Study inclusion
Year
Investigator
Study type
Patients (n)
Procedure
Variables assessed
2007
Alami
RCT
61
LRYGB
Postoperative EWL, operating room time, complication rate, comorbidity resolution
2008
Alger-Mayer
Prospective
150
RYGB
Postoperative EWL
2007
Ali
Retrospective
351
LRYGB
Postoperative EWL
2005
Alvarado
Retrospective
90
LRYGB
Postoperative EWL, operating time, comorbidity resolution
2010
Becouarn
Retrospective
507
RYGB/LAGB/SG
Postoperative EWL
2009
Benotti
Retrospective
881
LRYGB/RYGB
Complication rate
2007
Broderick-villa
Retrospective
353
RYGB
Postoperative EWL
2008
Carlin
Retrospective
295
LRYGB
Postoperative EWL
2008
Conlee
Retrospective
105
RYGB
Postoperative EWL, operating time, complication rate, length of stay
2010
Eisenberg
Retrospective
256
LRYGB
Postoperative EWL
1997
Finigan
Prospective
31
LAGB
Postoperative EWL
2008
Fujioka
Retrospective
121
LRYGB/RYGB
Postoperative EWL, complication rate
2008
Gallo
Retrospective
494
LAGB
Postoperative EWL, operating time
2008
Harnisch
Retrospective
203
LRYGB
Postoperative EWL, operating time, complication rate, comorbidity resolution
2005
Hong
Retrospective
100
LAGB
Postoperative EWL
2008
Huerta
Retrospective
40
RYGB
Postoperative EWL, operating time, complication rate, length of stay
2009
Jantz
Retrospective
384
LRYGB
Postoperative EWL
2005
Liu
Retrospective
95
LRYGB
Operating time, complication rate, length of stay
1995
Martin
Prospective
100
RYGB
Postoperative EWL, complication rate
2007
Micucci
Retrospective
NR
RYGB
Postoperative EWL
2008
Mrad
Retrospective
146
LRYGB/RYGB/LAGB/VGB
Postoperative EWL
2005
Phan
Retrospective
364
LRYGB/RYGB/LAGB
Postoperative EWL
2008
Reiss
Retrospective
262
LRYGB
Postoperative EWL, operating time, complication rate, length of stay
2009
Segaran
Prospective
37
RYGB/LAGB/SG
Complication rate
2009
Solomon
RCT
44
LRYGB
Postoperative EWL, conversion rate, complication rate
2007
Still
Prospective
884
LRYGB/RYGB
Postoperative weight loss, length of stay
1999
Van de Weijgert
Retrospective
153
RYGB/VGB
Postoperative EWL
Livhits and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of 15 articles including 3,404 patients. Only two of the included cohorts were excluded from the Cassie review. Not surprisingly, the authors drew similar conclusions. Of the 15 articles analyzed, 5 studies had positive effects for PWL, 2 studies showed positive short-term effects, 5 studies showed no difference, and 1 study showed a negative effect. Overall no significant heterogeneity was seen among the studies with results of postoperative weight loss [3].
Operative Time
One of the hypothesized benefits of PWL includes shorter operative times, so looking at the studies that analyzed this is important in determining if PWL is needed. In the Alami study, total operating time was greater in the non-preoperative weight loss group (257.6 ± 27.8 min versus 220.2 ± 31.5 min) as compared with the preoperative weight loss group [4]. Harnisch and colleagues also found a slight benefit in OR time with PWL (119.7 versus 104.9 min, P