Next Article in Journal
Placing Greater Torque at Shorter or Longer Muscle Lengths? Effects of Cable vs. Barbell Preacher Curl Training on Muscular Strength and Hypertrophy in Young Adults
Previous Article in Journal
Construction, Factor Structure, and Internal Consistency Reliability of the Hospital Physical Therapy Perceived Satisfaction Questionnaire (H-PTPS)
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJERPH
Volume 17
Issue 16
10.3390/ijerph17165858
ijerph-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Changes in Lipid Profile, Body Weight Variables and Cardiovascular Risk in Obese Patients Undergoing One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass

by
Jose-Maria Jiménez
1,2,3,*,
Miguel-Angel Carbajo
1,
María López
2,*,
María-José Cao
2,3,
Jaime Rúiz-Tovar
1,
Sara García
2 and
María-José Castro
1,2,3
1
Center of Excellence for the Study and Treatment of Diabetes and Obesity, 47004 Valladolid, Spain
2
Nursing Faculty, University of Valladolid, 47005 Valladolid, Spain
3
Endocrinology and Clinical Nutrition Research Center (ECNRC), University of Valladolid, 47005 Valladolid, Spain
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17(16), 5858; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165858
Submission received: 6 July 2020 / Revised: 5 August 2020 / Accepted: 6 August 2020 / Published: 13 August 2020
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Morbid obesity has a direct impact on the development of cardiovascular disease. One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is an effective surgical technique for the control of body weight and the reduction of cardiovascular risk. This work examines the change in weight loss, lipid profile and cardiovascular risk in 100 patients (71 women, 29 men), mean age 42.61 ± 11.33 years at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months after OAGB. At 24 months post-surgery, mean body weight was significantly reduced compared to pre-operative values (116.75 ± 22.19 kg vs. 69.66 ± 13.07 kg), as were mean total cholesterol (201.86 ± 44.60 mg/dL vs. 172.99 ± 32.26 mg/dL), LDL (Low-Density Lipoprotein) cholesterol (126.90 ± 39.81 mg/dL vs. 96.28 ± 26.99 mg/dL), triglycerides (138.05 ± 78.45 mg/dL vs. 76.04 ± 30.34 mg/dL) and cardiovascular risk (total cholesterol/HDL (High-Density Lipoprotein) cholesterol: 4.32 ± 1.24 vs. 2.93 ± 0.71), while the mean HDL cholesterol concentration was significantly higher (49.09 ± 14.16 mg/dL vs. 61.98 ± 14.86 mg/dL) (all p < 0.001). In conclusion, OAGB surgery led to significant reductions in body weight, a significant improvement in the lipid profile, and a reduction in cardiovascular risk.

1. Introduction

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines obesity as abnormal or excessive fat accumulation that may affect health [1]. Certainly, the condition increases the risk of developing cardiovascular disease, diabetes, musculoskeletal disorders and cancer in a manner proportional to the increase in body mass index (BMI). Worldwide, more than 1.9 billion people over 18 years of age were overweight in 2016; 650 million of them were obese [1]. According to the Global Burden of Disease Project, in 2015 excess bodyweight accounted for a global 4 million deaths and 120 million disability adjusted life years. Almost 70% of deaths related to high BMI were caused by cardiovascular disease, and over 60% of those deaths were among obese people [2].
Obesity is associated with high plasma concentrations of triglycerides, cholesterol and LDL (Low-Density Lipoprotein) cholesterol, and low concentrations of HDL (High-Density Lipoprotein) cholesterol. However, overweight, obesity and dyslipidemia are all modifiable risk factors of cardiovascular disease [3,4]. The treatment of choice for obesity depends upon the type of obesity and the clinical features of each patient, but generally begins with modification of the diet, health education, and medication [5,6,7]. Surgical treatment is, however, an option for some patients [8,9]. The main procedures include gastric bypass, a technique that reduces nutrient absorption (performed in 46.3% of cases), and sleeve gastrectomy, which restricts nutrient absorption (performed in 43.6% of cases) [10]. These techniques are associated with a 15–30% total weight loss (TWL) [11], improved weight control and a better lipid profile [12,13]. Indeed, even a 5–10% weight loss can lead to improved lipid metabolism [14], increasing the HDL cholesterol concentration and lowering those of triglycerides, total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol [15].
Compared to the above type of surgery, one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a more modern, less invasive (laparoscopic) mixed nutrient absorption reducing-restricting surgical technique, with the potential to provide similar results. The aim of the present work was to examine the change over a 24-month period in weight loss, lipid profile and cardiovascular risk in patients who had undergone OAGB.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

