One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass versus Roux en Y Gastric Bypass as Salvage Technique after Failed Gastric Band: a Retrospective Analysis of 80 Cases

The classical “Roux en Y Gastric Bypass” (RYGBP) is still the standard technique between all the ones being used nowadays. The “One anastomosis gastric bypass” (OAGBP), is an evolution of the “Minigastic bypass” described by Robert Rutledge in 2001, is a well known and progressively frequent but still controversial technique. In our group, after an experience of 10 years using the RYGBP as a salvage surgery after failed gastric banding, in 132 cases, we decided to adopt the OAGBP as our preferential bariatric technique also in this situation. The theoretical main reasons for that shift are related to the increased safety, maximized weight loss, long term weight loss maintenance and reversibility of the operation. Method: Retrospectively we evaluated data of the surgical management of revisional cases for conversion, after failed or complicated gastric bands to gastric bypass. We selected the last 40 cases of each technique since May 2010. Results: All cases were performed by laparoscopy without any conversion. In both groups the conversion has been performed in one single step (17 cases, 42,5%). Data showed lower morbidity with OAGBP (2,5% against 7,5%) and better weight loss in theOAGBP cohort after a median follow up of 16months (67%against 55%) in patients revised after gastric band failure or complications. None had statistic significance (p>0,1) by the chi-square contingency table analysis.Conclusion: It seems to there is a difference in favour of OAGBP for conversion of complicated gastric bands. In this study we didn’t found statistic significance probably because of the short numbers. Prospective and more powerful studies are necessary to evaluate the benefit of the studied procedure.

Quantitative Analysis of Immunoglobulin E Reactivity Profiles in Patients Allergic or Sensitized to Natural Rubber Latex (Hevea Brasiliensis)

Characterized native and recombinant Hevea brasiliensis (rHev b) natural rubber latex (NRL) allergens are available to assess patient allergen sensitization profiles. OBJECTIVE: Quantification of individual IgE responses to the spectrum of documented NRL allergens and evaluation of cross-reactive carbohydrate determinants (CCDs) for more definitive diagnosis. METHODS: Sera of 104 healthcare workers (HCW; 51 German, 21 Portuguese, 32 American), 31 spina bifida patients (SB; 11 German, 20 Portuguese) and 10 Portuguese with multiple surgeries (MS) were analysed for allergen-specific IgE antibody (sIgE) to NRL, single Hev b allergens and CCDs with ImmunoCAP technology. RESULTS: In all patient groups rHev b 5-sIgE concentrations were the most pronounced. Hev b 2, 5, 6.01 and 13 were identified as the major allergens in HCW and combined with Hev b 1 and Hev b 3 in SB. In MS Hev b 1 displayed an intermediate relevance. Different sIgE antibody levels to native Hevea brasiliensis (nHev b) 2 and rHev b 6.01 allowed discrimination of SB with clinical relevant latex allergy vs. those with latex sensitization. Sensitization profiles of German, Portuguese and American patients were equivalent. rHev b 5, 6.01 and nHev b 13 combined detected 100% of the latex-allergic HCW and 80.1% of the SB. Only 8.3% of the sera showed sIgE response to CCDs. CONCLUSIONS: Hev b 1, 2, 5, 6.01 and 13 were identified as the major Hev b allergens and they should be present in standardized latex extracts and in vitro allergosorbents. CCDs are only of minor relevance in patients with clinical relevant latex allergy. Component-resolved diagnostic analyses for latex allergy set the stage for an allergen-directed immunotherapy strategy