006 Jul-Aug;2(4):460-3.
 

Incidence and management of marginal ulceration after laparoscopic Roux-Y gastric bypass.

Gumbs AA, Duffy AJ, Bell RL.

Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06510, USA.

BACKGROUND: Marginal ulceration (MU) is a well-known complication after gastrojejunostomy; however, its incidence has rarely been reported in bariatric studies. We present 16 cases of documented MU after laparoscopic gastric bypass (LGBP) that were successfully treated with proton pump inhibition (PPI). METHODS: All patients undergoing LGBP from October 2002 to August 2005 were entered into a prospective, longitudinal database. All patients who subsequently presented with MU were analyzed. MU was diagnosed when patients presented postoperatively with mid-epigastric pain and/or upper gastrointestinal bleeding that responded to PPI or endoscopic intervention. Analysis of variance and Student's t test were used for the statistical analyses. RESULTS: MU was diagnosed in 16 (4%) of 347 patients in whom LGBP was performed. An additional 10 patients had symptoms suggestive of MU, which raised the incidence as great as 7%. Of the 26 patients, 18 were women and 8 were men (age range 23-53 years), with a preoperative body mass index 37.1-63.9 kg/m2, similar to that of the patients who did not develop MU. Compared with the patients who did not develop MU, the operative times were longer in the MU group (180.5 versus 140.4 minutes, P <0.001). Of the 26 patients, 10 presented with abdominal pain and 16 with upper gastrointestinal bleeding. The mean interval between the initial LGBP and subsequent MU was 6.3 months (range 1-13). After an initial history and physical examination, upper endoscopy confirmed the diagnosis of MU in 16 patients. Three patients who developed MU were receiving chronic anticoagulation medication. All patients who developed MU began high-dose PPI, which resulted in 100% resolution of MU within 8 weeks. Since January 2005, 73 patients were given prophylactic PPI therapy postoperatively, with no patients subsequently developing MU (P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: We report 16 documented cases of MU occurring after LGBP. This underreported complication can be successfully treated with PPI, although MU complicated by gastrogastric fistula may require operative intervention. The institution of routine PPI therapy after LGBP lowered the short-term incidence of MU at our institution. Additionally, we recommend that all patients who undergo LGBP be given prophylactic PPI therapy postoperatively.

 
Height: 5'7"     Join US On The VSG Maintenance Group Forum!!  
                          http://www.obesityhelp.com/group/VSGM/discussion/

(deactivated member)
on 6/30/09 1:09 am - Woodbridge, VA
OM recommended some search terms for me when I asked for him to offer documentation supporting the claim of intestinal ulcers in DS patients. I have been searching and have so far come up with these:

"Compared with other types of weight loss surgery, the duodenal switch has these advantages:
  • The remaining stomach is much larger after duodenal switch surgery than following gastric bypass; this allows for larger meals.
  • Reduced risk of developing ulcers"
"The bypassed stomach can still produce acid but it is not neutralized by the duodenum since the action of the duodenum to neutralize requires the presence of food.  Thus the acid may go into the small bowel. Ulcers in the small bowel especially in longer term gastric bypass patients are common.  These can be hard to find, hard to fix and cause leaks, and bowel obstructions."
(this is obviously about RNY)

"The Duodenal Switch is a newer surgery than the gastric bypass and the stomach stapling part has some advantages over the gastric bypass:   (1) DS patients may have less intestinal ulcers because the stomach is made into a pouch and retains the natural arrangement with a few inches of the first part of the small bowel still connected (i.e. no 'bypassed stomach' to dump raw acid into the small bowel)."

"There seemed to be no increase in the incidence of gallstone disease or gastroduodenal ulcer after the operation."
(from a clinical study synopsis of 5 year follow-up after "small intestinal bypass operations")

I also found information on intestinal ulcers relating to lymphoma, certain cancers, rheumatic disease, Crohn disease, and gastric bypass, but not the BPD, DS, or even pylorus-preserving intestinal bypass. When I search the exact phrase he gave me, I got no results, so I broke it up a bit to find something. Maybe you will have more luck than me!
Jen C.
on 6/30/09 1:36 am
Hi Jill,

That seems to make theoretical sense, that the acid from the blind stomach could cause intestinal ulcerations. I did a literature search as well, but I really can't find much on it. I'm sure it's happened to some people. The main concern is marginal ulcers, which have an incredibly high incidence of 10% in RNY patients.

The anastomosis of the pouch to the intestines is incredibly fragile. I'm glad I have a pyloric valve and not an ulcer-prone anastomosis.

Jen
 
Height: 5'7"     Join US On The VSG Maintenance Group Forum!!  
                          http://www.obesityhelp.com/group/VSGM/discussion/

Most Active
×