This descriptive study with prospective collection of data was performed at the Centre of Excellence for the Study and Treatment of Obesity and Diabetes in Valladolid (Spain). The study subjects were 100 Caucasian patients (71 women, 29 men) who underwent OAGB surgery between January and December of 2010. All fulfilled the indication criteria for bariatric-metabolic surgery approved by the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity (IFSO), i.e., a BMI of >40 kg/m2, or ≥30–35 kg/m2 plus a progressive deterioration of glycemic control, plus important but inadequately managed comorbidities [16].
Pre-surgery examination included the recording of patient sex and age, anamnesis, blood typing, anthropometric measurements, psychological and radiological evaluations, and cardiorespiratory function testing. Surgery was performed (always by the same surgical team) under general anesthesia and using a previously described laparoscopic technique [17]. Postoperative care included providing assistance to patients in their adaptation to new eating habits and increased physical activity. Following the recommendations of the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgeons (ASMBS) [18], the following variables were monitored: (1) changes in patient body weight, BMI [weight (Kg)/height2 (m)], percentage excess weight loss (%EWL = [pre-operative weight − current weight/pre-operative weight − ideal weight] × 100 [note: ideal body weight was defined by the weight corresponding to a BMI of 25 kg/m2]), percentage excess body mass index loss (%EBMIL = [pre-operative BMI − current BMI/pre-operative BMI − 25] × 100]), and percentage total weight loss (%TWL = [pre-operative weight – current weight]/[pre-operative weight] × 100], (2) lipid profile, i.e., total cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and triglycerides, and (3) cardiovascular risk (total cholesterol/HDL cholesterol).
Data were recorded at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18 and 24 months post-surgery. To determine the lipid profile, venous blood was collected after an overnight fasting. Lipid profile (high density lipoprotein, total cholesterol and triglycerides) were determined from the serum, following standard operating procedures. Commercial reagents are used, which include the enzymes and substrates necessary for the quantification of all forms of cholesterol present in the serum.
According to the clinical guidelines of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel III (ATP-III) for the diagnosis and treatment of dyslipidemia [19], a total cholesterol of <200 mg/dL was deemed normal, 200–239 mg/dL as borderline high, and >240 mg/dL as high. An LDL cholesterol concentration of <100 mg/dL was deemed optimal, 100–129 mg/dL as near optimal, 130–159 mg/dL as borderline high, 160–189 mg/dL as high, and ≥190 mg/dL as very high. The HDL cholesterol concentration was deemed low at <40 mg/dL, while >60 mg/dL was considered high. A triglyceride concentration of <150 mg/dL was deemed normal, 150–199 mg/dL as borderline high, 200–499 mg/dL as high, and ≥500 mg/dL as very high. In addition, a cardiovascular risk score (calculated as described above) of ≤3.27 was deemed ½ the average risk, up to 4.44 as the average risk, then up to 7.05 as twice the average, and then up to 11.04 as three times the average. Class I obesity was defined as BMI ≥ 30 ≤ 34.9 kg/m2, class II as BMI ≥ 35 ≤ 39.9 kg/m2, class III (morbid obesity) as BMI ≥ 40 ≤ 49.9 kg/m2, and class IV (extreme obesity) as BMI ≥ 50 kg/m2.

2.2. Statistical Analysis.

All calculations were performed using SPSS v.5.0 software (SPSS Inc.; Chicago, IL, USA). Quantitative variables were defined by mean and standard deviation when they followed a Gaussian distribution. Qualitative variables were defined by percentage. The paired t test or Wilcoxon rank test was used to study the differences between means over time, and ANOVA or the Kruskal-Wallis test for comparing changes in variables with more than two categories. Significance was set at p < 0.05.

2.3. Ethics Statement

This study was approved by the University of Valladolid Institutional Review Board and the Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Nursing (ID code: 2019/JMJP39). Informed written consent was obtained from all subjects. In the case of underage patients, the informed consent was completed by the parents or guardians and always informing and having the approval of the minor.

