Open Access

Biliary pancreatic diversion and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding in morbid obesity: their long-term effects on metabolic syndrome and on cardiovascular parameters

  • Antonio E Pontiroli1Email author,
  • Marco Laneri1,
  • Annamaria Veronelli1,
  • Francesca Frigè1,
  • Giancarlo Micheletto2,
  • Franco Folli3,
  • Gianfranco Adami4 and
  • Nicola Scopinaro4
Cardiovascular Diabetology20098:37

DOI: 10.1186/1475-2840-8-37

Received: 06 May 2009

Accepted: 20 July 2009

Published: 20 July 2009

Abstract

Background

Bariatric surgery is able to improve glucose and lipid metabolism, and cardiovascular function in morbid obesity. Aim of this study was to compare the long-term effects of malabsorptive (biliary pancreatic diversion, BPD), and restrictive (laparoscopic gastric banding, LAGB) procedures on metabolic and cardiovascular parameters, as well as on metabolic syndrome in morbidly obese patients.

Methods

170 patients studied between 1989 and 2001 were called back after a mean period of 65 months. 138 patients undergoing BPD (n = 23) or LAGB (n = 78), and control patients (refusing surgery and treated with diet, n = 37) were analysed for body mass index (BMI), blood glucose, cholesterol, and triglycerides, blood pressure, heart rate, and ECG indexes (QTc, Cornell voltage-duration product, and rate-pressure-product).

Results

After a mean 65 months period, surgery was more effective than diet on all items under evaluation; diabetes, hypertension, and metabolic syndrome disappeared more in surgery than in control patients, and new cases appeared only in controls. BPD was more effective than LAGB on BMI, on almost all cardiovascular parameters, and on cholesterol, not on triglyceride and blood glucose. Disappearance of diabetes, hypertension, and metabolic syndrome was similar with BPD and with LAGB, and no new cases were observed.

Conclusion

These data indicate that BPD, likely due to a greater BMI decrease, is more effective than LAGB in improving cardiovascular parameters, and similar to LAGB on metabolic parameters, in obese patients. The greater effect on cholesterol levels is probably due to the different mechanism of action.

Background

Obesity is often accompanied by diabetes, hyperlipidemia, arterial hypertension [1]; all are known risk factors for cardiovascular (CV) diseases, i.e. accelerated atherosclerosis [2] and congestive heart failure [CHF, [3]]. Insulin resistance [4], subclinical inflammation [5], sympathetic overactivity [6], and endothelial dysfunction [7], are present and often coexist in the same individual [8]. These abnormalities are risk factors for the development of left ventricular hypertrophy [LVH, [9, 10]], which is frequently detected in severe obesity, and is an alleged risk factor for CHF [3, 10]. The rate pressure product (RPP, heart rate × systolic BP) is a correlate of myocardial oxygen consumption, and hence of work load of the heart [11], is raised in obesity [1113]; RPP is considered a determinant of cardiovascular risk, since its increase precedes ischemic events [11].

Bariatric surgery improves glucose and lipid metabolism [14, 15] and attenuates endothelial dysfunction [16] and sympathetic overactivity [17]. These changes are inter-related, since reduction of sympathetic overactivity, improvement of endothelial dysfunction, and decrease of insulin resistance correlate each other, and with decreases of body weight and of visceral fat [18]. In addition, bariatric surgery has been shown to prevent arterial hypertension [19] and diabetes mellitus [1921].

Bariatric surgery has been reported to reduce LVM indices in a number of studies, and has beneficial effects on virtually all sections of electrocardiogram (ECG)[22]. It is possible that weight loss is effective in reducing LVM if accompanied by decrease of blood pressure [17]. LVM correlates with circulating leptin levels [23], and with insulin resistance [24], and decreases of LVM and of leptin levels are correlated [23] in obese normotensive subjects.

The amount of weight loss is greater with malabsorptive than with restrictive bariatric procedures [14, 15, 25]. Only few studies have directly compared different techniques [21, 2628], and were usually of short duration, and without control patients, i.e. patients not undergoing surgery [except for ref. [21]]. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term effects of malabsorptive (biliary pancreatic diversion, BPD], and restrictive (laparoscopic gastric banding, LAGB) procedures on metabolic and cardiovascular parameters, and on metabolic syndrome, in morbidly obese patients.

Methods

Laparoscopic gastric banding (LAGB) and biliary pancreatic diversion (BPD) are routinely performed at participating Institutions, following the indications and guidelines of NIH [29]; procedures have been approved by local ethics committees; patients undergo preliminary clinical work-up including psychological and psychiatric evaluation [14].

