Endoscopic gastrojejunostomy revision is more effective than medical management alone to address weight regain after RYGB

Comparable improvement and resolution of obesity-related comorbidities in endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty vs laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: single-center study

BACKGROUND

Despite excellent surgical outcomes, a minority of qualified patients undergo weight loss surgery. Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty (ESG), an incisionless procedure, has proven to be effective in achieving weight loss and comorbidity improvement. We aim to compare outcomes of ESG to those of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG).

METHOD

A retrospective review of a prospective database of patients who underwent ESG and LSG at NorthShore University HealthSystem from 2016 to 2023 was completed. Demographic and outcome data were analyzed. Pre- and post-surgical data were compared using chi-square and two-sample t tests. Improvement or resolution of obesity-related comorbidities were also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 212 LSG and 68 ESG patients were reviewed. ESG patients were older (47 ± 10 vs. 43 ± 12, p = 0.006) and less obese (BMI 37.0 ± 5.5 vs. 45.8 ± 0.4, p < 0.001) than LSG patients. Median length of stay after ESG was 0 days and after LSG 1 day (p < 0.001). Severe adverse events were seen less frequent after ESG (1.47%, vs 3.77%). LSG achieved more significant %TBWL at 6 months (25.2 ± 8.9 vs 14.9 ± 7.4), 1 year (27.5 ± 10.8 vs 14.1 ± 9.8), and 2 years (25.7 ± 10.8 vs 10.5 ± 8.8, all p < 0.001) after surgery when compared to ESG. LSG achieved significantly greater %EWL compared to ESG at 6 months (57.0 ± 20.7 vs 50.4 ± 29.2, p = 0.137), 1 year (61.4 ± 24.6 vs 46.5 ± 34.0, p = 0.026), and 2 years postoperatively (59.7 ± 25.5 vs 32.6 ± 28.2, p = 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in rates of improvement or resolution of diabetes, obstructive sleep apnea, hyperlipidemia, or hypertension.

CONCLUSION

ESG is an effective procedure for weight loss and comorbidity resolution. Obesity-related comorbidities are comparably improved and resolved following ESG vs LSG. Although the weight loss in LSG is significantly higher, patients can expect a shorter hospital length of stay and a lower rate of complications after ESG. ESG continues to show promise for long-term weight loss and improvement in health.

Reversal of Long-Term Weight Regain After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Using Liraglutide or Surgical Revision. A Prospective Study

Purpose

This study investigates whether pharmacotherapy with liraglutide is similarly effective in reversing weight regain more than 6 years after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional surgery aimed at restoring restriction.

Methods

Ninety-five consecutive patients (11 male, 84 female; mean BMI 45 ± 6 kg/m²) undergoing RYGB 9 ± 4 years ago were treated for 24 months as follows: Patients, who gained less than 10% from weight NADIR, served as controls and were provided lifestyle counseling (DC, n = 30). The others were allowed to choose between three different treatment groups: daily s.c. administration of liraglutide (LG, n = 34); endosurgery using Apollo’s Overstitch System™ (ES, n = 15), or implantation of a Fobi-ring with pouch resizing (FP, n = 16).

Results

Controls kept their weight stable during 24 months of study (− 0.1 ± 1.7 kg/m²). Weight loss was 4.8 ± 2.9 kg/m² for LG and 5.5 ± 2.9 kg/m² for FP, both losing more than 85% of regained weight from weight NADIR (p < 0.001). In contrast, weight loss in ES was 1.0 ± 0.9 kg/m² (i.e., 20% of regained weight). Thirty-seven percent of FP experienced serious complications (p < 0.05) in contrast to the other groups. An improved prevalence of hypertension and dyslipidemia was observed in LG and FP (p < 0.02) 24 months after intervention.

Conclusions

Weight regain during more than 6 years after RYGB can be safely and effectively reversed with liraglutide. Compared with revisional surgery, pharmacotherapy with liraglutide was low risk and resulted in an important improvement in hypertension and dyslipidemia. Therefore, daily subcutaneous injections of liraglutide are a valid option to treat weight regain after RYGB.

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 and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

OBJECTIVE

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, 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 health care 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.

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.

Modified-ESD Plus APC and Suturing for Treatment of Weight Regain After Gastric Bypass

BACKGROUND

Mechanisms for weight regain after gastric bypass are not fully understood and the process is likely multifactorial. The initial step in the management of weight regain is a comprehensive evaluation of contributing factors. While lifestyle modification is fundamental, it has limited efficacy which can be enhanced by medications and/or endoscopic revision. Anatomic changes such as larger pouch size and dilation of the gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA) may contribute to increased postoperative weight gain. Endoluminal revisions offer an effective and less invasive management strategy for this population.

METHODS

A 55-year-old female with history of RYGB in 2006 presented with weight regain. She was referred to our unit for endoscopic evaluation.

RESULTS

During endoscopy, a large GJA (25 mm in diameter) was diagnosed. A novel trans-oral outlet reduction (TORe) was then performed. A modified ESD was first performed on the GJA, followed by argon plasma coagulation of the margins of the ESD. Then a purse-string TORe with suturing was performed, using a 10 mm balloon to size the GJA. On 6-month follow-up, patient lost 20 lb. and 12.26 %TBWL and EGD showed a 10 mm diameter GJA. On 1-year follow-up, patient weight loss was 14 lb. and 8.58 %TBWL. The follow-up endoscopy showed a 12 mm diameter GJA.

CONCLUSION

Endoluminal therapies are safe, reproducible, and effective in the treatment of weight regain and should be utilized as a first-line approach to manage this condition. This novel-combined approach is feasible and may be more effective in the treatment of weight regain.

Endoscopic management of weight regain following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

INTRODUCTION

With the cumulative increase in the number of patients undergoing bariatric surgery, postoperative weight regain has become a considerable challenge. Mechanisms for weight regain are not fully understood and the process is likely multifactorial in many cases. Endoluminal revisions that reduce gastric pouch size and diameter of the gastrojejunal anastomosis may offer an effective and less invasive management strategy for this population.

AREAS COVERED

We critically review data from case series, retrospective and prospective studies, and meta-analyses pertaining to weight regain after gastric bypass. A variety of endoscopic revision approaches are reviewed, including technique details, procedural safety and efficacy, and post-procedure care.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Given the proliferation of endoluminal therapies with evidence showing safety and efficacy in the treatment of weight regain, it is likely that endoscopic revision will be the gold standard to treat weight regain in patients with gastric bypass.