Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty with Comparison to Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

Purpose Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) has grown in popularity as a potential minimally invasive bariatric procedure with acceptable short- and medium-term outcomes. This review aims to assess the safety and weight loss outcomes of ESG and compare it with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Material and Methods A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane and World Wide Web was conducted. Results Five studies were reviewed, three ESG cohort studies and two case-matched cohort studies comparing ESG with LSG. Total unique ESG and LSG patients were 1451 and 203, respectively. All papers demonstrated a modest short-term total body weight loss (TBWL%) at 6 months ranging from 13.7 to 15.2% for ESG. Comparably, the two LSG papers demonstrated a superior TBWL% of 23.5 and 23.6% at 6 months, with one paper reporting a 12-month TBWL% of 29.3%. Two ESG papers reported medium-term results at 18 and 24 months of 14.8% and 18.6%, respectively. Excluding Clavien-Dindo 1 complications, ESG had a complication rate between 2.0 and 2.7%, while comparatively, LSG had a complication rate between 9.2 and 16.9% (current literature reported as 8.7%). In both procedures, there were no grade IV or V complications. Conclusion ESG when compared with LSG has lower short-term weight loss outcomes with fewer complications. Weight loss results for ESG appear to plateau after the 1-year mark. The future and uptake of ESG as a minimally invasive bariatric procedure will be determined by its long-term data on potential weight loss sustainability.