3. Results

The mean age of the patients at baseline was 42.61 ± 11.33 years (range 13–65 years); women: 42.56 ± 11.33 years, men: 42.72 ± 12.25 years. The mean pre-operative BMI was 42.61± 6.66 kg/m2 (range 30–58.98 kg/m2), with no significant difference between women and men (42.32 ± 6.75 kg/m2 vs. 43.31 ± 6.49 kg/m2). Before surgery, 10% of the patients were class I obese (7% women, 3% men), 33% fell into class II (26% women, 7% men), 42% into class III or morbid obesity (28% women, 14% men), and 15% into class IV or extreme obesity (10% women, 5% men).

3.1. Weight Loss

Table 1 shows the change in weight loss variables of the patients who underwent OAGB. Significant weight loss was observed at all post-surgery check points with respect to initial body weight (p < 0.001). For the population as a whole, the lowest mean weight was reached 12 months after surgery (68.56 ± 13.10 kg); in men this was reached at 12 months (78.96 ± 12.94 kg), and in women at 18 months (63.57 ± 10.96 kg). At each check point a higher average body weight was observed for the men (p < 0.001).
Mean BMI also fell over time, reaching its lowest at 12 months post-surgery (25.08 ± 3.59 kg/m2). After this time the BMI increased, although the values always remained significantly lower than the pre-operative BMI (p < 0.001). No difference was seen between the BMI of the men and women before surgery (43.31 ± 6.49 kg/m2 vs. 42.32 ± 6.75 kg/m2), but the mean BMI of the men was higher than that of the women at the 18-month (26.90 ± 3.31 kg/m2 vs. 24.46 ± 3.41 kg/m2) and 24-month check points (26.70 ± 3.05 kg/m2 vs. 24.77 ± 3.32 kg/m2) (p < 0.05). After 24 months, a normal BMI (≥ 18.5 ≤ 24.9 kg/m2) was attained by 48% of patients; 43% were still overweight (BMI ≥ 25 ≤ 29.9 kg/m2), just 8% had class I obesity (BMI ≥ 30 ≤ 34.9 kg/m2), and none was morbidly or extremely obese.
The %EWL increased progressively over time, with the highest value seen at 12 months post-surgery (89.70% ± 16.57%, p < 0.001 compared to the first possible checkpoint at 3 months). At the 3-month check point no significant difference was seen between the men and women in terms of %EWL (70.68% ± 15.13% vs. 65.30% ± 18.25%). However, the women returned a significantly higher %EWL value than the men at 12, 18 and 24 months (p < 0.05).
The %EBMIL followed the same trend as BMI. Women obtained better results than men from the 6-month check point onwards, reaching significance at the 12-, 18- and 24-month check points (p < 0.05).
The %TWL increased by 6 months, with the highest values reached at 12 months post-surgery (41.30% ± 7.42%). The women returned better results than the men from 6 months onwards, reaching significance at 18 and 24 months (p < 0.05).

3.2. Change in Lipid Profile

Before surgery, 68% of the patients (49 women and 19 men) had dyslipidemia; 36.76% of them were following hypolipidemic treatments. Table 2 shows the change in the lipid profile following surgery. Total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol concentrations were significantly lower at every check point compared to pre-operative values.
Figure 1 shows the evolution of changes in the lipid profile, the lowest total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol concentrations were detected at 12 months (164.38 ± 28.25 mg/dL and 91.99 ± 24.75 mg/dL respectively). The women returned a mean total cholesterol level higher than that of the men at every check point (p < 0.05). No significant differences were seen between men and women in terms of LDL cholesterol. HDL cholesterol increased significantly from the 6-month check point onwards, reaching its highest value 24 months after surgery (61.98 ± 14.86 mg/dL). The women returned a higher mean HDL cholesterol value than the men at every check point. Both sexes returned the highest values at 24 months (men: 56.14 ± 16.17 mg/dL. women: 64.35 ± 13.72 mg/dL).
Triglycerides decreased progressively over time, with the lowest values (taking both sexes together) recorded 24 months after surgery (76.04 ± 30.34 mg/dL). A progressive reduction was also seen for both sexes, with the lowest mean value for women reached at 24 months (73.87 ± 27.79 mg/dL), and the lowest for the men reached 18 months (79.31 ± 29.52 md/dL). At 24 months, no patients required lipid-lowering medication, 83.51% had a normal total cholesterol concentration (i.e., ≤200 mg/dL), 58.63% had a normal LDL cholesterol concentration (<100 mg/dL), 97.90% had a normal triglyceride concentration (150 mg/dL), 100% had an HDL cholesterol concentration of >40 mg/dl, and 54.44% had an HDL cholesterol concentration of >60 mg/dL.
Table 2 shows the change in cardiovascular risk (as reflected by total cholesterol/HDL cholesterol). The fall was notable at every check point compared to pre-operative values. According to the ASMBS classification, the percentage of patients at ½ the average risk increased from a pre-operative 47.1% to 88% at 24 months post-surgery; the percentage of patients at average risk decreased from 50% to 12% over the same period; and the percentage at twice the average risk fell from 2.9% to 0%. Figure 2 shows that, at 24 months, those patients at higher post-operative cardiovascular risk had a greater body weight and BMI, and lower %EWL, %EBMIL and %TWL values (p < 0.001).
Significant differences were found between the patients of the different cardiovascular risk groups in terms of their lipid profile variables (p < 0.001); those at higher risk had higher total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and triglyceride concentrations, a higher total cholesterol/HDL cholesterol ratio, and a lower HDL cholesterol concentration (Figure 2).

