• Local Treatment of Diabetic Foot Ulcers by Hyperoil™: An Unexpected Outcome
    Ahmed Salah Arafa *, Ahmed yehia , Alaa fiad
  • Evaluation of the Effect of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy in the Treatment of Chronic Wounds
    1Magdy Salah El-Din Hussain, 1Hisham Wefky Anwar, 2Mostafa Mahmoud El Nakib, 1Amr Essam Mosaad*
  • Sandwich Vacuum Bogota versus Conventional Bogota Bag as Temporary Abdominal Closure (TAC) Techniques
    Doaa Ahmed Mansour M.D., FRCS Eng
  • Bleomycin Sclerotherapy for Management of Cervicofacial and Axillary Lymphatic Malformations in Children
    Moutaz Ragab1,Mohamed Hamed Abouelfadl1, Mahmoud M. Marei 1
  • Efficacy and Safety of Systemic Beta Blockers for the Treatment of Infantile Hemangioma
    Moutaz Ragab, Mahmoud M. Marei ,Mohamed Hamed Abouelfadl
  • Comparison between Mass Ligation of Testicular Vessels versus Testicular Artery Sparing during Laparoscopic Bilateral Varicocelectomy
    Wadie Boshra MD, MRCS, Mohammed Attia Elsayed MD, Ahmed S. M. Omar MD.
  • Study of Splenic Injury in Belharzail Hepatic Fibrosis Patients Subjected To Blunt Abdominal Trauma
    Mahmoud Alhussinia, M. Ashraf Balbaab, Ahmed Tarek Awada, Tamer Abdelbakia
  • Choledochal Cysts in Adults: The Clinicopathological Features and Surgical Outcomes in a Single Institute.
    Ahmed El-Gendi1, Mohamed El-Shafei2, Essam Bedewy3
  • Banded Versus Non-Banded Sleeve Gastrectomy “Comparative Study”
    Elsobky A, MD
  • Ultrasound guided sclerotherapy injection of subulcer venous plexus for treatment of chronic venous ulcer
    Ahmed Sawaby1, Islam Atta2, Amr El Abd3,Mohsen Ahmed Abdelmohsen4
  • Impact of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy on three common co-morbidities in morbidly obese Egyptian patients: A randomized comparative study
    Ayman M. A. Osman1 MD, MRCS (Eng); Hytham H. Mohey1 M.Sc.; Ahmed M. Ghobashy1 MD
  • Is transfer of surgically risk necrotizing enterocolitis to tertiary center is important from the start?
    Nezar A. Abo Halawa1*, Ahmed El-Abd Ahmed2, Sawsan A. Elkhateeb3, Galal H. Galal3
  • Delayed Primary Closure of Exomphalos Major in a Limited Resource Area
    Nezar A. Abo Halawa1*, Mohamed Yousef Batikhe2
  • Bilateral Thoracoscopic Sympathectomy for Primary Palmar Hyperhidrosis, Which Level: T3 or T4?
    Wadie Boshra MD, MRCS, Abdallah Hamed Ibrahim Khalil MD, Fawzy Salah Fawzy MD, MRCS
  • Comparative study between Tunneled central venous catheter and Infraclavicular Arterio-arterial Prosthetic loop as an access for Hemodialysis in End stage renal disease (ESRD)
    Hussein Ali Mustafa Abdel-Motaleb, Mohammed Ahmed Mohammed Ismail, Islam Mohamed Nabil Atta & Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed Abdel-Rahim*
  • Significance of Metastatic Positive Lateral Group of Lymph Nodes in Patients Undergoing Axillary Dissection for Breast Carcinoma
    Reem Mohamed Ali Abd El Reheem El Masry1, Sameh Abd Allah Maaty2, Anwar A. El Shenawy3, Fawzy Salah Fawzy2
  • Banded Versus Non-Banded Sleeve Gastrectomy “Comparative Study”

    Elsobky A, MD
    Department of General Surgery– Ain Shams University

    Background Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, as a primary operation in the management of morbid obesity, was first reported in 2003, documented as single therapy in the treatment of morbid obesity. With increasing experience, a number of complications have been reported with SG including dilatation of the remaining stomach. Also, doubts still persist regarding long-term weight loss. The placement of a band or gastric ring around the upper sleeve will further limit the volume of food intake and prevent dilatation of the gastric sleeve distal to the band in the long term. The procedure thus combines the potential benefits of SG and gastric banding. Methods: One hundred thirty-nine obese patients were enrolled in this study between (Feb ruary 2014) to (September 2016) in Safwat Elgolf private hospital. They were divided into two groups, group (1) with banded laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy BLSG (42 patients 30%) and group (2) with non-banded laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy NLSG (97 patients 70%). We analyzed differences in post-operative excess weight loss, operative time, as well as complication rate between the two groups through 3 years follow up. Results: Early follow-up (first 3 months) showed insignificant excess weight loss difference in both groups. However the difference become significant starting from 6 months postoperatively and continues to the end of 3years follow up. At 6 months the %EWL was 59.2 ± 17.8 for BLSG and 47.2 ± 15 for LSG (P value < 0.001), at 12 months the %EWL 63.8 ± 16 for BLSG and 60.6 ± 21.8 for LSG( P value < 0.001), At 24 months the %EWL was 70.6 ± 17.4 for BLSG and 63.2 ± 23 for NLSG ( P value < 0.001) and at 36 months the %EWL was 80.4 ± 13.3for BLSG and 59.3 ± 24.2for NLSG( P value < 0.001). No statistical difference between the two groups as regards operative time. Conclusion: BLSG surgery was found to be safe, feasible and effective; it gives better 1, 2 and 3-year weight loss results than NLG. However. Complication rates are significantly higher in the BLSG than that for NSG, mainly in band related complications, e.g.; stenosis, vomiting and esophageal reflux, but these complications are late and minor. The time required for the device positioning did not influence significantly the surgical time. Further studies will need to be conducted to compare if the weight loss curve converge by 5 years. Keywords: Sleeve gastrectomy, banded sleeve gastrectomy, bariatric surgery, obesity, body mass index.