Is Revisional Gastric Bypass as Effective as Primary Gastric Bypass for Weight Loss and Improvement of Comorbidities?

Five year outcomes of primary and secondary Single-Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal bypass with Sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S)

BACKGROUND

The single-anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) can be performed as a primary or (planned) secondary metabolic bariatric procedure. The aims of this study were to compare mid-term outcomes up to 5 years after primary vs secondary SADI-S and between different common channel (CC) lengths.

METHODS

Multicenter retrospective cohort study including 103 patients who underwent SADI-S between 06-2015 and 02-2019. Outcomes on weight loss, nutrient status, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and gastro-intestinal symptoms until 5 years postoperatively were evaluated and compared between primary (n = 19) vs secondary SADI-S (n = 84), and CC length ≤ 250 cm (n = 66,) vs > 250 cm (n = 33).

RESULTS

Mean total weight loss (TWL) at 5 years of follow-up was higher for patients who underwent primary SADI-S compared to secondary SADI-S (34.8 (29.8-39.9)% vs 15.9 (13.0-18.9)%, p < 0.001) and for CC length ≤ 250 cm compared to > 250 cm (25.3 (21.8-28.9)% vs 21.3 (17.2-25.4)%, p = 0.12). Patients who underwent primary SADI-S also had significantly higher scores on the domains of the BODY-Q HRQoL questionnaire (p < 0.05 for all), with the exception of sexual well-being. Nutrient status and gastro-intestinal symptoms were comparable between the indication groups, but CC length ≤ 250 cm tended to result in more nutrient deficiencies and higher defecation frequency.

CONCLUSION

Both primary and secondary SADI-S result in durable weight loss outcomes up to 5 years postoperatively. It is imperative that CC length should be at least 250 cm to prevent malnutrition and gastro-intestinal complaints. Furthermore, focus on HRQoL is essential in future research into SADI-S.

Efficacy and Safety of GLP- 1 Receptor Agonists in the Management of Weight Recurrence or Suboptimal Clinical Response after Undergoing Metabolic Bariatric Surgeries: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a pressing requirement to formulate innovative approaches for addressing inadequate weight loss or recurrence in individuals following metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS). Glucagon-like peptide- 1 (GLP- 1) analogues such as liraglutide and semaglutide have been formulated for treating type 2 diabetes or managing obesity. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to pool the results from all available studies on GLP- 1 agonists to assess the efficacy of these drugs in weight recurrence or suboptimal clinical response of patients who underwent MBS.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception till October 2024 for articles that fulfil our eligibility to be included in the systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the use of GLP- 1 agonists in the management of weight recurrence or suboptimal clinical response in patients who underwent MBS. The search strategy was as follows: "Liraglutide" OR "Semaglutide" OR "Tirzepatide" OR "GLP- 1" OR "Glucagon like peptide" AND "Weight" AND "Bariatric" OR "Sleeve" OR "Banding" OR "Roux-en-Y bypass. We used the mean difference (MD) to compare between continuous variables at a confidence interval (CI) of 95%, and p-value of 0.05.

RESULTS

The use of GLP- 1 agonists (liraglutide, semaglutide, and tirzepatide) was associated with a statistically significant decrease in the weight of the included patients showing an overall MD = 8.07 kg (95%CI: 5.5, 10.64, p < 0.00001) and I2 = 44%, p = 0.04. Moreover, these drugs (liraglutide, and semaglutide) showed significantly reduced body mass index (BMI) after treatment with overall MD = 4.42 kg/m2 (95%CI: 3.42, 5.42, p < 0.00001), and I2 = 67%, p = 0.0005. Compared with control group, the use of GLP- 1 agonists was associated with reduced weight with MD = - 9.19% (95%CI: - 10.81, - 7.58, p < 0.00001) and I2 = 0%. However, no difference was observed between both groups regarding BMI change with MD = - 1.97% (95%CI: - 4.65, 0.71, p = 0.15).

CONCLUSION

GLP- 1 agonists such as liraglutide and semaglutide effectively lower body weight and BMI in patients who suffer from weight recurrence or suboptimal clinical response after undergoing MBS. However, future studies are still warranted to investigate the most appropriate protocols for management.

Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists for the Treatment of Suboptimal Initial Clinical Response and Weight Gain Recurrence After Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Suboptimal initial clinical response (SICR) and weight gain recurrence (WGR) are challenging issues following bariatric surgery. Recently, the promising weight loss effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have been applied to bariatric patients. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of GLP-1 RAs in the treatment of SICR and WGR after bariatric surgery.

METHODS

A literature search was performed across online databases. The primary outcomes were percentage of total weight loss (%TWL) and absolute weight loss. Secondary outcomes included changes in biochemical markers and adverse effects (AEs).