The protocol of this study, i.e. ad-hoc call-back of patients for selected determinations, was specifically approved by local ethics committees, and all participating patients gave written informed consent. Patients undergoing surgery between 1989 and 2001 were considered in this study; all patients agreeing to come back to Institutions were considered; they were interviewed about current therapies, and underwent anthropometric evaluation, ECG recording, and heart rate and blood pressure measurement, fasting blood sampling for glucose and lipid determination. Patients who refused surgery and agreed to be followed-up (controls), were also considered. They were treated with diet [14]. Patients with atrial fibrillation or left bundle branch block were excluded, as well as patients receiving drugs known to interfere with electrophysiological ECG conduction. Therefore, a total number of 32 patients could not be included in the study because of the above clinical conditions or because basal ECG paper tracings had vanished and become unreadable; these patients were not different from the remaining 138 patients as to baseline characteristics or to clinical and metabolic follow-up. Blood sampling [14, 15] and ECG tracing in all patients was carried out at rest, after an overnight fast. On the same occasion, arterial blood pressure was evaluated by the same physician, using the same sphygmomanometer with an appropriate cuff.

Outcome measures

Arterial hypertension was diagnosed when systolic/diastolic blood pressure was ≥ 140/90 mmHg, or when subjects were under antihypertensive treatment. Diabetes mellitus was diagnosed when fasting blood glucose levels were > 126 mg/dl, or when subjects were under antihyperglycemic treatment (metformin). Rate pressure product (RPP, mmHg × bpm × 10-2) was calculated, and was used as an index of myocardial oxygen consumption and hence of work load of the heart [11]. Diagnosis of metabolic syndrome was established according to the ATP III criteria [30], and included three or more components.

Interviews and anthropometry

Patients were interviewed as to current and past therapies, and were measured for height and weight, to calculate body mass index, as already reported [14, 15].

ECG: QTc interval, Cornell voltage-duration product

All individual ECGs performed at baseline and at follow-up were compared by one person (ML). QT intervals were measured manually from the onset of the interval between Q and S waves of the electrocardiogram to the end of the T wave on the isoelectric baseline, and corrected according to Bazett's formula (QTc = QT/√RR) [31]. When a T wave could not be reliably determined, the lead was excluded from analysis [32]. QT interval was measured in at least 10 leads in each subject. Through ECG reading (paper running at 25 mm/s, 1 mm/mV), the Cornell voltage-duration product was calculated: [(RaVL+SV3) × QRS] in mm.ms, with an adjustment of 6 mm in women. These composite ECG criteria detect LVH with about 95% specificity in healthy and in hypertensive subjects [3335], and this approach allows direct evaluation of LVM [3638].

Statistical analysis

Inter-group comparisons were performed by one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by Scheffè's multiple comparison test. Intra-group comparisons were performed by two-tailed Student's t test for paired samples. Since a normal distribution of data was not assured, non-parametric tests (Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon test) were also used. Absolute frequencies and changes of comorbidities were compared by χ2 test. Pairwise correlations were computed between changes of clinical conditions (independent variables) and change of Cornell voltage-duration product, and of RPP (dependent variables). Next, a multivariate regression analysis was carried out to assess the role of independent variables significant at univariate analysis (plus age and sex) in change of clinical conditions such as diabetes mellitus, arterial hypertension, and metabolic syndrome, and changes of Cornell voltage-duration product, and of RPP; we reported significance of the whole model, plus F and p of variables statistically significant at multivariate regression analysis. p levels < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results

Figure 1 shows decrease of BMI in patients undergoing surgery and in control patients: weight loss was greater with BPD than with LAGB, and greater with LAGB than in controls, at virtually all time intervals. Table 1 shows that surgery, whether BPD or LAGB, was significantly superior to traditional treatment on all parameters considered. Diabetes mellitus and arterial hypertension disappeared in a few surgery patients, and appeared in a few control patients. Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus differed from other patients only for older age and for greater decrease of blood glucose levels. Table 2 shows the effects of BPD and of LAGB on metabolic and cardiovascular parameters. BPD was statistically more effective on weight loss, on decrease of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and on decrease of Cornell voltage-duration product and of RPP, and hence on reduction of cases of LVH. BPD, at difference from LAGB was also effective in decreasing cholesterol levels, while the effect on blood glucose and on triglycerides, and on disappearance of metabolic syndrome, was not different.
Table 1

Clinical, ECG, and metabolic details of patients in the study (controls and patients undergoing surgery).

 

CONTROLS

  

SURGERY

  

BEFORE

AFTER

CHANGE

BEFORE

AFTER

CHANGE

N (men, women)

37 (5/32)

  

101 (17/84)

  

Age (y)

46.5 ± 2.07

  

44.8 ± 0.98

  

Interval (mos)

59.3 ± 4.44

  

65.4 ± 4.65

  

BMI (kg/m2)

43.8 ± 1.18

43.5 ± 1.54

+0.3 ± 0.81

45.7 ± 0.67

34.2 ± 0.59 #

-11.1 ± 0.71 #

Systolic BP (mmHg)

133.5 ± 2.39

140.5 ± 3.12

+7.0 ± 3.82

136.4 ± 1.65

127.1 ± 1.48 #

-9.4 ± 1.95 #

Diastolic BP (mmHg)

83.7 ± 1.52

89.4 ± 1.91

+5.8 ± 2.46

85.9 ± 1.34

81.1 ± 1.01 #

-4.7 ± 1.53 #

Hypertension (y/n)

14/23

21/16

+7 (-3, +10)

40/61

20/81 #

-20 (-23, +3) §

Heart rate (bpm)

74.9 ± 1.83

74.2 ± 1.84

-0.6 ± 2.31

80.4 ± 1.29 *

67.5 ± 0.98 #

-12.9 ± 1.24 #

QTc (msec)

412.8 ± 4.62

410.7 ± 4.88

-2.1 ± 5.41

412.4 ± 2.99

398.7 ± 2.81 *

-13.7 ± 3.03 *

Cornell-voltage (mm.ms)

1487.3 ± 84.75

1434.6 ± 81.64

-52.7 ± 62.43

1561.1 ± 57.77

1461.3 ± 57.39

-106.1 ± 59.44

RPP

99.7 ± 2.99

104.7 ± 3.91

+5.6 ± 4.43

109.7 ± 2.39 *

86.2 ± 1.58 #

-23.6 ± 2.42 #

LVH (y/n) °

8/29

5/32

-3 (+2, -5)

31/70

28/73

-3 (+9, -12)

Cholesterol (mg/dl)

195.4 ± 8.66

198.9 ± 6.88

+2.1 ± 5.17

203.5 ± 4.47

183.5 ± 5.82

-20.4 ± 6.55 *

Triglycerides (mg/dl)

114.1 ± 8.57

123.9 ± 8.96

+9.4 ± 8.04

162.4 ± 17.13

100.3 ± 5.84 *

-64.1 ± 17.14 *

Blood glucose (mg/dl)

117.7 ± 8.74

124.6 ± 9.63

+6.9 ± 6.77

106.2 ± 3.58

91.1 ± 1.91 #

-15.1 ± 3.18 **

Diabetes mellitus (y/n)

9/28

11/26

+2

14/87

4/97 #

-10 *

Metabolic Syndrome (y/n)

15/22

13/24

-2 (-6, +4)

30/71

11/90 **

-19 *

Means ± SE or absolute frequencies

° as defined by ECG criteria

* = p < 0.05; ** = p < 0.01; # = p < 0.001 vs corresponding values of controls

Table 2

Clinical, ECG, and metabolic details of patients undergoing biliary-pancreatic-diversion (BPD) and laparoscopic gastric banding (LAGB).

 

BPD

  

LAGB

  

BEFORE

AFTER

CHANGE

BEFORE

AFTER

CHANGE

N (men, women)

23 (7/16)

  

78 (10/68)

  

Age (y)

45.3 ± 1.78

  

44.2 ± 1.16

  

BMI (kg/m2)

48.6 ± 1.45

30.1 ± 1.26

-18.5 ± 1.43

44.8 ± 0.74 *

35.4 ± 0.61 #

-9.5 ± 0.66 #

Systolic BP (mmHg)

148.3 ± 4.98

121.7 ± 2.86

-26.5 ± 5.16

132.9 ± 1.35 #

128.6 ± 1.69 *

-4.3 ± 1.61 #

Diastolic BP (mmHg)

97.8 ± 3.81

76.3 ± 1.92

-21.5 ± 3.35

82.4 ± 1.04 #

82.6 ± 1.12 *

+0.1 ± 1.26 #

Hypertension (y/n)

12/11

1/22

-11

28/50

19/59

-9 (-12, + 3)

Heart rate (bpm)

82.4 ± 3.63

69.8 ± 2.22

-12.6 ± 2.98

79.8 ± 1.31

66.8 ± 1.09

-13.0 ± 1.36

QTc (msec)

403.5 ± 5.44

388.9 ± 6.27

-14.6 ± 5.83

415.1 ± 3.48

401.6 ± 3.09

-13.5 ± 3.54

Cornell-voltage (mm.ms)

1612.6 ± 155.48

1249.6 ± 144.63

-391.4 ± 172.87

1545.9 ± 59.69

1523.8 ± 59.62

-22.2 ± 54.97 **

RPP

122.9 ± 7.79

85.4 ± 3.84

-37.5 ± 6.96

105.9 ± 1.92 *

86.4 ± 1.71

-19.5 ± 2.19 **

LVH (y/n) °

8/15

2/21

-6

23/55

26/52

+3 (-6, +9) *

Cholesterol (mg/dl)

210.1 ± 9.78

133.8 ± 6.43

-76.3 ± 11.48

200.5 ± 4.75

205.8 ± 5.26 #

+5.3 ± 3.82 #

Triglycerides (mg/dl)

190.4 ± 45.58

83.3 ± 7.02

-107.0 ± 48.33

149.6 ± 12.32

108.1 ± 7.69 *

-41.4 ± 10.31

Blood glucose (mg/dl)

98.8 ± 7.66

82.1 ± 2.13

-16.7 ± 6.94

108.4 ± 4.04

93.7 ± 2.31 **

-14.7 ± 3.49

Diabetes mellitus (y/n)

2/21

0/23

-2

12/66

4/74

-8

Metabolic Syndrome (y/n)

5/18

0/23

-5

25/53

11/67

-14

Means ± SE or absolute frequencies.

° as defined by ECG criteria

* = p < 0.05; ** = p < 0.01; # = p < 0.001 vs corresponding values of BPD

https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1475-2840-8-37/MediaObjects/12933_2009_Article_191_Fig1_HTML.jpg
Figure 1

Decrease of body mass index (BMI, kg/m 2 ) in patients undergoing BPD, LAGB, and in control patients. Means ± SE. at all times intervals, BMI decrease was significantly greater with BPD than with LAGB (°, p < 0.05 or less), and with LAGB than in controls (*, p < 0.05 or less).

In surgery patients, decrease of systolic and diastolic blood pressure, of Cornell voltage-duration product, of RPP correlated with decrease of BMI. The decrease of cholesterol was greater with BPD than with LAGB, independent of initial BMI, and of the amount of weight loss (not shown), and therefore seems due to the kind of surgery rather than to the amount of weight loss.

At multiple regression analysis disappearance of diabetes mellitus was significantly associated with presence of diabetes at the beginning (model r = .559, F = 30.013, p = 0.0001); disappearance of arterial hypertension was associated (model r = .562, p = 0.0001) with presence of hypertension at the beginning (F = 24.415, p = 0.0001) and change of BMI (F = 10.138, p = 0.02); disappearance of metabolic syndrome was associated (model r = .763, p = 0.0001) with presence of metabolic syndrome at the beginning (F = 53.589, p = 0.0001) and with change of BMI (F = 6.739, p = 0.0115). Table 3 shows that change of Cornell voltage-duration product correlated with initial Cornell voltage-duration product, with change of blood pressure and of BMI; at multiple regression analysis, the model accounted for r = .635, and only initial Cornell voltage-duration product, and change of systolic BP correlated with change of Cornell voltage-duration product. Table 3 also shows that change of RPP correlated with initial RPP, HR and blood pressure, and with change of systolic blood pressure, of heart rate, and of BMI; at multiple regression analysis, the model accounted for r = .995, and initial RPP, HR and BP, and change of HR and of systolic BP correlated with change of RPP.
Table 3

Linear and multiple regression

 

Linear Regression

Multiple Regression

A

Δ Cornell Voltage Product

 

Model r = .635,

Δ BMI

.204, 0.0406

 

Cornell voltage product initial

.516, 0.0001

F = 45.471, 0.0001

Δ Systolic BP

.282, 0.0001

F = 9.616, 0.01

Δ Diastolic BP

.235, 0.0001

 

B

Δ RPP

 

Model r = .989,

Δ BMI

.297, 0.0025

 

RPP initial

.786, 0.0001

F = 158.97, 0.0001

Systolic BP

.491, 0.0001

F = 93.45, 0.0001

Diastolic BP

.387, 0.0001

 

HR

.616, 0.0001

F = 110.42, 0.0001

Δ HR

.754, 0.0001

F = 1721.69, 0.0001

Δ Systolic BP

.685, 0.0001

F = 1060.15, 0.0001

Δ Diastolic BP

.489, 0.0001

 

A. On the left: correlations (linear regression) between changes of Cornell voltage product (dependent variable) and changes of clinical variables (independent variables): r and p are indicated. On the right, multiple regression model, partial F and p of independent variables statistically significant. B. On the left: correlations (linear regression) between changes of RPP (dependent variable) and changes of clinical variables (independent variables): r and p are indicated. On the right, multiple regression model, partial F and p of independent variables statistically significant.

Discussion

BPD is known to induce a greater weight loss than LAGB, independently of initial BMI; this information comes from a meta-analysis [25] and from two comparative studies [27, 28]. This finding was confirmed in the present study. Surgery was clearly more effective than control treatment, as already reported in the only study including control patients [21]. The pattern of BMI depicted in Figure 1 indicates that our findings were representative of what happens with the two surgical procedures. In agreement with two small studies [27, 28], the effect on metabolic variables, and the disappearance of diabetes mellitus (patients were treated with metformin, when required) were not different for the 2 procedures. Also disappearance of metabolic syndrome was not different. As to metabolic effects, the only difference was in cholesterol decrease, which appears more due to the technique than to amount of weight loss. We have other data [39] showing that another malabsorptive technique (Bilio-Intestinal-By-Pass) is more effective than LAGB in reducing cholesterol levels. The cholesterol level reduction that we and others have reported is a quite dramatic phenomenon and is likely due to the major reduction in bile acid re-absorption in the intestine and possibly to altered regulation of the feedback mechanisms controlled by nuclear protein such as LXR, FXR and PPAR; these transcriptional factors are involved in bile acid and cholesterol metabolism, occurring in patients undergoing BPD (which causes malabsorption and also reduced bile re-absorption), but not LAGB (a purely restrictive bariatric procedure)[14, 18, 19, 4042]. It is also possible that reduced gastric volume and reduced production of gastric lipase, as well as reduced secretion of colecystokinin (that physiologically stimulates digestive enzyme secretion such as lipases and proteases) might result in a marked decrease in the hydrolysis of triacylglycerols, with a reduction of the absorption of free fatty acids [43].

Some cardiovascular parameters were more influenced by BPD than by LAGB, such as diastolic and systolic blood pressure, Cornell voltage-duration product and RPP. It seems that this was generally due to a greater effect on BMI, although a direct role of BMI in multiple regression analysis was not evident.

Bariatric surgery is known to improve all sections of ECG [22]; ECG has been used as a method of measuring LVM (Cornell voltage-duration product) and of assessing work load [RPP, [11, 3338]]. In this study we found that BPD is superior to LAGB on these parameters. The fact that change of Cornell voltage-duration product is dependent first at all on its initial value fully agrees with the findings that decrease of LVM (echocardiographic measures) is dependent first at all with initial LVM [22]; in a previous paper we have shown that Cornell voltage-duration product and echocardiographic measures similarly describe decrease of LVM after weight loss, correlated with decrease of leptin levels [23]. Obesity is often accompanied, especially when of long duration, by increase of LVM [22]; probably, when obesity is untreated, the natural trend is of a progressive increase of LVM. Weight loss can reduce LVM [13, 17, 22], especially if accompanied by reduction of blood pressure [17]. In this study we found a significant reduction of Cornell voltage-duration product together with a significant decrease of both diastolic and systolic blood pressure. This finding corroborates a previous study from this group showing that weight loss alone is not sufficient to allow decrease of LVM [17].

HR and QTc are assumed as an index of sympathetic overactivity [17]; their decrease after weight loss is well in agreement with a previous study showing enhanced parasympathetic activity after diet-induced weight loss [44]. Rate pressure product, a correlate of myocardial oxygen consumption, and hence of work load of the heart [11, 12], decreased with weight loss. This finding has never been published before. Decrease of RPP correlated with initial RPP as well as with decrease of BMI, and of diastolic BP. Given the value of RPP and of heart rate as determinants of cardiovascular risk [11, 45, 46], these data indicate that both weight loss and decrease of blood pressure are of importance in reducing the overall cardiovascular risk in morbid obesity.

Conclusion

These data indicate that BPD, likely due to a greater BMI decrease, is more effective than LAGB in improving cardiovascular parameters, and similar to LAGB on metabolic parameters, in obese patients. The greater effect on cholesterol levels is probably due to the different mechanism of action.

Abbreviations

ANOVA

analysis of variance

ATP III

adult treatment panel III

BMI

body mass index

BP

blood pressure

BPD

biliopancreatic diversion

CHF

congestive heart failure

CV

cardiovascular

ECG

electrocardiography

FXR

farnesoid X-receptor

HR

heart rate

LAGB

laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding

LVH

left ventricular hypertrophy

LVM

left ventricular mass

LXR

liver X-receptor

PPAR

peroxisome proliferator activated receptor

QTc

corrected QT interval

RPP

rate pressure product.

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the very constructive activity of Michele Paganelli, MD, Antonio Intelisano, MD, and Riccardo Caccialanza, MD, in the recruitment of patients, in clinical monitoring, and in dietary counselling.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Dipartimento di Medicina, Chirurgia e Odontoiatria, Università degli Studi di Milano
(2)
Dipartimento di Scienze Chirurgiche
(3)
Diabetes Division, Department of Medicine, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
(4)
Dipartimento di Discipline Chirurgiche, Università di Genova

References

  1. Cottam DR, Mattar SG, Barinas-Mitchell E, Eid G, Kuller L, Kelley DE, Schauer PR: The chronic inflammatory hypothesis for the morbidity associated with morbid obesity: implications and effects of weight loss. Obes Surg. 2004, 14: 589-600. 10.1381/096089204323093345.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. McGill HC, McMahan CA, Herderick EE, Zieske AW, Malcom GT, Tracy RE, Strong JP: Pathobiological Determinants of Atherosclerosis in Youth (PDAY) Research Group. Obesity accelerates the progression of coronary atherosclerosis in young men. Circulation. 2002, 105: 2712-2718. 10.1161/01.CIR.0000018121.67607.CE.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Kenchaiah S, Evans JC, Levy D, Wilson PW, Benjamin EJ, Larson MG, Kannel WB, Vasan RS: Obesity and the risk of heart failure. N Engl J Med. 2002, 347: 305-313. 10.1056/NEJMoa020245.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Laakso M, Edelman SV, Brechtel G: Decreased effect of insulin to stimulate skeletal muscle blood flow in obese man: a novel mechanism for insulin resistance. J Clin Invest. 1990, 85: 1844-1852. 10.1172/JCI114644.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Festa A, D'Agostino R, Howard G, Mykkänen L, Tracy RP, Haffner SM: Chronic Subclinical Inflammation as Part of the Insulin Resistance Syndrome: The Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study (IRAS). Circulation. 2000, 102: 42-47.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Alvarez GE, Beske SD, Ballard TP, Davy KP: Sympathetic neural activation in visceral obesity. Circulation. 2002, 106: 2533-2536. 10.1161/01.CIR.0000041244.79165.25.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Ziccardi P, Nappo F, Giugliano G, Esposito K, Marfella R, Cioffi M, D'Andrea F, Molinari AM, Giugliano D: Reduction of inflammatory cytokine concentrations and improvement of endothelial functions in obese women after weight loss over one year. Circulation. 2002, 105: 804-809. 10.1161/hc0702.104279.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Natali A, Toschi E, Baldeweg S, Ciociaro D, Favilla S, Sacca L, Ferrannini E: Clustering of insulin resistance with vascular dysfunction and low-grade inflammation in type 2 diabetes. Diabetes. 2006, 55: 1133-1140. 10.2337/diabetes.55.04.06.db05-1076.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. de Simone G, Devereux RB, Roman MJ, Alderman MH, Laragh JH: Relation of obesity and gender to left ventricular hypertrophy in normotensive and hypertensive adults. Hypertension. 1994, 23: 600-606.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Cummings PM, Le BH, Lopes MB: Postmortem findings in morbidly obese individuals dying after gastric bypass procedures. Hum Pathol. 2007, 38: 593-7. 10.1016/j.humpath.2006.09.021.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. White WB: Heart rate and the rate-pressure product as determinants of cardiovascular risk in patients with hypertension. Am J Hypertens. 1999, 12 (2 Pt 2): 50S-55S. 10.1016/S0895-7061(98)00280-5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Martin JW, Briesmiester K, Bargardi A, Muzik O, Mosca L, Duvernoy CS: Weight changes and obesity predict impaired resting and endothelium-dependent myocardial blood flow in postmenopausal women. Clin Cardiol. 2005, 28: 13-18. 10.1002/clc.4960280105.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Ikonomidis I, Mazarakis A, Papadopoulos C, Patsouras N, Kalfarentzos F, Lekakis J, Kremastinos DT, Alexopoulos D: Weight loss after bariatric surgery improves aortic elastic properties and left ventricular function in individuals with morbid obesity: a 3-year follow-up study. J Hypertens. 2007, 25: 439-447. 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3280115bfb.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Pontiroli AE, Pizzocri P, Librenti MC, Vedani P, Marchi M, Cucchi E, Orena C, Paganelli M, Giacomelli M, Ferla G, Folli F: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding for the treatment of morbid (grade 3) obesity and its metabolic complications: a three-year study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002, 87: 3555-3561. 10.1210/jc.87.8.3555.