No not really. An IPO sells shares in a company to investors. Those investors are now owners of the firm. If the firm makes money, share price goes up, and they make money, in addition they might get a share of the profits in the form of a dividend, however, if the firm loses money, the share price goes down and if they sell they lose money. It's standard stock trading.
In a leveraged buyout, the "investors" buy the firm, become its owners, but are not responsible for any of the debt they've organised in order to buy the firm. So the new owners have just borrowed a ton of cash, but they dont have to actually pay back that cash, the company has to pay for it. But the "investors" remain the boss of the firm, even though it's the firm itself paying off it's own debt.
Compare that to if you buy a house. You organise a loan from a bank, so YOU are responsible for the debt on the house. And as you pay it off, the House becomes yours. However, if you fail to pay for it, the bank might take possession of the house, sell it off to pay off your debt, and if that doesnt cover the full loan, then the bank will also chase you to pay off the debt.
But imagine, if you could buy your house with a leveraged buyout. You would own the house, but the house would be expected to pay the debts (I guess your renting the house out for that to work :P), if the House doesnt pay off its loans, then sure the bank can take possession of the house, and sell it off, but if that doesnt cover the debts. Well too bad for the bank, your home scot free. And you probably still "own" the land, so can tear down the house and build something on the rubble. All up it's pretty much cost you nothing, as the bank held all the debt, but you got to be the "owner".
I'll never understand why any bank would get involved in such a purchase, they pretty much only ever stand to lose or at best break even...