RESULTS

Nineteen studies including 1290 patients were included. After at least 3 months of treatment, the pooled %TWL was 9.24% for liraglutide, 11.38% for semaglutide, and 15.50% for tirzepatide, with corresponding weight reductions of 8.56 kg, 11.62 kg, and 12.60 kg, respectively. Additionally, %TWL and weight loss with liraglutide use were 7.65% and 7.47 kg for ≤ 6 months, 10.22% and 9.30 kg for 6-12 months, and 10.80% and 9.72 kg for ≥ 12 months. For semaglutide, the %TWL and weight reduction were 10.18% and 9.43 kg at 6 months, and 13.15% and 14.68 kg at 12 months. Biochemical markers including triglycerides, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, glycated hemoglobin, and alanine aminotransferase levels showed significant reductions after GLP-1 RA treatment. Common AEs were nausea (23%), vomiting (6%), diarrhea (6%), constipation (10%), headache (6%), fatigue (8%), abdominal pain (2%), and abdominal bloating (2%). The proportion of patients who discontinued the treatment due to AEs was 3%.

CONCLUSIONS

GLP-1 RAs are effective and safe for treating SICR and WGR after bariatric surgery.

Post metabolic bariatric surgery weight regain: the importance of GLP-1 levels

Weight regain and insufficient weight loss are essential problems after metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) in people living with obesity. Changes in the level of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) secreted from the gut after bariatric surgery are one of the underlying mechanisms for successful initial weight loss. Studies and meta-analyses have revealed that postprandial GLP-1 levels increase after the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy, but fasting GLP-1 levels do not increase significantly. Some observational studies have shown the relationship between higher postprandial GLP-1 levels and successful weight loss after bariatric surgery. There is growing evidence that GLP-1-receptor agonist (GLP-1-RA) use in patients who regained weight after bariatric surgery has resulted in significant weight loss. In this review, we aimed to summarize the changes in endogenous GLP-1 levels and their association with weight loss after MBS, describe the effects of GLP-1-RA use on weight loss after MBS, and emphasize metabolic adaptations in light of the recent literature. We hypothesized that maintaining higher basal-bolus GLP-1-RA levels may be a promising treatment choice in people with obesity who failed to lose weight after bariatric surgery.

Evaluation of l-cell activity in the small intestine according to the extension of the biliopancreatic loop in patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric by-pass

BACKGROUND

Individuals with severe obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus have reduced secretion of incretins by L cells. Studies suggest an increase in L cell activity according to the length of the Biliopancreatic Loop (BPL).

OBJECTIVE

Compare the effect of biliopancreatic loop extension on the number and expression of L cells in patients undergoing RYGB METHODS: Subjects (n = 13) undergoing RYGB with a BPL of 100 cm (G1) or 200 cm (G2). Intestinal biopsies were done before (T1) and 6 months after (T2) RYGB in 3 segments: gastro-enteric anastomosis (A), entero-enteric anastomosis (B) and terminal ileum (C). Analyzes of intestinal biopsies by immunohistochemistry and qRT-PCR.

RESULTS

There was an increase (p < 0.0001) in L cells marked by PYY and GLP1 between T1 (17 ± 10.5) and T2 (23.5 ± 10.7) only at point C. There was no difference in L cells expression between groups G1 and G2 at points A (A1: 17.3 ± 2.9; A2: 19.9 ± 1.9; p = 0.09), B (B1: 13.7 ± 6.6; B2: 14.1 ± 4.9; p = 0.89) and C (C1: 13.2 ± 2.2; C2: 11.4 ± 3.4; p = 0.32) in PYY and GLP1 gene expression (A1: 20.8 ± 4, 1; A2: 23.7 ± 3.6; p = 0.2), B (B1:14.3 ± 7.9; B2: 22.7 ± 11.8; p = 0.1), (C1: 17±4.1; C2: 21.1 ± 4.8; p = 0.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Both techniques lead to an increase in the number of active L cells.

Conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Is Intrathoracic Migration of the Sleeve of High Incidence?

BACKGROUND

Conversion of SG to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is increasing. Intrathoracic migration of the sleeve (ITM) often seems associated and is increasingly reported.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients who underwent a conversion of SG to RYGB from August 2013 to December 2022 were included. Two groups were compared: patients operated on for weight loss failure (WLF gp) and those operated on for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD gp). Demographic data, the incidence of ITM, weight loss outcomes, resolution of symptoms, and morbidity were analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients were included with an average follow-up of 32 months: 46 patients in the GERD gp (78%) were compared to 13 patients (22%) in the WLF gp. Groups were comparable regarding age and gender, but BMI and commodities were significantly higher in the WLF gp. In the GERD gp, on preoperative gastroscopy, 30% had a esophagitis, 48% had an ITM which required a posterior crural closure versus no esophagitis (p=0.02) and 23% of ITM in the WLF gp (p=0.11). Conversion led to 93% of GERD symptom improvement. In the WLF gp, mean TWL% was 15.3%, significantly greater than in the GERD gp (TWL% = 4.6%, p = 0.01). The complication rate was 10% at 30 days and 3.4% after 30 days, not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSION

The main indication of conversion of SG to RYGB was because of GERD: in these indications, the incidence of ITM was high requiring a surgical treatment with a very good efficacy on symptoms. Weight loss results were disappointing.

