中国糖尿病杂志
中國糖尿病雜誌
중국당뇨병잡지
Chinese Journal of Diabetes
2015年
9期
810-813
,共4页
易波%李鹏洲%蒋娟%粟晗%宋智%朱晒红
易波%李鵬洲%蔣娟%粟晗%宋智%硃曬紅
역파%리붕주%장연%속함%송지%주쇄홍
糖尿病, 2型%腹腔镜Roux-en-Y胃旁路术%胃囊容积%腹型肥胖%胰岛素抵抗
糖尿病, 2型%腹腔鏡Roux-en-Y胃徬路術%胃囊容積%腹型肥胖%胰島素牴抗
당뇨병, 2형%복강경Roux-en-Y위방로술%위낭용적%복형비반%이도소저항
Diabetes mellitus,type 2%Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB)%Stomach pouch%Abdominal visceral obesity%Insulin resistance(IR)
目的:探讨不同胃囊容积腹腔镜 Roux‐en‐Y 胃旁路术(LRYGB)对BMI <35 kg/m2的T2DM患者的术后疗效。方法60例T2DM患者分别行保留大部分胃囊的腹腔镜Roux‐en‐Y胃旁路术(下称“大胃囊LRYGB”)和缩小胃囊容积的改良LRYGB(下称“小胃囊LRYGB”,胃囊容积控制约50 ml)。患者术后随访12个月,比较两组手术前后BMI 、WC、体脂率、FPG、2 hPG、HbA1c、胰岛素抵抗指数(HOMA‐IR)变化及术后并发症发生率。结果两种手术方式均能降低 FPG、2 hPG、HbA1c水平,改善IR;小胃囊LRYGB对于BMI、体脂率、WC、术后吻合口溃疡发生率、糖代谢异常及IR的改善优于大胃囊LRYGB。结论两种手术方式均可缓解BMI<35 kg/m2的 T2DM 患者糖代谢异常。相比大胃囊LRYGB ,小胃囊LRYGB更能改善腹型肥胖,且对糖代谢异常、IR的治疗优势更加明显。
目的:探討不同胃囊容積腹腔鏡 Roux‐en‐Y 胃徬路術(LRYGB)對BMI <35 kg/m2的T2DM患者的術後療效。方法60例T2DM患者分彆行保留大部分胃囊的腹腔鏡Roux‐en‐Y胃徬路術(下稱“大胃囊LRYGB”)和縮小胃囊容積的改良LRYGB(下稱“小胃囊LRYGB”,胃囊容積控製約50 ml)。患者術後隨訪12箇月,比較兩組手術前後BMI 、WC、體脂率、FPG、2 hPG、HbA1c、胰島素牴抗指數(HOMA‐IR)變化及術後併髮癥髮生率。結果兩種手術方式均能降低 FPG、2 hPG、HbA1c水平,改善IR;小胃囊LRYGB對于BMI、體脂率、WC、術後吻閤口潰瘍髮生率、糖代謝異常及IR的改善優于大胃囊LRYGB。結論兩種手術方式均可緩解BMI<35 kg/m2的 T2DM 患者糖代謝異常。相比大胃囊LRYGB ,小胃囊LRYGB更能改善腹型肥胖,且對糖代謝異常、IR的治療優勢更加明顯。
목적:탐토불동위낭용적복강경 Roux‐en‐Y 위방로술(LRYGB)대BMI <35 kg/m2적T2DM환자적술후료효。방법60례T2DM환자분별행보류대부분위낭적복강경Roux‐en‐Y위방로술(하칭“대위낭LRYGB”)화축소위낭용적적개량LRYGB(하칭“소위낭LRYGB”,위낭용적공제약50 ml)。환자술후수방12개월,비교량조수술전후BMI 、WC、체지솔、FPG、2 hPG、HbA1c、이도소저항지수(HOMA‐IR)변화급술후병발증발생솔。결과량충수술방식균능강저 FPG、2 hPG、HbA1c수평,개선IR;소위낭LRYGB대우BMI、체지솔、WC、술후문합구궤양발생솔、당대사이상급IR적개선우우대위낭LRYGB。결론량충수술방식균가완해BMI<35 kg/m2적 T2DM 환자당대사이상。상비대위낭LRYGB ,소위낭LRYGB경능개선복형비반,차대당대사이상、IR적치료우세경가명현。
Objective To explore effects of LRYGB with different gastric pouch volume on type 2diabeticpatientswithBMI<35kg/m2.Methods 60T2DMpatientswererecruitedandrandomizedto undergo either LRYGB with a big gastric pouch or LRYGB with a small gastric pouch (about 50 ml). All patients were followed up for 12 months. Pre‐and post‐operative changes in BMI ,waist circumference , body fat rate ,FPG ,2 hPG ,HbA1c ,HOMA‐IR and incidence of post‐operative complication were compared between the two groups. Results Both procedures were successful in reducing FPG ,2 hPG and HbA1 c , and improving HOMA‐IR. LRYGB with a small gastric pouch resulted in a greater reduction in BMI ,body fat rate ,WC ,incidence of postoperative marginal ulcer ,glucose metabolism disorders and HOM A‐IR compared with LRYGB with a big gastric pouch. Conclusion Both procedures are effective in treating glucose metabolism disorders for T2DM patients with BMI < 35 kg/m2. LRYGB with a small gastric pouch is better in releasing abdominal obesity ,restoring glucose metabolism disorders and improving IR.