Single Versus Double Anastomosis Duodenal Switch in the Management of Obesity: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.

Background: Biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD-DS) is an effective yet technically challenging bariatric surgery with many complications. Alternatively, single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) was recently introduced as a simplified bariatric procedure. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of SADI-S compared with BPD-DS in the management of patients with obesity.
Methods: Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for articles from their inception to May 2022 by 2 independent reviewers using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis system. The review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42022333521).
Results: From 123 studies screened, 6 studies met the eligibility criteria, with a total of 1847 patients with obesity undergoing either SADI-S (n=818) or BPD-DS (n=1029). Preoperative body mass index was similar between the 2 groups, and the BPD-DS group had a greater % excess body mass index loss (EBMIL) (MD=-10.16%, 95% confidence interval: -11.80, -8.51, I 2 =0%) at 2 years compared with the SADI-S group. There was no difference observed in preoperative comorbidities and remission, including diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia between SADI-S and BPD-DS cohorts. Compared with BPD-DS, SADI-S had shorter hospital stays (MD=-1.36 d, 95% CI: -2.39, -0.33, I 2 =86%), and fewer long-term (>30 d) complications (OR=0.56, 95% CI: 0.42, 0.74, I 2 =20%). Conversely, among nutritional deficiency outcomes, the SADI-S group had few patients with abnormal vitamin D (OR=0.51, 95% CI: 0.36, 0.72, I 2 =0%) values than the BPD-DS group.
Conclusions: SADI-S has shown to be a possible alternative treatment option to BPD-DS in managing patients with obesity. Despite the promising results, further randomized controlled studies with more extended follow-up periods are necessary to ascertain the safety and efficacy of the treatment.
Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
(Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)