218 A Narrative Review: Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Laparoscopic Mini Gastric Bypass Surgery for Treatment of Morbid Obesity Regarding Pattern of Postoperative Weight Loss

Abstract Aim Bariatric surgery is the most effective long-term obesity treatment. We aim to compare laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic mini gastric bypass (LMGB) as surgical interventions for morbid obesity, focusing on postoperative weight loss patterns, complications, and long-term efficacy. Method The review synthesizes findings from a comprehensive literature analysis, including retrospective and prospective studies, clinical trials, and meta-analyses. Data were evaluated regarding excess body weight loss (EBWL), complication rates, and postoperative outcomes associated with LSG and LMGB. The technical aspects and physiological effects of both procedures were also assessed. Results Both LSG and LMGB demonstrated effective short- and medium-term outcomes in terms of weight loss and remission of obesity-related comorbidities. LSG resulted in 47–76% EBWL within 1–2 years, with sustained long-term results showing >50% EBWL at 5 years in many studies. LMGB showed comparable or slightly higher EBWL, averaging 65–91% at 1–2 years and 80% at 5 years in some reports. LSG had fewer complications such as nutritional deficiencies but higher incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). LMGB had low rates of bile reflux and marginal ulcers, and showed high patient satisfaction, with shorter operation time and reversibility as added benefits. Conclusions Both LSG and LMGB are effective bariatric procedures for morbid obesity, offering significant weight loss and improvement in comorbidities. While LSG is technically simpler and safer with fewer nutritional deficiencies, LMGB provides slightly superior long-term weight outcomes and patient satisfaction. The choice of procedure should be individualized based on patient risk profile, comorbid conditions, and lifestyle adaptability.