Bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for patients with morbid obesity. Until recently, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was regarded as the standard bariatric procedure. However, sleeve gastrectomy is being performed with increasing frequency despite the lack of evidence regarding its long-term efficacy.¹ The sleeve gastrectomy procedure is technically easier, faster to perform, and potentially safer compared with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. However, much more data on clinical and metabolic long-term outcomes are available on the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedure. Early and midterm results of sleeve gastrectomy showed potential benefit, but only a limited number of randomized studies have compared outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass head to head, most of which were underpowered because of low patient numbers, short follow-up, or both.^2-6

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has been proposed as an effective alternative to the current standard procedure, laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). Prospective data comparing both procedures are rare. Therefore, we performed a randomized clinical trial assessing the effectiveness and safety of these 2 operative techniques. Two hundred seventeen patients were randomized at 4 bariatric centers in Switzerland. One hundred seven patients underwent LSG using a 35-F bougie with suturing of the stapler line, and 110 patients underwent LRYGB with a 150-cm antecolic alimentary and a 50-cm biliopancreatic limb. The mean body mass index of all patients was 44 ± 11.1 kg/m, the mean age was 43 ± 5.3 years, and 72% were female. The 2 groups were similar in terms of body mass index, age, sex, comorbidities, and eating behavior. The mean operative time was less for LSG than for LRYGB (87 ± 52.3 minutes vs 108 ± 42.3 minutes; P = 0.003). The conversion rate was 0.9% in both groups. Complications (<30 days) occurred more often in LRYGB than in LSG (17.2% vs 8.4%; P = 0.067). However, the difference in severe complications did not reach statistical significance (4.5% for LRYGB vs 1% for LSG; P = 0.21). Excessive body mass index loss 1 year after the operation was similar between the 2 groups (72.3% ± 22% for LSG and 76.6% ± 21% for LRYGB; P = 0.2). Except for gastroesophageal reflux disease, which showed a higher resolution rate after LRYGB, the comorbidities and quality of life were significantly improved after both procedures. LSG was associated with shorter operation time and a trend toward fewer complications than with LRYGB. Both procedures were almost equally efficient regarding weight loss, improvement of comorbidities, and quality of life 1 year after surgery. Long-term follow-up data are needed to confirm these facts.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is performed almost as often in Europe as laparoscopic Roux-Y-Gastric Bypass (LRYGB). We present the 3-year interim results of the 5-year prospective, randomized trial comparing the 2 procedures (Swiss Multicentre Bypass Or Sleeve Study; SM-BOSS). Initially, 217 patients (LSG, n = 107; LRYGB, n = 110) were randomized to receive either LSG or LRYGB at 4 bariatric centers in Switzerland. Mean body mass index of all patients was 44 ± 11 kg/m, mean age was 43 ± 5.3 years, and 72% of patients were female. Minimal follow-up was 3 years with a rate of 97%. Both groups were compared for weight loss, comorbidities, quality of life, and complications. Excessive body mass index loss was similar between LSG and LRYGB at each time point (1 year: 72.3 ± 21.9% vs. 76.6 ± 20.9%, P = 0.139; 2 years: 74.7 ± 29.8% vs. 77.7 ± 30%, P = 0.513; 3 years: 70.9 ± 23.8% vs. 73.8 ± 23.3%, P = 0.316). At this interim 3-year time point, comorbidities were significantly reduced and comparable after both procedures except for gastro-esophageal reflux disease and dyslipidemia, which were more successfully treated by LRYGB. Quality of life increased significantly in both groups after 1, 2, and 3 years postsurgery. There was no statistically significant difference in number of complications treated by reoperation (LSG, n = 9; LRYGB, n = 16, P = 0.15) or number of complications treated conservatively. In this trial, LSG and LRYGB are equally efficient regarding weight loss, quality of life, and complications up to 3 years postsurgery. Improvement of comorbidities is similar except for gastro-esophageal reflux disease and dyslipidemia that appear to be more successfully treated by LRYGB.