4. Discussion

At 24 months after OAGB, the patients had lower body weights and better lipid profiles, reducing their risk of developing cardiovascular disease. Indeed, a significant weight loss was recorded at every post-surgery check point compared to pre-operative values.
In agreement with the present results, Chakhtoura et al. [20] reported the greatest weight loss (89.8 ± 18.4 kg) to be seen at 12 months after mini-gastric bypass (a reduction-restriction technique), while authors report the greatest weight loss at 18 months with this technique (79.3 ± 14.4 kg) [21].
Weight loss after OAGB was substantial, demonstrating the impact of weight loss in the modification of the lipid profile on the study cohort previously published by the same surgical team [22].
Bariatric surgery has been shown effective for achieving weight loss, with the best result obtained when using surgical techniques that reduce nutrient absorption. In the present study, which involved a combined nutrient absorption reduction-restriction technique, higher %EWL values were returned than with the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), another combined nutrient reduction-restriction technique at 12 months (89.70% vs. 53.8%) and 24 months (88.10% vs. 60.7%) [23].
The present weight loss results at 24 months were also better than those obtained by Ooi et al. who performed nutrient restriction surgery involving adjustable gastric banding (AGB) (%EWL 88.10% vs. 48.7%; %TWL 39.87% vs. 18.4%) [14].
Lee et al. reported higher %EWL values at 5 years for patients who underwent RYGB (a reduction-restriction technique) compared to those underwent sleeve gastrectomy (a restriction technique) (69.6% vs. 68.7%) [24].
In the present patients, total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol concentrations were significantly lower than pre-operative values through until 24 months post-surgery (but with no further improvement after 12 months). Similarly, HDL cholesterol was significantly higher than pre-operative values at all check points. Other authors describe a significant reduction in total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol and triglycerides, plus an increase in HDL cholesterol, at 6 and 12 months after different types of bariatric surgery, with RYGB (reduction-restriction) returning the best results [9,15,25] though perhaps less impressive than those obtained with the present OAGB technique. It would be interesting to eventually compare longer term results.
In the present patients, the triglyceride concentration was significantly reduced at every check point compared to the pre-operative values. Other authors report the same at 12 months after sleeve gastrectomy (restriction), and even more so in patients treated by RYGB (reduction-restriction) [26].
The present work suffers from a number of limitations. The sample was not randomly selected from several centers; all the patients were consecutive and from the same center. Further, the follow-up time was limited to 24 months. Future work should involve patients from different centers, longer follow-up periods, and take into account the impact of other health factors influenced by lifestyle.

