Users Online : 646 About us |  Subscribe |  e-Alerts  | Feedback | Login   |   
Journal of Minimal Access Surgery Current Issue | Archives | Ahead Of Print Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
           Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
 ¤   Next article
 ¤   Previous article
 ¤   Table of Contents

 ¤   Similar in PUBMED
 ¤  Search Pubmed for
 ¤  Search in Google Scholar for
 ¤Related articles
 ¤   Citation Manager
 ¤   Access Statistics
 ¤   Reader Comments
 ¤   Email Alert *
 ¤   Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed5716    
    Printed190    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded290    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

 

 REVIEW ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 12  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 305-310

Current status of mini-gastric bypass


1 Bariatric Unit, Sunderland Royal Hospital, Sunderland, UK
2 Department of General Surgery, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Nedlands, Australia

Correspondence Address:
Kamal K Mahawar
Sunderland Royal Hospital, Sunderland SR4 7TP
UK
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0972-9941.181352

Rights and Permissions

Mini-gastric bypass (MGP) is a promising bariatric procedure. Tens of thousands of this procedure have been performed throughout the world since Rutledge performed the first procedure in the United States of America in 1997. Several thousands of these have even been documented in the published scientific literature. Despite a proven track record over nearly two decades, this operation continues to polarise the bariatric community. A large number of surgeons across the world have strong objections to this procedure and do not perform it. The risk of symptomatic (bile) reflux, marginal ulceration, severe malnutrition, and long-term risk of gastric and oesophageal cancers are some of the commonly voiced concerns. Despite these expressed fears, several advantages such as technical simplicity, shorter learning curve, ease of revision and reversal, non-inferior weight loss and comorbidity resolution outcomes have prompted some surgeons to advocate a wider adoption of this procedure. This review examines the current status of these controversial aspects in the light of the published academic literature in English.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*


        
Print this article     Email this article

© 2004 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 15th August '04