Endoscopy 2019; 51(04): S53
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-1681328
ESGE Days 2019 oral presentations
Friday, April 5, 2019 14:30 – 16:30: Bariatric Club B
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

BODY COMPOSITION ALTERATIONS WITH THE ENDOSCOPIC TREATMENT OF OBESITY WITH INTRAGASTRIC BALLOON (IGB). IS IT THE BEST FOLLOW UP STRATEGY?

S Barrichello
1   Bariatric Endoscopy, Healthme Weight Management Clinic, São Paulo, Brazil
,
AC Hoff
2   Bariatric Endoscopy, Angioskope Clinic, São José dos Campos, Brazil
,
JR Fernandes Fittipaldi
3   Bariatric Endoscopy, Endogastrorio Clinic, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
,
M Galvão Neto
4   Bariatric Endoscopy, FMABC, Santo André, Brazil
,
T Ferreira de Souza
4   Bariatric Endoscopy, FMABC, Santo André, Brazil
,
A Zamarian Veinert
5   Nutrology, Healthme Weight Management Clinic, São Paulo, Brazil
,
C Teixeira
1   Bariatric Endoscopy, Healthme Weight Management Clinic, São Paulo, Brazil
,
AF Teixeira
6   Bariatric Endoscopy, Gastros Bahia Clinic, Vitoria da Conquista, Brazil
,
E Nobuki Usuy
7   Bariatric Endoscopy, Usuy Clínica Médica, Florianopolis, Brazil
,
E Guimaraes Hourneax de Moura
8   Bariatric Endoscopy, Hospital das Clinicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
18 March 2019 (online)

Also available at
 

Aims:

IGBs are part of the therapeutic arsenal in the fight against obesity.

Body mass index (BMI) is the most widespread method used worldwide to classify the degree of obesity. Since BMI is an imprecise method for analyzing body composition, there is an urgent need to adopt more objective methods for patient follow-up and the treatment of obesity, helping in the adoption of strategies for maintaining weight after withdrawal of the accessary.

Methods:

We retrospectively analyzed the results obtained after endoscopic treatment of obesity with IGB. The sample consisted of 46 patients. The variables considered were the decrease in TBWL, BMI, changes in body composition and metabolic rate. Subgroup analysis was done according to the degree of obesity. We used means and standard deviation, Wilcoxon and the T-test. In order to analyze the difference between the groups, the Kruskal-Wallis and the Dunn test were used.

Results:

The initial mean weight was 90.6 ± 16.1 kg and after removal of the IGB was 75.7 ± 12.5 kg, and the BMI ranged from 34.1 ± 4.8 to 28.6 ± 3.7 p < 0.05.

The percentage of fat free mass presented an increase of 9.4%, from 61.5 ± 4.2 to 67.3 ± 5.8 p < 0.05. The percentage of body fat ranged from 38.5 ± 4.2 to 32.6 ± 5.8 p < 0.05.

The metabolic rate decreased from 1731 ± 303 to 1589 ± 268. Patients with grade 2 and 3 obesity presented higher total body weight loss, decreased BMI, and greater loss of fat free mass. Regarding the metabolic rate, the grade 2 and 3 obesity groups presented a statistically greater reduction.

Conclusions:

Treatment with IGBs presents consistent results in weight loss, changes in body composition and metabolic rate. Follow-up considering changes in body composition and metabolic rate is efficient and may suggest different strategies for each result obtained.