5. Conclusions

OAGB would appear to be an effective surgical technique for achieving weight loss; both patient weight and BMI become more normal (in the present work no subject remained morbidly or extremely obese at 6 months). In addition, total cholesterol, triglycerides and LDL cholesterol concentrations fall, and the HDL cholesterol concentration rises. This weight loss, and the improvement in the lipid profile experienced, reduce the cardiovascular risk to which patients are exposed.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.-M.J., M.L. and M.-J.C. (María-José Castro); methodology, J.-M.J.; validation, J.-M.J., M.L., M.-A.C., M.-J.C. (María-José Cao), J.R.-T., S.G. and M.-J.C. (María-José Castro); formal analysis, J.-M.J. and M.L.; investigation, J.-M.J.; resources, J.-M-J., M.-A.C., M.-J.C. (María-José Cao), J.R.-T.; data curation, J.-M.J., M.L. and S.G.; writing—original draft preparation, J.-M.J. and M.L.; writing—review and editing, J.-M.J., M.L., M.-A.C., M.-J.C. (María-José Cao), J.R.-T., S.G. and M.-J.C. (María-José Castro); visualization, J.-M.J., M.L., M.-A.C., M.-J.C. (María-José Cao), J.R.-T., S.G. and M.-J.C. (María-José Castro); supervision, M.-J.C. (María-José Castro). All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. World Health Organisation (WHO). Obesity and Overweight. 2018. Available online: http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/obesity-and-overweight (accessed on 15 October 2018).
  2. Global Burden of Disease (GBD 2015 Obesity Collaborators). Health Effects of Overweight and Obesity in 195 Countries over 25 Years. N. Engl. J. Med. 2017, 377, 13–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Hernández-Lepe, M.A.; López-Díaz, J.; Rosa, L.A.; Hernández-Torres, R.P.; Wall-Medrano, A.; Juarez-Oropeza, M.A.; Pedraza-Chaverri, J.; Urquidez-Romero, R.; Ramos-Jiménez, A. Double-Blind Randomised Controlled Trial of the Independent and Synergistic Effect of Spirulina Maxima with Exercise (ISESE) on General Fitness, Lipid Profile and Redox Status in Overweight and Obese Subjects: Study Protocol. BMJ Open 2017, 7, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Klop, B.; Elte, J.W.; Cabezas, M.C. Dyslipidemia in Obesity: Mechanisms and Potential Targets. Nutrients 2013, 5, 1218–1240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Hamasaki, H.; Kawashima, Y.; Tamada, Y.; Furuta, M.; Katsuyama, H.; Sako, A.; Yanai, H. Associations of Low-Intensity Resistance Training with Body Composition and Lipid Profile in Obese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0132959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Li, Y.C.; Li, C.L.; Li, R.; Chen, Y.; Zhang, M.; Guo, P.P.; Shi, D.; Ji, X.N.; Feng, R.N.; Sun, C.H. Associations of Dietary Phytosterols with Blood Lipid Profiles and Prevalence of Obesity in Chinese Adults, a Cross-Sectional Study. Lipids Health Dis. 2018, 17, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  7. Valsesia, A.; Saris, W.H.; Astrup, A.; Hager, J.; Masoodi, M. Distinct Lipid Profiles Predict Improved Glycemic Control in Obese, Nondiabetic Patients after a Low-Caloric Diet Intervention: The Diet, Obesity and Genes Randomized Trial. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2016, 104, 566–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  8. Heffron, S.P.; Parikh, A.; Volodarskiy, A.; Ren-Fielding, C.; Schwartzbard, A.; Nicholson, J.; Bangalore, S. Changes in Lipid Profile of Obese Patients Following Contemporary Bariatric Surgery: A Meta-Analysis. Am. J. Med. 2016, 129, 952–959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Milone, M.; Lupoli, R.; Maietta, P.; Di Minno, A.; Bianco, P.; Ambrosino, P.; Coretti, G.; Milone, F.; Di Minno, M.N.; Musella, M. Lipid Profile Changes in Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery: A Comparative Study between Sleeve Gastrectomy and Mini-Gastric Bypass. Int. J. Surg. 2015, 14, 28–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Angrisani, L.; Santonicola, A.; Iovino, P.; Formisano, G.; Buchwald, H.; Scopinaro, N. Bariatric Surgery Worldwide 2013. Obes. Surg. 2015, 25, 1822–1832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Sjöström, L. Review of the Key Results from the Swedish Obese Subjects (SOS) Trial—A Prospective Controlled Intervention Study of Bariatric Surgery. J. Inter. Med. 2013, 273, 219–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Laguna, S.; Andrada, P.; Silva, C.; Rotellar, F.; Valenti, V.; Gil, M.J.; Gomez-Ambrosi, J.; Frünbeck, G.; Salvador, J. Las Variaciones En Colesterol-HDL Tras Bypass Gástrico Proximal Son Independientes de La Evolución Ponderal. An. Sist. Sanit. Navar. 