Systematic review on reoperative bariatric surgery: American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Revision Task Force. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2014;10:952-972. [PMID: 24776071 DOI: 10.1016/j.soard.2014.02.014]

A Spanish Society joint SECO and SEEDO approach to the Post-operative management of the patients undergoing surgery for obesity

PURPOSE

Bariatric surgery is the method of choice for the management or treatment of obesity. Bariatric surgery brings about several physiological changes in the body and is associated with set of complications. The aim of this study is to provide guidelines on post bariatric surgery management based on consensus by the Spanish society for Obesity Surgery (Sociedad Española de Cirugía de la Obesidad) (SECO) and the Spanish Society for the Study of Obesity (Sociedad Española para el Estudio de la Obesidad) (SEEDO).

METHOD

The boards proposed seven experts from each society. The experts provided the evidence and a grade of recommendation on the selected topics based on systematic reviews/meta-analysis. A list of clinical practical recommendations levels of evidence and grades of these recommendations was derived from the consensus statements from the members of these societies.

RESULTS

Seventeen topics related to post-operative management were reviewed after bariatric surgery. The experts came with 47 recommendations and statements. The mean number of persons voting at each statement was 54 (range 36-76).

CONCLUSION

In this consensus, we have designed a set of guidelines to be followed while managing patients after bariatric surgery. Expertise and knowledge of the clinicians are required to convey suitable considerations to the post-bariatric patients. There should also be extensive follow-up plans for the bariatric surgery patients.

Clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative nutrition, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of patients undergoing bariatric procedures - 2019 update: cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

OBJECTIVE

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPG) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The Obesity Society, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the Obesity Medicine Association, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists boards of directors in adherence to the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPG, algorithms, and checklists.

METHODS

Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts.

RESULTS

New or updated topics in this CPG include contextualization in an adiposity-based, chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based, and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current healthcare arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest).

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence-based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

Risk Prediction Model for Severe Postoperative Complication in Bariatric Surgery

Background

Factors associated with risk for adverse outcome are important considerations in the preoperative assessment of patients for bariatric surgery. As yet, prediction models based on preoperative risk factors have not been able to predict adverse outcome sufficiently.

Objective

This study aimed to identify preoperative risk factors and to construct a risk prediction model based on these.

Methods

Patients who underwent a bariatric surgical procedure in Sweden between 2010 and 2014 were identified from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry (SOReg). Associations between preoperative potential risk factors and severe postoperative complications were analysed using a logistic regression model. A multivariate model for risk prediction was created and validated in the SOReg for patients who underwent bariatric surgery in Sweden, 2015.

Results

Revision surgery (standardized OR 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14–0.24, p < 0.001), age (standardized OR 1.10, 95%CI 1.03–1.17, p = 0.007), low body mass index (standardized OR 0.89, 95%CI 0.82–0.98, p = 0.012), operation year (standardized OR 0.91, 95%CI 0.85–0.97, p = 0.003), waist circumference (standardized OR 1.09, 95%CI 1.00–1.19, p = 0.059), and dyspepsia/GERD (standardized OR 1.08, 95%CI 1.02–1.15, p = 0.007) were all associated with risk for severe postoperative complication and were included in the risk prediction model. Despite high specificity, the sensitivity of the model was low.

Conclusion

Revision surgery, high age, low BMI, large waist circumference, and dyspepsia/GERD were associated with an increased risk for severe postoperative complication. The prediction model based on these factors, however, had a sensitivity that was too low to predict risk in the individual patient case.

Perioperative Outcomes of Laparoscopic and Robotic Revisional Bariatric Surgery in a Complex Patient Population

BACKGROUND

Utilization of the robotic platform has become more common in bariatric applications. We aim to show that robotic revisional bariatric surgery (RRBS) can be safely performed in a complex patient population with perioperative outcomes equivalent to laparoscopic revisional bariatric surgery (LRBS).

METHODS

Retrospective review was conducted of adult patients undergoing laparoscopic revisional bariatric surgery (LRBS) or robotic revisional bariatric surgery (RRBS) at our institution from September 2007 to December 2016. Patients undergoing planned two-stage bariatric procedures were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients who underwent LRBS (n = 66) or RRBS (n = 18) were included. The index operation was adjustable gastric banding (AGB) in 39/84 (46%), sleeve gastrectomy (VSG) in 23/84 (27%), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in 13/84 (16%), and vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) in 9/84 (11%). For patients undergoing conversion from AGB (n = 39), there was no difference in operative time, length of stay, or complications by surgical approach. For patients undergoing conversion from a stapled procedure (n = 45), the robotic approach was associated with a shorter length of stay (5.8 ± 3.3 vs 3.7 ± 1.7 days, p = 0.04) with equivalent operative time and post-operative complications. There were three leaks in the LRBS group and none in the RRBS group (p = 0.36). Major complications occurred in 3/39 (8%) of patients undergoing conversion from AGB and 2/45 (4%) of patients undergoing conversion from a stapled procedure (p = 0.53) with no difference by surgical approach.

CONCLUSIONS

RRBS is associated with a shorter length of stay than LRBS in complex procedures and has at least an equivalent safety profile. Long-term follow-up data is needed.

30-Day Outcomes of Revisional Bariatric Stapling Procedures: First Report Based on MBSAQIP Data Registry

INTRODUCTION

The number of bariatric revisional cases has nearly doubled since 2011, and now comprises 13.6% of the total number of cases. The objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes and safety of the two most common stapling revisional procedures, namely, sleeve and gastric bypass in comparison to primary stapling procedures using the MBSAQIP data registry.

METHODS

We reviewed all the sleeve and gastric bypass cases entered between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015, in the MBSAQIP data registry. We, then, identified sleeve and bypass patients who have had a previous bariatric procedure. Demographics and 30 day outcomes of all sleeve and gastric bypass patients were analyzed. We conducted within group comparisons comparing primary sleeve gastrectomy (PS) and primary gastric bypass (PB) patients to revisional sleeve (RS) and revisional gastric bypass (RB) patients, respectively. We, then, conducted group comparisons comparing RS to RB patients.

RESULTS

The total number of patients analyzed was 141,577 (98,292 or 69% sleeve patients and 43,285 or 31% gastric bypass patients). Among the sleeve patients, 92,666 (94%) had a PS and 5626 (6%) had RS. Among the bypass patients, 39,567 (91%) had a PB and 3718 patients (9%) had RB. 30-day readmission rate of RS was significantly higher as compared to PS (4.1 vs 0.4%, p < 0.05). The incidence of at least one complication requiring reoperation or reintervention within 30 days following RS was twice as high as compared to PS (1.9 and 2% for RS vs 0.9 and 1.1% for PS respectively, p < 0.05). Length of stay and 30 day mortality rates for PS and RS were the same. 30-day readmission rate of RB as compared to PB was 8.3 vs 6.3% (p < 0.05). Also, the incidence of at least one complication requiring reoperation or reintervention following RB was 3.9 and 4%, respectively vs 2.4 and 2.7% for PB (p < 0.05). In addition, readmission rates and unplanned admission rates to the ICU were significantly higher for RB compared to RS (8.3 and 2% for RB vs 4.1 and 0.9% for RS respectively, p < 0.05). The incidence of at least one reoperation or one intervention following RB were also significantly higher compared to RS (3.9 vs 1.9% and 4 vs 2% respectively, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Revisional stapling procedures are safe but the rates of complications following RS and RB are twice as high compared to PS and PB. Also, RB are more likely to develop complications compared to RS.

Endoscopic techniques for weight loss and treating metabolic syndrome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The endoscopic armamentarium against obesity and metabolic syndrome is rapidly growing and improving. Novel devices have been tested and recent data either support or reject their use. We aim to discuss current data on new endoscopic procedures addressing overweight, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome.

RECENT FINDINGS

Four-year follow-up of the aspiration therapy have shown efficacy and safety at long term. A recent consensus on intragastric balloon gathered experience from more than 40 000 procedures and standardized most steps of the treatment. The TransPyloric Shuttle has been proven effective at short term but carries high rates of adverse events. The endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty promotes similar weight loss to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in mildly obese patien. The endoluminal magnetic partial jejunal diversion promoted good weight loss and a significant reduction in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) but most cases required laparoscopic assistance to couple the magnets. One-year follow-up demonstrated that the duodenal mucosal resurfacing carried a 1.0% reduction in HbA1c.

SUMMARY

Innovative endoscopic procedures focused on the treatment of overweight and related diseases are available and there is growing evidence supporting their use. Nonetheless, a multidisciplinary approach is mandatory. VIDEO ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/COG/A25.

Outcomes in conventional laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted revisional bariatric surgery: a retrospective, case-controlled study of the MBSAQIP database

Introduction

Revisional bariatric surgery is being increasingly performed and is associated with higher operative risks. Optimal techniques to minimize complications remain controversial. Here, we report a retrospective review of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Participant User Files (PUF) database, comparing outcomes between revision RBS and LBS.

Methods

The 2015 and 2016 MBSAQIP PUF database was retrospectively reviewed. Revision cases were identified using the Revision/Conversion Flag. Selected cases were further stratified by surgical approach. Subgroup analysis of sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass cases was performed. Case–controlled matching (1:1) was performed of the RBS and LBS cohorts, including gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy cohorts separately. Cases and controls were match by demographics, ASA classification, and preoperative comorbidities.

Results

26,404 revision cases were identified (93.3% LBS, 6.7% RBS). 85.6% were female and 67% white. Mean age and BMI were 48 years and 40.9 kg/m². 1144 matched RBS and LBS cases were identified. RBS was associated with longer operative duration (p < 0.0001), LOS (p = 0.0002) and a higher rate of ICU admissions (1.3% vs 0.5%, p = 0.05). Aggregate bleeding and leak rates were higher in the RBS cohort. In both gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy cohorts, the robotic-assisted surgery remain associated with longer operative duration (p < 0.0001). In gastric bypass, rates of aggregate leak and bleeding were higher with robotic surgery, while transfusion was higher with laparoscopy. For sleeve gastrectomy cases, reoperation, readmission, intervention, sepsis, organ space SSI, and transfusion were higher with robotic surgery.