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Scopinaro N, Marinari GM, Camerini GB, Papadia FS, Adami GF: Specific effects of biliopancreatic diversion on the major components of metabolic syndrome. Diabetes Care. 2005, 28: 2406-2411. 10.2337/diacare.28.10.2406.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Pontiroli AE, Pizzocri P, Koprivec D, Vedani P, Marchi M, Arcelloni C, Paroni R, Esposito K, Giugliano D: Body weight and glucose metabolism have a different effect on circulating levels of ICAM-1, E-selectin, and endothelin-1 in humans. Eur J Endocrinol. 2004, 150: 195-200. 10.1530/eje.0.1500195.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Pontiroli AE, Pizzocri P, Saibene A, Girola A, Koprivec D, Fragasso G: Left ventricular hypertrophy and QT interval in obesity and in hypertension: effects of weight loss and of normalisation of blood pressure. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2004, 28: 1118-23. 10.1038/sj.ijo.0802733.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Pontiroli AE, Pizzocri P, Paroni R, Folli F: Sympathetic overactivity, endothelial dysfunction, inflammation, and metabolic abnormalities cluster in Grade III (WHO) obesity. Reversal through sustained weight loss obtained with laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). Diabetes Care. 2006, 29: 2735-2738. 10.2337/dc06-1417.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Pontiroli AE, Folli F, Paganelli M, Micheletto G, Pizzocri P, Vedani P, Luisi F, Perego L, Morabito A, Bressani Doldi S: Laparoscopic gastric banding prevents type 2 diabetes and arterial hypertension and induces their remission in morbid obesity: a 4-year case-controlled study. Diabetes Care. 2005, 28: 2703-2709. 10.2337/diacare.28.11.2703.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Long SD, O'Brien K, MacDonald KG, Leggett-Frazier N, Swanson MS, Pories WJ, Caro JF: Weight loss in severely obese subjects prevents the progression of impaired glucose tolerance to type II diabetes. A longitudinal interventional study. Diabetes Care. 1994, 17: 372-375. 10.2337/diacare.17.5.372.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Sjostrom L, Lindroos AK, Peltonen M, Torgerson J, Bouchard C, Carlsson B, Dahlgren S, Larsson B, Narbro K, Sjostrom CD, Sullivan M, Wedel H, Swedish Obese Subjects Study Scientific Group: Lifestyle, diabetes, and cardiovascular risk factors 10 years after bariatric surgery. N Engl J Med. 2004, 351: 2683-2693. 10.1056/NEJMoa035622.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Ashrafian H, le Roux CW, Darzi A, Athanasiou T: Effects of bariatric surgery on cardiovascular function. Circulation. 2008, 118: 2091-2102. 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.721027.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Perego L, Pizzocri P, Corradi D, Maisano F, Paganelli M, Fiorina P, Barbieri M, Morabito A, Paolisso G, Folli F, Pontiroli AE: Circulating leptin correlates with left ventricular mass in morbid (grade III) obesity before and after weight loss induced by bariatric surgery: a potential role for leptin in mediating human left ventricular hypertrophy. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2005, 90: 4087-4093. 10.1210/jc.2004-1963.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Iacobellis G, Ribaudo MC, Zappaterreno A, Vecci E, Tiberti C, Di Mario U, Leonetti F: Relationship of insulin sensitivity and left ventricular mass in uncomplicated obesity. Obes Res. 2003, 11: 518-524. 10.1038/oby.2003.73.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Buchwald H, Avidor Y, Braunwald E, Jensen MD, Pories W, Fahrbach K, Schoelles K: Bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2004, 292: 1724-1737. 10.1001/jama.292.14.1724.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Kim TH, Daud A, Ude AO, DiGiorgi M, Olivero-Rivera L, Schrope B, Davis D, Inabnet WB, Bessler M: Early U.S. outcomes of laparoscopic gastric bypass versus laparoscopic adjustable silicone gastric banding for morbid obesity. Surg Endosc. 2006, 20: 202-209. 10.1007/s00464-005-0243-1.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Dolan K, Hatzifotis M, Newbury L, Fielding G: A comparison of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding and biliopancreatic diversion in superobesity. Obes Surg. 2004, 14: 165-169. 10.1381/096089204322857500.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Parikh M, Ayoung-Chee P, Romanos E, Lewis N, Pachter HL, Fielding G, Ren C: Comparison of rates of resolution of diabetes mellitus after gastric banding, gastric bypass, and biliopancreatic diversion. J Am Coll Surg. 2007, 205: 631-635. 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.05.033.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. NIH Consensus Development Panel: Gastrointestinal surgery for severe obesity. Ann Intern Med. 1991, 115: 956-961.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Ford ES, Giles WH, Dietz WH: Prevalence of the metabolic syndrome among US adults: findings from the third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. JAMA. 2002, 287: 356-359. 10.1001/jama.287.3.356.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Bazett HC: An analysis of time relations of the electrocardiogram. Heart. 1920, 7: 353-370.Google Scholar
  32. Zareba W, Moss AJ, Le Cessie S: Dispersion of ventricular repolarization and arrhythmic cardiac death in coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 1994, 74: 550-553. 10.1016/0002-9149(94)90742-0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Okin PM, Roman MJ, Devereux RB, Kligfield P: Electrocardiographic identification of increased left ventricular mass by simple voltage-duration products. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995, 25: 417-423. 10.1016/0735-1097(94)00371-V.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Dahlof B, Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE, Julius S, Beevers G, Faire U, Fyhrquist F, Ibsen H, Kristiansson K, Lederballe-Pedersen O, Lindholm LH, Nieminen MS, Omvik P, Oparil S, Wedel H: Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in the Losartan Intervention For Endpoint reduction in hypertension study (LIFE): a randomised trial against atenolol. Lancet. 2002, 359: 995-1003. 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08089-3.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Okin PM, Jern S, Devereux RB, Kjeldsen SE, Dahlof B, for the LIFE study group: Effect of obesity on electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients. The losartan intervention for endpoint (LIFE) reduction in hypertension study. Hypertension. 2000, 35: 13-18.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Rautaharju PM, Manolio TA, Siscovick D: Utility of new electrocardiographic models for left ventricular mass in older subjects. Hypertension. 1996, 28: 8-15.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Festa A, D'Agostino R, Rautaharju PM: Relation of systemic blood pressure, left ventricular mass, insulin sensitivity, and coronary heart disease to QT interval duration in nondiabetic and type 2 diabetic subjects. Am J Cardiol. 2000, 86: 1117-1122. 10.1016/S0002-9149(00)01170-X.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Bulatov VA, Stenehejem A, Os I: Left ventricular mass assessed by electrocardiography and albumin excretion rate as a continuum in untreated essential hypertension. J Hypertens. 2001, 19: 1473-1478. 10.1097/00004872-200108000-00016.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Frige' F, Laneri M, Veronelli A, Folli F, Paganelli M, Vedani P, Marchi M, Noe' D, Ventura P, Opocher E, Pontiroli AE: Bariatric surgery in obesity: Changes of glucose and lipid metabolism correlate with changes of fat mass. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2009, 19: 198-204. 10.1016/j.numecd.2008.04.005.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Valera-Mora ME, Simeoni B, Gagliardi L, Scarfone A, Nanni G, Castagneto M, Manco M, Mingrone G, Ferrannini E: Predictors of weight loss and reversal of comorbidities in malabsorptive bariatric surgery. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005, 81: 1292-1297.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Vila M, Ruiz O, Belmonte M, Riesco M, Barcelo A, Perez G, Moreiro J, Salinas R: Changes in lipid profile and insulin resistance in obese patients after Scopinaro biliopancreatic diversion. Obes Surg. 2009, 19: 299-306. 10.1007/s11695-008-9790-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Repa JJ, Mangelsdorf DJ: Nuclear receptor regulation of cholesterol and bile acid metabolism. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 1999, 10: 557-563. 10.1016/S0958-1669(99)00031-2. ReviewView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Bays HA: Current and investigational antiobesity agents and obesity therapeutic treatment targets. Obes Res. 2004, 12: 1197-1211. 10.1038/oby.2004.151.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Poirier P, Hernandez TL, Weil KM, Shepard TJ, Eckel RH: Impact of Diet-Induced Weight Loss on the Cardiac Autonomic Nervous System in Severe Obesity. Obes Res. 2003, 11: 1040-1047. 10.1038/oby.2003.143.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Diaz A, Bourassa MG, Guertin MC, Tardif JC: Long-term prognostic value of resting heart rate in patients with suspected or proven coronary artery disease. Eur Heart J. 2005, 26: 967-974. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehi190.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Karason K, Wikstrand J, Sjostrom L, Wendelhag I: Weight loss and progression of early atherosclerosis in the carotid artery: controlled study of obese subjects. Int J Obes. 1999, 23: 948-956. 10.1038/sj.ijo.0801024.View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Pontiroli et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement