Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases
Volume 6, Issue 4 , Pages 386-389, July 2010

Evaluating gastric erosion in band management: an algorithm for stratification of risk

Presented at the 26th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Grapevine, Texas, June 21-26, 2009.

New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York

Received 27 May 2009; received in revised form 19 October 2009; accepted 30 November 2009. published online 21 December 2009.

Abstract 

Background

Laparoscopic gastric banding has several known complications, including gastric erosion. No clear factors have been determined for the development of band erosion, but technical factors such as covering the buckle of the band have been implicated. The objective of the present study was to determine whether band management after surgery, band size, or filling beyond the manufacturer-determined maximal volume has an effect on the incidence of erosion at a university hospital in the United States.

Methods

We performed a retrospective review of a prospective institutional review board–approved database. All patients who had been followed from 2002 to 2008 were identified. The maximal band volume was 4 cm3 for the 9.75-cm/10-cm band and 10 cm3 for the Vanguard band. The bands were considered overfilled if they had been filled to greater than the maximal volume for ≥3 months.

Results

A total of 2437 patients had undergone Lap-Band surgery. Of these 2437 patients, 14 developed erosion (.57%). The primary erosion rate was .39% (9 of 2359). These patients were divided into 3 groups according to the type of band placed: group 1, Vanguard (n = 735); group 2, 9.75-cm/10-cm band (n = 1624); and group 3, revisions to Vanguard, including a band placed around a bypass (n = 78). The incidence of gastric erosion by group was .95% (7 of 735) in group 1, .12% (2 of 1624) in group 2, and 6.41% (5 of 78) in group 3. The difference in the erosion rate among the groups was significant (group 1 versus 2, P = .005; group 3 versus 1, P = .003; and group 3 versus 2, P = .001). Erosions developed in each group without overfilling. Also, comparing the erosion rate in the overfilled versus underfilled bands, statistical significance was found only for group 1 at 3.18% versus .35% (P = .006). The erosion rate in the overfilled versus underfilled was 1.01% versus .07% in group 2 and 11.11% versus 3.92% in group 3.

Conclusion

A band that needs to be overfilled might be a sign of erosion, and patients should undergo endoscopy. Band revision has a greater rate of erosion than primary banding. The Vanguard band has a greater risk of erosion than the 4-cm3 bands.

Keywords: Gastric erosion, Laparoscopic gastric banding, Vanguard band

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S1550-7289(09)00777-1

doi:10.1016/j.soard.2009.11.020

Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases
Volume 6, Issue 4 , Pages 386-389, July 2010