Conclusion

In this matched cohort analysis of revision bariatric surgery, both approaches were overall safe. RBS was associated with longer operative duration and higher rates of some complications. Complications were higher in the robotic sleeve cohort. Robotic is likely less cost-effective with no clear patient safety benefit, particularly for sleeve gastrectomy cases.

Medical Complications of Binge Eating Disorder

Binge eating disorder (BED) is the most common eating disorder and is accompanied by multiple medical comorbidities, many of which are associated with obesity-related diseases. However, the BED itself is likely to confer additional risk factors. BED presents with medical symptoms in virtually every body system and can have devastating consequences on both quality and length of life. This review covers the major comorbidities of BED and highlights areas of ongoing research in this disorder.

Readability of online patient-based information on bariatric surgery

Background: Web-based patient education literature has been shown to be written at reading levels far above what is recommended. Little is known about the overall readability of current internet-based bariatric surgery information. The purpose of this study was to assess the readability of current bariatric material on the internet.

Methods: The term "weight loss surgery" was searched using the Chrome browser on the first 15pages of URLs that appeared with content written in English. Using five readability measures, scores were generated using Readable.io for written content on a sample of 96 websites. Scores were sorted into the readability categories of "easy," "average," and "difficult."

Results: Almost 93% of websites, both .com and .org, sampled received an unacceptable readability score on each assessment.

Conclusion: Accurate and appropriate information about bariatric procedures is critical for patient comprehension and adherence to recommended protocols.

Modifiable factors associated with weight regain after bariatric surgery: a scoping review

Background: Although bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for severe obesity, weight regain may still occur. While non-modifiable factors associated with weight regain have been explored, modifiable factors responsible for weight regain are understudied. This scoping review aimed to identify modifiable behaviors associated with weight regain after bariatric surgery. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in Medline, Google Scholar, Cochrane, National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT) and Practice-based Evidence in Nutrition (PEN) which included articles published between January 1990 and February 2 2017, for studies examining "weight regain" after bariatric surgery. A total of 293 citations were retrieved. Eligible articles must have examined modifiable factors and addressed weight regain, or a long-term post-operative phase in which weight regain may occur. After removing duplicates, 22 studies were included for thematic analysis. Results: Key modifiable factors associated with weight regain were identified and categorized under the following themes: poor dietary adherence (e.g. excessive calorie, carbohydrate, and alcohol intake), maladaptive eating behaviors (e.g. grazing, binging), lack of on-going follow-up with the bariatric team and insufficient physical activity. Conclusions:  Health professionals and self-monitoring tools for patients who have undergone bariatric surgery may benefit from these findings to direct their education and interventions to target behavior change.

Modifiable factors associated with weight regain after bariatric surgery: a scoping review

Background: Although bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for severe obesity, weight regain may still occur. While non-modifiable factors associated with weight regain have been explored, modifiable factors responsible for weight regain are understudied. This scoping review aimed to identify modifiable behaviors associated with weight regain after bariatric surgery. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in Medline, Google Scholar, Cochrane, National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (NCCMT) and Practice-based Evidence in Nutrition (PEN) which included articles published between January 1990 and February 2 2017, for studies examining "weight regain" after bariatric surgery. A total of 293 citations were retrieved. Eligible articles must have examined modifiable factors and addressed weight regain, or a long-term post-operative phase in which weight regain may occur. After removing duplicates, 22 studies were included for thematic analysis. Results: Key modifiable factors associated with weight regain were identified and categorized under the following themes: poor dietary adherence (e.g. excessive calorie, carbohydrate, and alcohol intake), maladaptive eating behaviors (e.g. grazing, binging), lack of on-going follow-up with the bariatric team and insufficient physical activity. Conclusions:  Health professionals and self-monitoring tools for patients who have undergone bariatric surgery may benefit from these findings to direct their education and interventions to target behavior change.

Efficacy of the cardiac septal occluder in the treatment of post-bariatric surgery leaks and fistulas

BACKGROUND

Endoscopy has evolved to become first-line therapy for the treatment of post-bariatric leaks; however, many sessions are often required with variable success rates. Due to these limitations, the use of the cardiac septal defect occluder (CSDO) has recently been reported in this population.

METHODS

The study population was a multicenter retrospective series of patients with post-bariatric surgical leaks who underwent treatment with CSDO placement. Data on the type of surgery, previous treatment details, fistula dimensions, success rate, and adverse events were collected. Leaks were grouped according to the International Sleeve Gastrectomy Expert Panel Consensus. Outcomes included technical and clinical success and safety of the CSDO. Regression analysis was performed to determine the predictors of response.