2016, 39, 23–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Spivak, H.; Sakran, N.; Dicker, D.; Rubin, M.; Raz, I.; Shohat, T.; Blumenfeld, O. Different Effects of Bariatric Surgical Procedures on Dyslipidemia: A Registry-Based Analysis. Surg. Obes. Relat. Dis. 2017, 13, 1189–1194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Ooi, G.J.; Doyle, L.; Tie, T.; Wentworth, J.M.; Laurie, C.; Earnest, A.; Cowley, M.A.; Sikaris, K.; le Roux, C.W.; Burton, P.R.; et al. Weight Loss after Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Band and Resolution of the Metabolic Syndrome and Its Components. Int. J. Obes. 2017, 41, 902–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Cunha, F.M.; Oliveira, J.; Preto, J.; Saavedra, A.; Costa, M.M.; Magalhães, D.; Lau, E.; Bettencourt-Silva, R.; Freitas, P.; Varela, A.; et al. The Effect of Bariatric Surgery Type on Lipid Profile: An Age, Sex, Body Mass Index and Excess Weight Loss Matched Study. Obes. Surg. 2016, 26, 1041–1047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Dixon, J.B.; Zimmet, P.; Alberti, K.G.; Rubino, F. Bariatric Surgery: An IDF Statement for Obese Type 2 Diabetes. Surg. Obes. Relat. Dis. 2011, 7, 433–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Carbajo, M.A.; Luque-de-León, E.; Jiménez, J.M.; Ortiz-de-Solórzano, J.; Pérez-Miranda, M.; Castro-Alija, M.J. Laparoscopic One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass: Technique, Results, and Long-Term Follow-Up in 1200 Patients. Obes. Surg. 2017, 27, 1153–1167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. Brethauer, S.A.; Kim, J.; el Chaar, M.; Papasavas, P.; Eisenberg, D.; Rogers, A.; Ballem, N.; Kligman, M.; Kothari, S.; ASMBS Clinical Issues Committee. Standardized Outcomes Reporting in Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. Surg. Obes. Relat. Dis. 2015, 11, 489–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults. Executive Summary of the Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA 2001, 285, 2486–2497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Chakhtoura, G.; Zinzindohoué, F.; Ghanem, Y.; Ruseykin, I.; Dutranoy, J.C.; Chevallier, J.M. Primary Results of Laparoscopic Mini-Gastric Bypass in a French Obesity-Surgery Specialized University Hospital. Obes. Surg. 2008, 18, 1130–1133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Noun, R.; Skaff, J.; Riachi, E.; Daher, R.; Antoun, N.A.; Nasr, M. One Thousand Consecutive Mini-Gastric Bypass: Short- and Long-Term Outcome. Obes. Surg. 2012, 22, 697–703. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Carbajo, M.A.; Jiménez, J.M.; Luque-de-León, E.; Cao, M.J.; López, M.; García, S.; Castro, M.J. Evaluation of Weight Loss Indicators and Laparoscopic One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Outcomes. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 8–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Bindal, V.; Gonzalez-Heredia, R.; Elli, E.F. Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass as a Reoperative Bariatric Procedure. Obes. Surg. 2015, 25, 1810–1815. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Lee, W.J.; Pok, E.H.; Almulaifi, A.; Tsou, J.J.; Ser, K.H.; Lee, Y.C. Medium-Term Results of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Matched Comparison with Gastric Bypass. Obes. Surg. 2015, 25, 1431–1438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Vigilante, A.; Signorini, F.; Marani, M.; Paganini, V.; Viscido, G.; Navarro, L.; Obeide, L.; Moser, F. Impact on Dyslipidemia After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy. Obes. Surg. 2018, 28, 3111–3115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Bužga, M.; Marešová, P.; Petřeková, K.; Holéczy, P.; Kuča, K. The Efficacy of Selected Bariatric Surgery Methods on Lipid and Glucose Metabolism: A Retrospective 12-Month Study. Cent. Eur. J. Public Health 2018, 26, 49–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Ijerph 17 05858 g001 550
Figure 1. Evolution of changes in the lipid profile (total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides) after bariatric surgery. † p < 0.05 or †† p < 0.001 compared to the pre-operative check point. Results were expressed with mean. Units of measurement: mg/dL
Figure 1. Evolution of changes in the lipid profile (total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides) after bariatric surgery. † p < 0.05 or †† p < 0.001 compared to the pre-operative check point. Results were expressed with mean. Units of measurement: mg/dL
Ijerph 17 05858 g001
Ijerph 17 05858 g002 550
Figure 2. Change in weight, lipid profile and cardiovascular risk (according to ASBMS criteria) at 24 months post-surgery. * p < 0.001 when comparing cardiovascular risk groups.
Figure 2. Change in weight, lipid profile and cardiovascular risk (according to ASBMS criteria) at 24 months post-surgery. * p < 0.001 when comparing cardiovascular risk groups.
Ijerph 17 05858 g002
Table
Table 1. Change in the examined weight loss variables for the population as a whole.
Table 1. Change in the examined weight loss variables for the population as a whole.
Pre-Operative 3 Months6 Months9 Months12 Months18 Months24 Months
Weight (kg)116.75 ± 22.1981.55 †† ± 15.2274.02 †† ± 14.1172.13 †† ± 14.7868.56 †† ± 13.1069.67 †† ± 14.4069.66 †† ± 13.07
BMI (kg/m2)42.61 ± 6.6629.77 †† ± 5.0426.99 † ± 4.1526.44 † ± 3.9225.08 † ± 3.5925.27 † ± 3.5425.33 †† ± 3.35
%EWL-66.86 ± 17.4981.05 †† ± 17.6483.31 †† ± 15.3789.70 †† ± 16.5788.40 †† ± 16.9388.10 †† ± 16.99
%EBMIL-78.72 ± 24.1295.50 †† ± 26.6696.96 †† ± 20.76104.82 †† ± 23.57103.43 †† ± 24.16103.79 †† ±25.89
%TWL-30.19 ± 6.5736.65 †† ± 6.1638.86 †† ± 6.9841.30 †† ± 7.4240.60 †† ± 7.4439.87 †† ± 7.30
†p < 0.05, †† p < 0.001 compared to pre-operative value or that recorded at first possible check point.
Table
Table 2. Change in lipid profile after surgery.
Table 2. Change in lipid profile after surgery.
Pre-Operative 3 Months6 Months9 Months12 Months18 Months24 Months
Total Cholesterol201.86 ± 44.60170.60 †† ± 35.9171.01 †† ± 32.65166.34 †† ± 29.48164.38 †† ± 28.25168.62 †† ± 28.59172.99 †† ± 32.26
LDL Cholesterol126.90 ± 39.81105.82 †† ± 35.78102.90 †† ± 29.4098.80 †† ± 24.0391.99 †† ± 24.7594.88 †† ± 25.0196.28 †† ± 26.99
HDL Cholesterol49.09 ± 14.1645.86 ± 13.9149.37 ± 12.0552.56 † ± 11.2557.08 †† ± 13.6958.85 †† ± 13.6261.98 †† ± 14.86
Triglycerides138.05 ± 78.45100.09 †† ± 31.0388.05 †† ± 34.4983.94 †† ± 32.7681.06 †† ± 31.5877.35 †† ± 29.5476.04 †† ± 30.34
Cardiovascular Risk. (TC/HDL Ratio)4.32 ± 1.243.93 †† ± 1.093.61 †† ± 0.913.27 †† ± 0.653.05 †† ± 0.902.99 †† ± 0.722.93 †† ± 0.71
†p < 0.05, †† p < 0.001 compared to the pre-operative check point.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jiménez, J.-M.; Carbajo, M.-A.; López, M.; Cao, M.-J.; Rúiz-Tovar, J.; García, S.; Castro, M.-J. Changes in Lipid Profile, Body Weight Variables and Cardiovascular Risk in Obese Patients Undergoing One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 5858. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165858

AMA Style

Jiménez J-M, Carbajo M-A, López M, Cao M-J, Rúiz-Tovar J, García S, Castro M-J. Changes in Lipid Profile, Body Weight Variables and Cardiovascular Risk in Obese Patients Undergoing One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(16):5858. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165858

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jiménez, Jose-Maria, Miguel-Angel Carbajo, María López, María-José Cao, Jaime Rúiz-Tovar, Sara García, and María-José Castro. 2020. "Changes in Lipid Profile, Body Weight Variables and Cardiovascular Risk in Obese Patients Undergoing One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 16: 5858. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165858

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop