TheRealist
Member
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2017
- Messages
- 9
I agree it makes sense that there should be similar complication rates, but at least from research thus far people are claiming less? For example: web.duke.edu/surgery/2017BariatricMasters/yurcisin_current_status_of_the_sips.pdf. Of course again, not a lot of research on this (compared to DS), but that is where I was getting the idea that complication rate was less.
Also thanks Larra, didn't realize a shorter common channel was not possible with SIPS. So I guess the choice then is DS with 150cm (or a cm determined by the Hess method, if the surgeon will do it) or SADIS with 300cm.
This does make me wonder why early research says SADIS and a normal DS have roughly equivalent weight loss outcomes, given the differences in common channel lengths. Makes me think SADIS won't hold for long-term (10+ years) in terms of keeping the pounds off. And thus is pushing me into the DS camp.
Also thanks Larra, didn't realize a shorter common channel was not possible with SIPS. So I guess the choice then is DS with 150cm (or a cm determined by the Hess method, if the surgeon will do it) or SADIS with 300cm.
This does make me wonder why early research says SADIS and a normal DS have roughly equivalent weight loss outcomes, given the differences in common channel lengths. Makes me think SADIS won't hold for long-term (10+ years) in terms of keeping the pounds off. And thus is pushing me into the DS camp.
Last edited: