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.

Spectrum and Frequency of GJB2 Mutations in a Cohort of 264 Portuguese Nonsyndromic Sensorineural Hearing Loss Patients

OBJECTIVE: To assess the spectrum and prevalence of mutations in the GJB2 gene in Portuguese nonsyndromic sensorineural hearing loss (NSSHL) patients. DESIGN: Sequencing of the coding region, basal promoter, exon 1, and donor splice site of the GJB2 gene; screening for the presence of the two common GJB6 deletions. STUDY SAMPLE: A cohort of 264 Portuguese NSSHL patients. RESULTS: At least one out of 21 different GJB2 variants was identified in 80 (30.2%) of the 264 patients analysed. Two mutant alleles were found in 53 (20%) of these probands, of which 83% (44/53) harboured at least one c.35delG allele. Twenty-seven (10.2%) of the probands harboured only one mutant allele. Subsequent analysis revealed that the GJB6 deletion del(GJB6-D13S1854) was present in at least 7.4% (2/27) of the patients carrying only one mutant GJB2 allele. Overall, one in five (55/264) of the patients were diagnosed as having DFNB1-related NSSHL, of which the vast majority (53/55) harboured only GJB2 mutations. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides clear demonstration that mutations in the GJB2 gene are an important cause of NSSHL in Portugal, thus representing a valuable indicator as regards therapeutical and rehabilitation options, as well as genetic counseling of these patients and their families.