Comparison of 30-day outcomes after non-LapBand primary and revisional bariatric surgical procedures from the Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery study

William B. Inabnet, Steven H. Belle, Marc Bessler, Anita Courcoulas, Patchen Dellinger, Luis Garcia, James Mitchell, Brant Oelschlager, Robert O'Rourke, John Pender, Alfons Pomp, Walter Pories, Ramesh Ramanathan, Abdus Wahed, Bruce Wolfe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

58 Scopus citations


Background: The goals were to compare the morbidity and mortality between primary and revisional bariatric surgery and to identify the clinical predictors of adverse outcomes among patients undergoing revisional surgery in the Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery consortium. The study was multi-institutional at university hospitals in the United States. Methods: Data from the LABS-1 (safety) cohort were analyzed, excluding primary gastric banding patients. A total of 3802 LABS-1 patients were included: 3577 who underwent primary surgery and 225 who underwent revisional surgery. The demographic, clinical, operative, and 30-day outcome data were compared between the 2 groups. A nonlinear mixed effects logit model was used to identify independent risk factors for adverse outcomes (death, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, reintubation, reoperation, or discharge after 30 days). Results: Compared with those undergoing revisional surgery, the primary surgery patients were younger (median age 44 versus 49 years, P <.0001) and more likely to be male (20.5% versus 12.7%, P = .006) and heavier (median body mass index 47.3 versus 41.2 kg/m2, P <.0001) and to have more co-morbidities (P <.0001), including hypertension (56.0% versus 46.0%, P = .0044), diabetes (35.7% versus 20.0%, P <.0001), and sleep apnea (50.3% versus 27.2%, P <.0001). The operative time for the revisional procedures was longer (median 181 versus 135 min, P <.0001) and associated with greater blood loss (median 100 versus <50 mL, P <.0001). Adverse outcomes were more likely after revisional surgery (15.1% versus 5.3%, P <.0001, odds ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.6-3.6). After adjusting for patient characteristics previously shown to be associated with adverse outcomes, this difference remained statistically significant (odds ratio 2.3, 95% confidence interval 1.5-3.8). The 30-day mortality rate was similar in the 2 groups (.4%). Conclusion: Revisional surgery was performed without substantial mortality but with a greater incidence of adverse outcomes than was primary bariatric surgery.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)22-30
Number of pages9
JournalSurgery for Obesity and Related Diseases
Issue number1
StatePublished - Jan 2010

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
S. Belle, none; M. Bessler, none; A. Courcoulas, none; P. Dellinger practices in an American College of Surgeons Bariatric Center, is a site visitor for the American College of Surgeons program to visit and gather information for certification of new centers, and is a consultant to GlaxoSmithKline, Merck & Company, Pfizer, and Wyeth; L. Garcia, none; W. B. Inabnet is an educational or research grant recipient from Covidien; J. Mitchell, none; R. O'Rourke, none; B. Oelschlager is on the Speakers Bureau for Covidien and Cook Surgical; J. Pender is a consultant to, and has received educational grants from, Tyco Health Care; A. Pomp, none; W. Pories has received a research grant from Johnson & Johnson and GlaxoSmith Kline; R. Ramanathan, none; A. Wahed, none; B. Wolfe is on the Speakers Bureau for the American College of Surgeons Bariatric Centers and Surgical Review Corporation and is a Consultant to Enteromedics.


  • Bariatric surgery
  • Complications
  • Failed restrictive procedure
  • Gastric bypass
  • Revision

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery


Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of 30-day outcomes after non-LapBand primary and revisional bariatric surgical procedures from the Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this