RESULTS

Forty-three patients with leaks were included (31 sleeve gastrectomy and 12 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass). They were divided into acute (n = 3), early (n = 5), late (n = 23), and chronic (n = 12). Forty patients had failed previous endoscopic treatment and 3 patients had CSDO as the primary treatment. Median follow-up was 34 weeks. Technical success was achieved in all patients and clinical success in 39 patients (90.7%). All chronic, late, and early leaks were successfully closed, except one undrained late leak. The 5 patients with early leaks had an initial satisfactory response, but within 30 days, drainage recurred. The CSDOs were removed and replaced with larger-diameter devices leading to permanent defect closure. Acute leaks were not successfully closed in all 3 patients. Regression analysis showed that chronicity and previous treatment were associated with fistula closure; success rates for late/chronic leaks versus acute/early leaks were 97.1% and 62.5%, respectively (P = .0023).

CONCLUSION

This observational study found that the CSDO had a high efficacy rate in patients with non-acute leaks, with no adverse events. All early, late, and chronic leaks were successfully closed, except for one undrained late leak. However, early leaks required a second placement of a larger CSDO in all cases. These results suggest that the CSDO should be considered for non-acute fistula and that traditional closure methods are likely preferred in the acute and early settings.

A novel risk prediction model for 30-day severe adverse events and readmissions following bariatric surgery based on the MBSAQIP database

BACKGROUND

Although bariatric surgery is safe, some patients fear serious complications.

OBJECTIVES

This retrospective study used the 2015 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality Improvement Project (MBSAQIP) database to evaluate patient outcomes for gastric bypass (GB) and sleeve gastrectomy and to develop a risk prediction model for serious adverse events (SAEs) and readmission rates 30 days after surgery.

SETTING

MBSAQIP national patient database.

METHODS

We created separate exploratory multivariable logistic regression models for SAEs and readmissions. We then externally validated both models using the 2016 MBSAQIP Participant Use Data File.

RESULTS

Significant predictors of SAEs were preoperative body mass index (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.07, P < .0001); GB surgery (AOR 2.08, P < .0001); cardiovascular disease (AOR 1.43, P < .0001); smoking (AOR 1.12, P = .04); diabetes (AOR 1.15, P = .0001); hypertension (AOR 1.17, P < .0001); limited ambulation (AOR 1.48, P < .0001); sleep apnea (AOR 1.12, P = .001); history of pulmonary embolism (AOR 2.81, P < .0001); and steroid use (AOR 1.40, P = .001). Significant predictors of readmissions were GB surgery (AOR 1.81, P < .0001); female sex (AOR 1.26, P < .0001); diabetes (AOR 1.08, P = .04); hypertension (AOR 1.11, P = .004); preoperative body mass index (AOR 1.05, P < .0001); sleep apnea (AOR 1.11, P = .002); history of pulmonary embolism (AOR 2.35, P < .0001); cardiovascular disease (AOR 1.61, P < .0001); smoking (AOR 1.14, P = .01); and limited ambulation (AOR 1.55, P < .0001). External validation supported these covariates, with similar model discriminative power.

CONCLUSIONS

Our exploratory regression models may be used by clinicians to counsel patients about surgical risks, although future external validation should occur in non-North American populations.

Surgical management of obesity

Weight loss surgery is the most effective intervention for addressing obesity and related metabolic disorders such as diabetes. We describe common surgical procedures as well as emerging and investigational procedures in terms of their capacity to induce weight reduction and their risk profiles. We then discuss the impact of weight loss surgery on important obesity related disorders including diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. The question of operative choice is discussed with respect to benefits and risks of common procedures. Reoperative weight loss surgery, an increasingly common element of weight loss surgical practice, is reviewed. We briefly discuss the metabolic mechanism of action of weight loss surgery. Lack of access to and under-utilization of weight loss surgery represent important challenges to adequate obesity treatment, and we review these topics as well.

'No one is as invested in your continued good health as you should be:' an exploration of the post-surgical relationships between weight-loss surgery patients and their home bariatric clinics

This article traces the post-surgical relationship between weight-loss surgery (WLS) patients and their home bariatric clinics. Following surgery, there is substantive drop off in patient attendance at both follow-up appointments and support groups. While barriers to follow-up are often discussed with the bariatric literature, patients themselves are typically defined as the problem. Based upon a thematic analysis of 217 blog posts and comments in two top patient-led online forums, I demonstrate that bariatric patients tell a more complex story about their post-surgical lives. I argue that WLS patients constitute a population with highly specialised medical needs that is caught between the requirements for living with surgically altered digestive systems and a lack of sufficient post-operative follow-up care from their home bariatric clinics. Although online forums provide spaces for patients to examine these post-operative social and clinical experiences in critical terms, seek information and get support, ultimately the conversations serve to underline the value of personal responsibility for post-operative outcomes-a framing that echoes that of the bariatric profession. This framing should be understood within a larger climate of weight-based stigma and discrimination as well as neoliberal healthism.

Single- or double-anastomosis duodenal switch versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass as a revisional procedure for sleeve gastrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is one of the most commonly performed bariatric procedure worldwide. There is currently no consensus on which revisional procedure is best after an initial SG.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety between single-anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI) or biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD-DS) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as a revisional procedure for SG.

SETTING

University Hospital, Canada.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PubMed were searched up to August 2018. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they compared SADI or BPD-DS with RYGB as a revisional bariatric procedure for SG. Primary outcome was absolute percentage of total weight loss. Secondary outcomes were length of stay, adverse events, and improvement or resolution of co-morbidities (diabetes, hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia). Pooled mean differences were calculated using random effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Six retrospective cohort studies involving 377 patients met the inclusion criteria. The SADI/BPD-DS group achieved a significantly higher percentage of total weight loss compared with RYGB by 10.22% (95% confidence interval, -17.46 to -2.97; P = .006). However, there was significant baseline equivalence bias with 4 studies reporting higher initial body mass index (BMI) in the SADI/BPD-DS group. There were no significant differences in length of stay, adverse events, or improvement of co-morbidities between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

SADI, BPD-DS, and RYGB are safe and efficacious revisional surgeries for SG. Both SADI and RYGB are efficacious in lowering initial BMI but there is more evidence for excellent weight loss outcomes with the conversion to BPD-DS when the starting BMI is high. Further randomized trials are required for definitive conclusions.

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy: what factors influence patient preference?

BACKGROUND

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) are the most commonly performed bariatric procedures. RYGB involves altered gastrointestinal anatomy and 2 anastomoses, while SG involves gastric resection. When potential patients view images of the procedures, they may perceive RYGB to involve significant risk compared with SG, in which no significant gastrointestinal alterations are depicted.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate preferences for RYGB versus SG.

SETTING

Survey of U.S. adults.

METHODS

An electronic survey was distributed to 1000 U.S. adults. Respondents selected either RYGB or SG based on (1) procedural pictures alone, (2) only data on risks and benefits of each procedure, (3) pictures with corresponding risk/benefit profile, and (4) pictures with mismatched information.

RESULTS

Overall, 999 individuals met inclusion criteria; 66 (7%) had undergone bariatric surgery and were excluded. Mean age and body mass index of respondents was 44.8 ± 14.6 years (n = 922) and 28.7 ± 8.0 kg/m² (n = 915). A higher proportion of patients preferred RYGB to SG when images only were provided (54% versus 46%), when information only was provided (63% versus 37%), and when correct information with the procedure image was provided (57% versus 43%). When presented with mismatched information and images, 56% preferred RYGB information + SG image versus SG information + RYGB image (44%).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this survey, providing evidence-based risks and benefits of a procedure resulted in the majority of respondents choosing RYGB over SG. When procedure images were provided alone, preference for RYGB and SG were similar. There are likely other factors contributing to increasing SG volume aside from patient preference.

Long-term weight change and health outcomes for sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and matched Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) participants in the Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery (LABS) study

BACKGROUND

Data from a US multicenter longitudinal study of bariatric surgery were used to compare weight change (primary outcome) and comorbidities (secondary outcome) in patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

METHODS

This study includes participants who underwent sleeve gastrectomy and matched participants who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass from the Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery-2 (LABS-2) study. Adults undergoing initial bariatric surgical procedures between 2006 and 2009 were enrolled. Participants who underwent sleeve gastrectomy were high-risk or superobese and intended to have a second-stage procedure. Mixed models were used to evaluate percent weight change from baseline through 7 years, and diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension prevalence through 5 years.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven of 59 participants who underwent sleeve gastrectomy were matched one to one. Most were female (68%) and white (81%), and had a median age of 49 (37-56) years and median body mass index of 56.4 (35.5-76.8) kg/m2 presurgery. Weight loss was significantly less 1 to 7 years after sleeve gastrectomy versus matched Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (eg, year 7 mean weight loss was 23.6% vs 30.4%, respectively; P = .001). For both surgical groups, prevalence of diabetes, low high-density lipoprotein, and hypertension were significantly (P < .05) lower 5 years postsurgery versus baseline.

CONCLUSION

Higher-risk or super-obese participants after sleeve gastrectomy lost less weight than did matched Roux-en-Y gastric bypass counterparts throughout 7 years. Both groups exhibited improvements in comorbidities from presurgery through 5 years.

Weight Loss Medications in Young Adults after Bariatric Surgery for Weight Regain or Inadequate Weight Loss: A Multi-Center Study

This paper presents a retrospective cohort study of weight loss medications in young adults aged 21 to 30 following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) between November 2000 and June 2014. Data were collected from patients who used topiramate, phentermine, and/or metformin postoperatively. Percentage of patients achieving ≥5%, ≥10%, or ≥15% weight loss on medications was determined and percent weight change on each medication was compared to percent weight change of the rest of the cohort. Our results showed that 54.1% of study patients lost ≥5% of their postsurgical weight; 34.3% and 22.9% lost ≥10% and ≥15%, respectively. RYGB had higher median percent weight loss (−8.1%) than SG (−3.3%) (p = 0.0515). No difference was found in median percent weight loss with medications started at weight plateau (−6.0%) versus after weight regain (−5.4%) (p = 0.5304). Patients taking medications at weight loss plateau lost 41.2% of total body weight from before surgery versus 27.1% after weight regain (p = 0.076). Median percent weight change on metformin was −2.9% compared to the rest of the cohort at −7.7% (p = 0.0241). No difference from the rest of the cohort was found for phentermine (p = 0.2018) or topiramate (p = 0.3187). Topiramate, phentermine, and metformin are promising weight loss medications for 21 to 30 year olds. RYGB patients achieve more weight loss on medications but both RYGB and SG benefit. Median total body weight loss from pre-surgical weight may be higher in patients that start medication at postsurgical nadir weight. Participants on metformin lost significantly smaller percentages of weight on medications, which could be the result of underlying medical conditions.

Case report of combined surgical oncologic and bariatric procedures

•

Morbidly obese patients do get cancer and require laparotomy for resection of the malignancy.

•

Sleeve gastrectomy can follow a successful oncologic intervention with minimal increase in morbidity and mortality.

•

Doing the oncologic procedure, HIPEC, and then sleeve gastrectomy helps prevent tumor seeding at the gastric staple line.

•

Patient satisfaction is high with a favorable prognosis expected from a simultaneous oncologic and bariatric intervention.

Introduction

Morbidly obese patients may require a laparotomy to resect a malignancy. In some patients the cancer resection can be combined with the bariatric procedure to concomitantly treat both diseases.

Presentation of case

A morbidly obese patient with peritoneal metastases from an appendiceal mucinous neoplasm was evaluated and definitively treated with Cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC), at the same time the patient was treated for morbid obesity with sleeve gastrectomy and removal of a previous laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB).

Discussion

The clinical features and treatments of a cancer patient who underwent a combined surgical oncologic and bariatric procedure is presented. A second-look cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) preceded a sleeve gastrectomy. At the time of surgical exploration the prognosis from an oncologic perspective was acceptable. The near total gastric resection was performed without complications.

Conclusions

With short term follow-up, this patient’s outcome was favorable suggesting that surgical oncologic and bariatric procedures can be combined. Further, clinical investigations are indicated in this common clinical setting.

MiR-122 marks the differences between subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissues and associates with the outcome of bariatric surgery

The physiological roles and clinical impacts of the differences between visceral fat (VF) and subcutaneous fat (SF) are unclear. The present study aimed to compare the miRNA signatures between visceral fat (VF) and subcutaneous fat (SF) and study their influences on outcomes of bariatric surgery. To study the microRNA signatures of the VF and SF in obesity, we performed paired microRNA arrays of the adipose tissues from 20 bariatric surgery patients. The microRNA analysis identified miR-122 as the most significant signature between VF and SF. The tissue distribution, functions, and influences on adipogensis of miR-122 were analysed by Northern blotting, microRNA mimics and inhibitors, and whole-genome microarray analysis. The outcomes of body weight changes after bariatric surgery were analysed and correlated with the miR-122 abundances. Northern blotting confirmed that miR-122 was highly expressed in VF and SF. Bioinformatics analysis of the microarray revealed that proliferator activator receptor-γ (PPAR-γ) signalling was critically affected by miR-122. The modulation of PPAR-γ by miR-122 was confirmed in murine adipocytes and human adipose tissues. Furthermore, the differentiation of preadipocytes was significantly influenced by miR-122. In obese patients receiving bariatric surgery, the ratio of VF and SF miR-122 abundance correlated with 6-month and 1-year % excess body weight loss. Our findings indicate that miR-122 is highly expressed in adipose tissue. The abundance of miR-122 affects PPAR-γ signalling and adipocytes differentiation in vitro and human adipose tissues. Higher miR-122 in VF may be associated with greater body weight loss after bariatric surgery.

Feeding the gut after revisional bariatric surgery: The fate of 126 enteral access tubes

BACKGROUND

Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) is associated with higher complication rates compared with primary bariatric surgery. Feeding tubes (FTs), including gastrostomy and jejunostomy tubes placed during RBS, may serve as a safety net to provide nutrition when oral intake is contraindicated or limited; however, FTs in this setting have not been well investigated.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to determine complications, use, and duration of FTs placed during RBS.

SETTING

A high-volume academic medical center in the United States.

METHODS

Included patients underwent RBS between January 2008 and December 2016 with FTs placed at the time of RBS.

RESULTS

There were 126 patients identified (84.9% female, 76.2% Caucasian, mean age 53.4-±10.9 yr). Patients had previously undergone Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (34.1%), vertical banded gastroplasty (27.8%), and adjustable gastric band (14.3%). Indications for RBS included correction of complication of prior bariatric surgeries (50%), weight regain/failure to lose weight (32.3%), or both (17.3%). Most FTs were placed in the excluded stomach (89.7%), and median tube size was 18 F. FTs were used for feeding in 68.2% of patients, with feeding initiated in a median of 2 days. Leakage around the tube (32.5%) and pain (26.8%) were common complaints. Significant tube-related complications included infection (9.1%), dislodgement (5.9%), reintervention (5.8%), and reoperation (2.8%); 16.7% experienced at least 1 significant complication. FTs were removed at a median of 36 days.

CONCLUSION

FTs may aid in prevention of perioperative dehydration and malnutrition after RBS, but should not be considered a benign intervention. FT use should be balanced against institutional outcomes and care goals.

Specialty Article: so You Think You Got a Bypass? A Case Series of Adventures in Bariatric Surgery

To raise awareness for surgeons encountering bariatric patients with anatomy that deviates from the standard Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). This is a single-institution retrospective case series over 12 years (2003-2014) involving patients who believed they received RYGBs, but actually did not. Data was obtained reviewing physician encounters, imaging, and operative reports. There were six cases with confusing clinical pictures, found to have aberrant RYGB anatomy: (1) gastric bypass with jejuno-jejunostomy only without gastrojejunostomy, (2) distal partial vertical gastrectomy without expected prosthetic band, (3) inverse vertical banded gastroplasty, (4) non-divided gastric bypass with no gastrojejunostomy, (5) 20-cm Roux limb, with gastro-gastric fistula, and (6) 200-cm bilio-pancreatic limb similar to the traditional Scopinaro procedure. There are cases of "Roux-en-Y gastric bypasses" that have no resemblance to the named procedure at all. Adjunctive upper gastrointestinal studies and upper endoscopies help surgeons make diagnoses that are incongruent with the surgical history. It is important to keep in mind that there could be anatomic or surgical variations which were born out of necessity or based on other surgeons' creativities.

Completion Gastrectomy with Esophagojejunostomy for Management of Complications of Benign Foregut Surgery

BACKGROUND

With the worldwide epidemic of obesity, an increasing number of bariatric operations and antireflux fundoplications are being performed. Despite low morbidity of the primary foregut surgery, completion gastrectomy may be necessary as a definitive procedure for complications of prior foregut surgery; however, the literature evaluating outcomes after completion gastrectomy with esophagojejunostomy (EJ) for benign diseases is limited. We present our experience of completion gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y EJ in the setting of benign disease at a single tertiary center.

METHODS AND PROCEDURES

All patients who underwent total, proximal, or completion gastrectomy with EJ for complications of benign foregut surgery from January 2006 to December 2015 were retrospectively identified. All cancer operations were excluded.

RESULTS

There were 23 patients who underwent gastrectomy with EJ (13 laparoscopic EJ [LEJ] and 10 open EJ). The index operations included 12 antireflux, 9 bariatric, and 2 peptic ulcer disease surgeries. Seventy-eight percent of patients had surgical or endoscopic interventions before EJ, with a median of one prior intervention and a median interval from the index operation to EJ of 25 months (interquartile range 9-87). The 30-day perioperative complication rate was 30% with 17% classified being major (Clavien-Dindo ≥ III) and no 30-day perioperative mortality. Comparing laparoscopic and open approaches showed similar operative times, estimated blood loss, and overall complication rate. LEJ was associated with a shorter length of stay (LOS) (P < .001), fewer postoperative ICU days (P = .002), fewer 6-month complication rates (P < .007), and decreased readmission rate (P = .024).

CONCLUSION

Our series demonstrates that EJ is a reasonable option for reoperative foregut surgery. The laparoscopic approach appears to be associated with decreased LOS and readmissions.

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: Outcomes of a case-matched comparison of primary versus revisional surgery

Introduction:

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy are popular bariatric procedures. Certain complications may necessitate revision. Adverse outcomes are reported after revisional bariatric surgery. We compared patients undergoing revisional versus primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB).

Materials and Methods

This was retrospective comparative 1:1 case-matched analysis of revisional LRYGB Group A versus primary LRYGB (pLRYGB/Group B). Matching was based on body mass index (BMI) and comorbidities. BMI decrease at 6 and 12 months post-surgery, comorbidity resolution, operative time, morbidity and length of hospital stay (LOS) were compared. Total decrease in BMI, i.e., change from before initial bariatric procedure to 12 months after revision for Group A was also compared.

Results:

Median BMI (inter-quartile range) for Group A decreased to 44.74 (7.09) and 41.49 (6.26) at 6 and 12 months, respectively, for Group B corresponding figures were 38.74 (6.9) and 33.79 (6.64) (P = 0.001 and P = 0.0001, respectively). Total decrease in BMI (Group A) was 9.8, whereas BMI decrease at 12 months for Group B was 15.2 (P = 0.23). Hypertension resolved in 63% (Group A), 70% (Group B) (P = 0.6). Diabetes resolution was 80% (Group A), 63% (Group B) (P = 0.8). Operative time for Groups A, B was 151 ± 17, 137 ± 11 min, respectively (P = 0.004). There was no difference in morbidity and LOS.

Conclusion:

Comorbidity resolution after revisional and pLRYGB are similar. Less weight loss is achieved after revision than after pLRYGB, but total weight loss is comparable. Revisional surgery is safe when performed by experienced surgeons in high-volume centres.

American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery estimation of metabolic and bariatric procedures performed in the United States in 2016

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery, despite being the most successful long-lasting treatment for morbid obesity, remains underused as only approximately 1% of all patients who qualify for surgery actually undergo surgery. To determine if patients in need are receiving appropriate therapy, the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery created a Numbers Taskforce to specify annual rate of use for obesity treatment interventions.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to determine metabolic and bariatric procedure trends since 2011 and to provide the best estimate of the number of procedures performed in the United States in 2016.

SETTING

United States.

METHODS

We reviewed data from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program, National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database, and Nationwide Inpatient Sample. In addition, data from industry and outpatient centers were used to estimate outpatient center activity. Data from 2016 were compared with the previous 5 years of data.

RESULTS

Compared with 2015, the total number of metabolic and bariatric procedures performed in 2016 increased from approximately 196,000 to 216,000. The sleeve gastrectomy trend is increasing, and it continues to be the most common procedure. The gastric bypass and gastric band trends continued to decrease as seen in previous years. The percentage of revision procedures and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch procedures increased slightly. Finally, intragastric balloons placement emerged as a significant contributor to the cumulative total number of procedures performed.

CONCLUSIONS

There is increasing use of metabolic and bariatric procedures performed in the United States from 2011 to 2016, with a nearly 10% increase noted from 2015 to 2016.

Pouch Reshaping for Significant Weight Regain after Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

BACKGROUND

Significant weight regain after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) occurs in around 20 % of patients in the long term. Anatomical reasons include dilatation of the gastric pouch and/or the pouch-jejunal anastomosis, leading to loss of restriction. Pouch reshaping (PR) aims at reestablishing restriction with a subsequent feeling of satiety. This study reports the outcome of PR embedded in a multidisciplinary treatment pathway.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients after PR for weight regain >30 % following RYGB in a university hospital between October 2010 and March 2016 were analyzed. Excluded were patients with PR for gastro-gastric fistulae, hypoglycemia, candy cane syndrome, and concomitant alteration of limb lengths. PR consisted in laparoscopic lateral resection of the gastric pouch, the anastomosis and the proximal 5 cm of the alimentary limb over a 32F bougie.

RESULTS

Median follow-up after PR was 48 months (range 24-60). Median BMI at PR was 39.1 kg/m² (32.7-59.1). Median operation time was 85 min (25-190), and median length of stay was 3 days (1-35). Minor complications (grade ≤ 2) occurred in seven (27 %) patients and major complications (grade ≥ 3) in four patients (15 %). Nadir BMI and %EBMIL after PR were 32.9 kg/m² and 43.3 %, reached after a median of 12 months (3-48). Comorbidities were resolved in 81 %. After 48 months, median BMI was 33.8 kg/m² (20.4-49.2) and %EBMIL was 61.4 (39.1-121.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Used selectively in a multidisciplinary treatment pathway, PR leads to prolonged weight stabilization around the previous nadir. However, its associated perioperative morbidity must not be disregarded.

Management of Complications and Outcomes After Revisional Bariatric Surgery: 3-Year Experience at a Bariatric Center of Excellence

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) is increasingly common. A tailored decision-making process is advocated. In this retrospective study, we reviewed the RBS experience of a single center, analyzing perioperative complications to provide insight into management options and midterm outcomes.

METHODS

Records from November 2011 to March 2015 were reviewed from prospectively maintained database. Six hundred eighteen patients underwent laparoscopic bariatric procedures; of these, 81 (13.1 %) underwent RBS. Patients with a minimum follow-up of 6 months (n = 77) were evaluated. Fifty-nine underwent revised laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, and 18 underwent revised Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Indications for RBS were inadequate weight loss or weight regain in 42 cases (54.5 %) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), procedure-related complications, or technical failure in 35 cases (45.5 %).

RESULTS

There were no deaths or conversions to open surgery. After a mean follow-up of 22 months, body mass index (BMI) decreased from 40.9 ± 6.7 to 31.9 ± 4.8 kg/m(2), mean % excess weight loss (%EWL) was 58 ± 24.3 %, and 55.3 % of patients had resolution of comorbidities. Eight major complications (10.4 %) occurred: five leaks and three intra-abdominal hematomas. Non-surgical management succeeded in 50 % of complications.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that RBS is challenging; a complication rate of 10 % is expected. Major surgery can be avoided when devoted endoscopists and radiologists are available. Intensive follow-up after complications allows early diagnosis and treatment of unfavorable sequelae. RBS induced a mean %EWL of 58 % at 2 years and resolution of comorbidities in 50 % of cases. However, the durability of these effects remains questionable.