Decision-making Considerations in Revisional Bariatric Surgery

OBJECTIVE

With drastic variations in bariatric practices, consensus is lacking on an optimal approach for revisional bariatric surgeries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors reviewed and consolidated bariatric surgery literature to provide specific revision suggestions based on each index surgery, including adjustable gastric band (AGB), sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD-DS), single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve (SADI-S), one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), and vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG).

RESULTS

AGB has the highest weight recurrence rate and can be converted to RYGB, SG, and BPD-DS. After index SG, common surgical options include a resleeve or RYGB. The RYGB roux limb can be distalized and pouch resized in context of reflux, and the entire anatomy can be revised into BPD-DS. Data analyzing revisional surgery after a single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve was limited. In patients with one anastomosis gastric bypass and vertical banded gastroplasty anatomy, most revisions were the conversion to RYGB.

CONCLUSIONS

As revisional bariatric surgery becomes more common, the best approach depends on the patient's indication for surgery and preexisting anatomy.

The predictive relationship between early and long-term weight loss outcomes after one anastomosis gastric bypass

BACKGROUND

Weight loss failure after bariatric surgery imposes great stress on patients and surgeons and great costs on healthcare systems. The literature review shows that weight loss failure is the most common cause of redo bariatric surgery. Therefore, identifying the predictors of weight loss failure in patients in the early stages can help bariatric surgeons. The present study aims to determine the association between primary weight loss and long-term weight loss outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted on 329 patients undergoing OAGB who were followed for 60 months. For the prediction of short-term (24 months) and long-term (60 months) successful weight loss and weight regain, we used %TWL and BMI at any regular follow-ups.

RESULTS

In preoperative indices, age, sex, DLP, hypothyroidism, and HTN were not significant to predict successful short-term and long-term weight loss but %TWL at 12 months is a significant predictor of successful weight loss in short-term and long-term follow up. In the prediction of weight regain, preoperative indices (except BMI) were not significant but 12-month %TWL was a significant predictor.

CONCLUSIONS

This index can help surgeons find these patients early and provide helpful instructions to manage their issues more promptly to reach better weight loss outcomes.

Adjuvant Glucose-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonist Therapy for Suboptimal Weight Loss After Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review

Addressing suboptimal weight loss post-bariatric surgery poses a challenge. While glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RA) show promise in managing obesity, their role as an adjuvant treatment after bariatric surgery remains uncertain. We conducted a systematic literature review focused on the efficacy and safety of GLP1-RA in bariatric surgery patients with insufficient weight loss or distant weight regain. Our literature search identified 1167 articles, with 10 (involving 594 patients) meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria for detailed review. GLP1-RA therapy resulted in 5 to 17% weight loss over 6 to 12 months, with 10-50% experiencing non-severe side effects like nausea. Overall, GLP1-RA emerges as an effective adjuvant therapy for patients experiencing inadequate weight loss or regain after bariatric surgery, offering a viable alternative to revision surgery.

Outcome comparison between primary and revisional bariatric surgery: A propensity-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Revisional bariatric procedures for weight recurrence are rising but are considered higher risk and less effective than primary bariatric procedures. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes between primary and revisional bariatric surgery for weight recurrence.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data from adult patients who underwent revisional or primary bariatric surgery from 2016 to 2020 in an academic institution were reviewed. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy were performed primarily or as conversion procedures after laparoscopic adjustable gastric band, vertical banded gastroplasty, and sleeve gastrectomy. 1:1 propensity score matching was performed between revisional bariatric surgery and primary bariatric surgery, and logistic regression analysis was used to compare up to 2-year weight loss and comorbidity resolution outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of172 cases (86 revisional bariatric surgery versus 86 primary bariatric surgery) were included. Groups were matched for age, sex, preoperative body mass index, bariatric procedure, diabetes, hypertension, and obstructive sleep apnea. Procedure duration (203 ± 78 vs 154 ± 69 minutes; P < .001) and length of stay (2.3 ± 2.1 vs 1.7 ± 1 days; P = .02) were longer for revisional bariatric surgery versus primary bariatric surgery, respectively. Total weight loss was less in revisional bariatric surgery compared with primary bariatric surgery at 1 year (23 ± 10% vs 32 ± 9%; P < .001) and 2 years (21 ± 12.% vs 32 ± 10%; P < .001) of follow-up; however, no differences were detected in postoperative occurrences, emergency department visits, readmissions, reintervention and reoperation rates, and comorbidity resolution.

CONCLUSION

Although revisional bariatric surgery was associated with longer operation times, prolonged hospitalization, and lower weight loss than primary bariatric surgery, it was accomplished safely and led to substantial weight loss and comorbidity resolution. This information can guide patient counseling before revisional surgery for weight recurrence.

Efficacy of High-dose Liraglutide 3.0 mg in Patients with Poor Response to Bariatric Surgery: Real-world Experience and Updated Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Poor response to bariatric surgery, characterized by insufficient weight loss (IWL) or weight regain (WR), poses a significant challenge in obesity treatment. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of liraglutide in addressing this issue.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective, multicenter cohort study investigated the impact of liraglutide 3 mg on weight loss in adults with suboptimal responses or weight regain after bariatric surgery (BS). Additionally, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted for a comprehensive evaluation.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patients (mean age 41.03 ± 11.2 years, 71.4% female) who experienced IWL or WR after BS received pharmacologic therapy with liraglutide 3 mg. Mean percent weight loss in the entire cohort was 5.6 ± 2.6% at 12 weeks and 9.3 ± 3.6% at 24 weeks with a significant reduction in waist circumference (p < 0.0001). No serious side effects were reported. A meta-analysis, utilizing the fixed effect model with the metafor package in R, included 6 and 5 papers for the change in body weight and BMI after liraglutide treatment, respectively. The analysis demonstrated a considerable reduction in body weight (7.9; CI - 10.4; - 5.4, p < 0.0001) and BMI (3.09; CI 3.89; - 2.28, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Liraglutide 3 mg emerges as a viable option for significant weight loss in patients experiencing IWL or WR after BS. Its inclusion in a multimodal, sequential obesity treatment approach proves promising.

Efficacy of endoscopic resuturing versus pharmacotherapy to treat weight recidivism after endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A subset of patients experience weight recidivism after primary endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (P-ESG). Available options for management of weight regain include initiation of antiobesity medications (AOMs) or redo ESG (R-ESG). The comparative effectiveness of these options is not clear.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing ESG. From 2013 to 2021, 79 patients who were started on AOM or underwent R-ESG for management of weight recidivism after P-ESG were included. The primary outcome of this study was final total body weight loss (TBWL) at the end of follow-up.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients were started on AOM and 24 patients underwent R-ESG. Age, gender distribution, and baseline body mass index did not differ significantly between groups. The proportion of noncompliant patients (defined as patients who missed their first post-ESG follow-up visit) was significantly higher in the AOM group compared with the R-ESG group (67% vs 35%, P = .012). The additional TBWL after R-ESG was significantly (both clinically and statistically) better than after initiation of AOM (9.5% ± 7.2% vs 2.1% ± 8.6%, respectively; P = .001). Final TBWL clearly favored R-ESG over AOM for treatment of weight recidivism (19.9% ± 10.4% vs 13.6% ± 9.2%, P = .028).

CONCLUSIONS

R-ESG is an effective treatment to induce weight loss after experiencing weight recidivism. These results highlight an important advantage of ESG as a repeatable minimally invasive procedure.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass conversion versus primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Secondary bariatric surgery rates have increased, accounting for approximately 19% of the total bariatric cases in the last years, most commonly conversion of sleeve gastrectomy to gastric bypass. Using the MBSAQIP, we evaluate the outcomes of this procedure compared to the primary RYGB surgery.

METHODS

The new variable, conversion of sleeve gastrectomy to RYGB in the 2020 and 2021 MBSAQIP database was analyzed. Patients who underwent primary laparoscopic RYGB and those who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy to RYGB conversion were identified. Using Propensity Score Matching analysis, the cohorts were matched for 21 preoperative characteristics. We then compared 30-day outcomes and bariatric-specific complications between primary RYGB and conversion from sleeve gastrectomy to RYGB.

RESULTS

There were 43,253 primary RYGB procedures performed and 6,833 conversions from sleeve gastrectomy to RYGB. The matched cohorts (n = 5912) for the two groups have similar pre-operative characteristics. Propensity-matched outcomes showed that conversion from sleeve gastrectomy to RYGB was associated with more readmissions (6.9% vs 5.0%, p < 0.001), interventions (2.6% vs 1.7%, p < 0.001), conversion to open (0.7% vs 0.2%, p < 0.001), length of stay (1.79 ± 1.77 days vs 1.62 ± 1.66 days, p < 0.001), and operative time (119.16 ± 56.82 min vs 138.27 ± 66.00, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in mortality (0.1% vs 0.1%, p = 0.405), and bariatric-specific complications such as anastomotic leak (0.5% vs 0.4%, p = 0.585), intestinal obstruction (0.1% vs 0.2%, p = 0.808), internal hernia (0.2% vs 0.1%, p = 0.285) or anastomotic ulcer (0.3% vs 0.3%, p = 0.731) rates.

CONCLUSION

Conversion from sleeve gastrectomy to RYGB is a safe and feasible operation with reasonable outcomes compared with primary RYGB.

What About My Weight? Insufficient Weight Loss or Weight Regain After Bariatric Metabolic Surgery

Context

This review study aimed to investigate the definition, etiology, risk factors (RFs), management strategy, and prevention of insufficient weight loss (IWL) and weight regain (WR) following bariatric metabolic surgery (BMS).

Evidence Acquisition

Electronic databases were searched to retrieve relevant articles. The inclusion criteria were English articles with adult participants assessing the definition, prevalence, etiology, RFs, management strategy, and prevention of IWL/WR.

Results

Definition: The preferred definition for post-BMS IWL/WR are the terms "Lack of maintenance of total weight loss (TWL)>20%" and "weight change in percentage compared to nadir weight or weight loss". Prevalence: The exact prevalence of IWL/WR is still being determined due to the type of BMS and various definitions. Etiology: Several mechanisms, including hormonal/metabolic, dietary non-adherence, physical inactivity, mental health, and anatomic surgical failure, are possible etiologies of post-BMS IWL/WR. Risk factors: Preoperative body mass index (BMI), male gender, psychiatric conditions, comorbidities, age, poor diet, eating disorders, poor follow-ups, insufficient physical activity, micronutrients, and genetic-epigenetic factors are the most important RFs. Management Strategy: The basis of treatment is lifestyle interventions, including dietary, physical activity, psychological, and behavioral therapy. Pharmacotherapy can be added. In the last treatment line, different techniques of endoscopic surgery and revisional surgery can be used. Prevention: Behavioral and psychotherapeutic interventions, dietary therapy, and physical activity therapy are the essential components of prevention.

Conclusions

Many definitions exist for WR, less so for IWL. Etiologies and RFs are complex and multifactorial; therefore, the management and prevention strategy is multidisciplinary. Some knowledge gaps, especially for IWL, exist, and these gaps must be filled to strengthen the evidence used to guide patient counseling, selection, and improved outcomes.

Revisional surgery after restrictive surgery: midterm outcomes of a tertiary center

INTRODUCTION

Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) is a challenging type of procedure for the surgeons due to its specific morbidity and efficiency. The RBS has a higher prevalence nowadays and this study may help to improve scarce data upon this specific topic.

METHODS

Data from 252 patients undergoing RBS after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) between 2005 and 2019, were analyzed at 2 years of follow up. A subgroup analysis of third procedure was also performed.

RESULTS

Overall morbidity occurred in 35 patients (37%) in the LSG group and 40 patients (25%) in the LAGB group (p = 0.045). At 2 years of RBS, mean weight was 92.8 ± 26.7 kg, BMI was 33.1 ± 8.56 kg/m2 for patients who had RBS after LSG. When RBS was performed after LAGB, mean weight at 2 years was 90.1 ± 20.7 kg and BMI was 32.5 ± 6.45 kg/m2. TWL for RBS performed after LSG was 12.7 ± 16.4% versus 25.5 ± 10.3% after LAGB (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

RBS after LSG seems to lead to higher overall morbidity whereas RBS after LAGB lead to more perioperative issues.

Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Prescription of Supplements in Pre- and Post-bariatric Surgery Patients: An Updated Comprehensive Practical Guideline

Only in the USA, 315 billion dollars are spent annually on the medical cost of obesity in adult patients. Till now, bariatric surgery is the most effective method for treating obesity and can play an essential role in reducing the direct and indirect costs of obesity treatment. Nonetheless, there are few comprehensive guidelines which include nutrition, physical activity, and supplements, before and after surgery. The purpose of the present narrative review is to provide an updated and comprehensive practical guideline to help multidisciplinary teams. The core keywords include nutrition, diet, physical activity, exercise, supplements, macronutrients, micronutrients, weight reduction, bariatric surgery, Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass, Sleeve Gastrostomy, Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding, and Biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch which were searched in databases including PubMed/Medline, Cochrane, and some other sources such as Google Scholar. We answered questions in five important areas: (a) nutritional strategies before bariatric surgery, (b) nutrition after bariatric surgery, (c) physical activity before and after bariatric surgery, (d) weight regain after bariatric surgery, and (e) micronutrient assessments and recommendations before and after bariatric surgery. Some new items were added in this updated guideline including "weight regain" and "pregnancy after bariatric surgery." Other fields were updated based on new evidence and guidelines.

Weight loss and clinical outcomes following primary versus secondary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a multi-institutional experience

BACKGROUND

Revisional bariatric surgeries are increasing for weight recurrence and return of co-morbidities. Herein, we compare weight loss and clinical outcomes following primary Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (P-RYGB), adjustable gastric banding to RYGB (B-RYGB), and sleeve gastrectomy to RYGB (S-RYGB) to determine if primary versus secondary RYGB offer comparable benefits.

METHODS

Participating institutions' EMRs and MBSAQIP databases were used to identify adult patients who underwent P-/B-/S-RYGB from 2013 to 2019 with a minimum one-year follow-up. Weight loss and clinical outcomes were assessed at 30 days, 1 year, and 5 years. Our multivariable model controlled for year, institution, patient and procedure characteristics, and excess body weight (EBW).

RESULTS

768 patients underwent RYGB: P-RYGB n = 581 [75.7%]; B-RYGB n = 106 [13.7%]; S-RYGB n = 81 [10.5%]. The number of secondary RYGB procedures increased in recent years. The most common indications for B-RYGB and S-RYGB were weight recurrence/nonresponse (59.8%) and GERD (65.4%), respectively. Mean time from index operation to B-RYGB or S-RYGB was 8.9 and 3.9 years, respectively. After adjusting for EBW, 1 year %TWL (total weight loss) and %EWL (excess weight loss) were greater after P-RYGB (30.4%, 56.7%) versus B-RYGB (26.2%, 49.4%) or S-RYGB (15.6%, 37%). Overall comorbidity resolution was comparable. Secondary RYGB patients had a longer adjusted mean length of stay (OR 1.17, p = 0.071) and a higher risk of pre-discharge complications or 30-day reoperation.

CONCLUSION

Primary RYGB offers superior short-term weight loss outcomes compared to secondary RYGB, with decreased risk of 30-day reoperation.

When Definitions Differ, are Comparisons Meaningful? Definitions of Weight Regain After Bariatric Surgery and Their Associations with Patient Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes - A Need for a Revisit?

INTRODUCTION

Definitions and prevalence of weight regain (WR) after bariatric surgery remains inconsistent and their clinical significance unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess WR five years after sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), employing six definitions; and appraise their association with patient characteristics/clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Consecutive patients (N = 589) who underwent LSG were followed up for 5 years. WR prevalence was calculated yearly employing six definitions. Regression analysis assessed associations between WR at 5 years, and patient characteristics (age, sex, preop BMI, number of follow-up visits, number of comorbidities) and remission of comorbidities (type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia).

RESULTS

Sample's mean age and BMI were 34 ± 11.6 years and 43.13 ± 5.77 kg/m², and 64% were females. Percentage of patients with WR at 2, 3, 4, and 5 years fluctuated between 2.53% and 94.18%, subject to definition, and time point. The definition "Any WR" generated the highest prevalence of WR (86-94%) across all time points. At 5 years, for patient characteristics, preoperative BMI was associated with three definitions (P 0.49 to < 0.001), sex was associated with two (P < 0.026-0.032), and number of comorbidities was associated with one definition (P = 0.01). In terms of comorbidities, only hypertension was associated with WR (one definition, P = 0.025). No other definitions of WR were associated with any of the variables under examination.

CONCLUSION

Weight regain is reasonably expected after BMS. WR definitions were of minor clinical significance due to weak associations with limited comorbidities. Dichotomous definitions might offer some guidance while managing individual patients. However, its utility as a comparator metric across patients/procedures requires refinements.

Conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Indications, Prevalence, and Safety

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) frequently requires conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) due to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or weight recurrence. Current evidence evaluating the safety of conversion from SG to RYGB and its indications is limited to single centers.

METHODS

The objective was to determine the rate of serious complications and mortality of conversion of SG to RYGB (SG-RYGB) compared to primary RYGB (P-RYGB). This was a retrospective analysis of the MBSAQIP database which includes 30-day outcomes. Individuals undergoing P-RYGB or SG-RYGB were included. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine if revisional surgery was an independent predictor of serious complications or mortality.

RESULTS

In 2020 and 2021, 84,543 (86.3%) patients underwent P-RYGB and 13,432 (13.7%) underwent SG-RYGB. SG-RYGB cohort had lower body mass index, lower rates of diabetes and hypertension, and higher rates of GERD. GERD was the most common indication for revision (55.3%) followed by weight regain (24.4%) and inadequate weight loss (12.7%). SG-RYGB had longer operative times (145 vs. 125 min, p < 0.001) and a higher rate of serious complications (7.2 vs. 5.0%, p < 0.001). This included higher rates of anastomotic leak (0.5 vs. 0.4%, p = 0.002), bleeding (2.0 vs. 1.6%, p < 0.001), and reoperation (3.0 vs. 1.9%, p < 0.001) but not death (0.1 vs. 0.1%, p = 0.385). On multivariable analysis, SG-RYGB was independently predictive of serious complications (OR 1.21, 95%CI 1.12 to 1.32, p < 0.001) but not mortality (p = 0.316).

CONCLUSIONS

While SG-RYGB is safe with a low complication rate, SG-RYGB was associated with a higher rate of serious complications compared to P-RYGB.

Characteristics and outcomes for patients undergoing revisional bariatric surgery due to persistent obesity: a retrospective cohort study of 10,589 patients

BACKGROUND

Revisional bariatric surgery in an option for patients who experience weight regain or inadequate weight loss after primary elective bariatric procedures. However, there is conflicting data on safety outcomes of revisional procedures. We aim to characterize patient demographics, procedure type, and safety outcomes for those undergoing revisional compared to initial bariatric interventions to guide management of these patients.

METHODS

The 2020 Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) registry was analyzed, comparing primary elective to revisional bariatric procedures for inadequate weight loss. Bivariate analysis was performed to determine between group differences. Multivariable logistic regression determined factors associated with serious complications or mortality.

RESULTS

We evaluated 158,424 patients, including 10,589 (6.7%) revisional procedures. Patients undergoing revisional procedures were more like to be female (85.5% revisional vs. 81.0% initial; p < 0.001), had lower body mass index (43.6 ± 7.8 kg/m² revisional vs. 45.2 ± 7.8 kg/m² initial; p < 0.001), and less metabolic comorbidities than patients undergoing primary bariatric surgery. The most common revisional procedures were Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (48.4%) and sleeve gastrectomy (32.5%). Revisional procedures had longer operative duration compared to primary procedures. Patients undergoing revisional procedures were more likely to experience readmission to hospital (4.8% revisional vs. 2.9% initial; p < 0.001) and require reoperation (2.4% revisional vs. 1.0% initial; p < 0.001) within 30 days of the procedure. Revisional procedures were independently associated with increased serious complications (OR 1.49, CI 1.36-1.64, p < 0.001) but were not a significant predictor of 30-day mortality (OR 0.74, CI 0.36-1.50, p = 0.409).

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison to primary bariatric surgery, patients undergoing revisional procedures have less metabolic comorbidities. Revisional procedures have worse perioperative outcomes and are independently associated with serious complications. These data help to contextualize outcomes for patients undergoing revisional bariatric procedures and to inform decision making in these patients.

Definition, Mechanisms and Predictors of Weight Loss Failure After Bariatric Surgery

It has been proven that surgery is more effective than non-surgical treatment in obese patients. However, this approach has several disadvantages, especially long-term weight loss. Weight loss failures can be broadly classified into two categories; insufficient weight loss (poor responder) and weight regain. However, a unified definition has not been established yet for each category, and there is no clear standard for the post-surgery time point to be used to assess weight loss failure. In addition, analyzing factors that contribute to weight loss failure will lead to strategies for reducing it. Therefore, many researchers have been interested in this subject and have published conflicting results. This review presents a definition for and describes the mechanisms and predictors of weight loss failure after bariatric surgery.

Comparing weight loss outcomes after conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus duodenal switch from sleeve gastrectomy in a community hospital

Background

Recidivism after initial sleeve gastrectomy (SG) remains common. Revisional surgery to convert SG to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or duodenal switch (DS) for additional weight loss is increasing. This study aims to compare the outcomes after conversion of SG to RYGB or DS.

Methods

A retrospective single-institution review was conducted from 2015 to 2021, identifying 75 patients who underwent conversion from prior SG to either RYGB (40) or DS (35). Mean excess body weight loss (EBWL) at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months was assessed and compared. Secondary measures of length of stay (LOS), procedure length, and 30-day readmission rate were also reviewed.

Results

Percentage EBWL for RYGB vs DS was 24.0% vs 18.8% at 3 months (N = 36 vs 26; P < 0.0491), 34.8% vs 29.0% at 6 months (N = 29 vs 17; P < 0.2192), 43.0% vs 40.1% at 12 months (N = 28 vs 12; P < 0.6828), and 36.2% vs 41.7% at 24 months (N = 27 vs 7; P < 0.5553). Average LOS was 2.6 days ± 1.4 for RYGB and 2.8 days ± 1.3 for DS (P < 0.6032). Average procedure length was 134.4 min for RYGB and 189.8 min for DS (P < 0.0001). 30-day readmission rate was 27.5% (N = 11) for RYGB and 14.3% (N = 5) for DS (P < 0.1645). Significant weight loss was observed in both subgroups up to 12 months, with no significant weight loss between 12 and 24 months (RYGB N = 21, P < 0.2961; DS N = 5, P < 0.7233).

Conclusion

Both revisional RYGB and revisional DS procedures had significant and sustained weight loss in the first 12 months. There was no significant excess body weight loss difference between revisional RYGB and revisional DS patients at 6, 12, and 24 months, with only significant greater weight loss for RYGB patients at 3 months. Additionally, procedure length was significantly longer for DS compared to RYGB, with no significant differences in LOS and 30-day readmission rates.

Graphical abstract

SMALL INTESTINAL L CELL DENSITY IN PATIENTS WITH SEVERE OBESITY AFTER ROUX-EN-Y GASTRIC BYPASS

BACKGROUND:

Enteroendocrine L cells can be found in the entire gastrointestinal tract and their incretins act on glycemic control and metabolic homeostasis. Patients with severe obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus may have lower density of L cells in the proximal intestine.

AIMS:

This study aimed to analyze the density of L cells in the segments of the small intestine in the late postoperative of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in diabetic patients with standardization of 60 cm in both loops, alimentary and biliopancreatic.

METHODS:

Immunohistochemistry analysis assays were made from intestinal biopsies in three segments: gastrointestinal anastomosis (GIA= Point A), enteroenteral anastomosis (EEA= Point B= 60 cm distal to the GIA) and 60 cm distal to the enteroenteral anastomosis (Point C).

RESULTS:

A higher density of L cells immunostaining the glucagon-1 peptide was observed in the distal portion (Point C) when compared to the more proximal portions (Points A and B).

CONCLUSIONS:

The concentration of L cells is higher 60 cm distal to enteroenteral anastomosis when comparing to proximal segments and may explain the difference in intestinal lumen sensitization and enterohormonal response after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

Preoperative Prediction of Body Mass Index of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes at 1 Year After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Very few models predict weight loss among type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) patients after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). This retrospective study undertook such a task. Materials and Methods: We identified all patients >18 years old with T2D who underwent primary LSG at our institution and had complete data. The training set comprised 107 patients operated upon during the period April 2011 to June 2014; the validation set comprised 134 patients operated upon during the successive chronological period, July 2014 to December 2015. Sex, age, presurgery BMI, T2D duration, number of T2D medications, insulin use, hypertension, and dyslipidemia were utilized as independent predictors of 1-year BMI. We employed regression analysis, and assessed the goodness of fit and "Residuals versus Fits" plot. Paired sample t-tests compared the observed and predicted BMI at 1 year. Results: The model comprised preoperative BMI (β = 0.757, P = 0.026) + age (β = 0.142, P < 0.0001) with adjusted R² of 0.581 (P < 0.0001), and goodness of fit showed an unbiased model with accurate prediction. The equation was: BMI value 1 year after LSG = 1.777 + 0.614 × presurgery BMI (kg/m²) +0.106 × age (years). For validation, the equation exhibited an adjusted R² 0.550 (P < 0.0001), and the goodness of fit indicated an unbiased model. The BMI predicted by the model fell within -3.78 BMI points to +2.42 points of the observed 1-year BMI. Pairwise difference between the mean 1-year observed and predicted BMI was not significant (-0.41 kg/m², P = 0.225). Conclusions: This predictive model estimates the BMI 1 year after LSG. The model comprises preoperative BMI and age. It allows the forecast of patients' BMI after surgery, hence setting realistic expectations which are critical for patient satisfaction after bariatric surgery. An attainable target motivates the patient to achieve it.

Resizing a large pouch after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: comparing the effect of two techniques on weight loss

BACKGROUND

Insufficient weight loss or weight regain has many causes including a large gastric pouch. A large gastric pouch may be due to the surgical technique or can be patient related (dilation). Resizing the gastric pouch may lead to additional weight loss. Currently, there is no gold standard for the revisional surgical technique. Therefore this study was performed to determine which surgical technique for revisional bariatric surgery (BS) has superior outcomes in terms of weight loss: sleeve resection of the gastrojejunostomy and gastric pouch (SGP), or resection of the gastrojejunostomy with resizing of the pouch and creation of a new anastomosis (RGJ).

METHODS

All patients who underwent revisional BS for insufficient weight loss or weight regain as a result of an enlarged pouch after LRYGB from April 2014 to June 2018 in our hospitals were included in this observational cohort study. Outcomes were measured in percentage total weight loss (%TWL).

RESULTS

A total of 37 patients who underwent SGP and 21 patients who underwent RGJ as revisional BS were included in this study. The median body mass index before revisional BS was 37.6 kg/m² versus 35.7 kg/m² (SGP vs RGJ, respectively, P = 0.115). There was no significant difference in %TWL between the two cohorts 1 and 2 years after revisional BS, respectively; SGP 14.5% vs RGJ 11.0%, P = 0.885 and SGP 12.3% vs RGJ 10.8%, P = 0.604. Comparing %TWL based on weight at LRYGB, there was also no significant difference two years after revisional BS (SGP 22.0% vs RGJ 22.2%, P = 0.885). The average use of surgical disposables for the SGP technique were lower compared to the RGJ technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Resizing a large pouch leads to additional weight loss. Both techniques have comparable outcomes in terms of weight loss. However, based on average surgical costs, the SGP technique may be preferable.

How Sustained is Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Long-term Efficacy? : Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass efficacy

Purpose

The rate of weight regain after Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) can hamper the procedure long-term efficacy for obesity treatment and related comorbidities. To evaluate the rate of weight loss and comorbidity remission failure 10 years or more after RYGB surgery.

Materials and methods

Retrospective observational cohort study. Patients submitted to RYGB for obesity treatment at a single centre with 10 years or more after surgery underwent a clinical reassessment.

Results

Among the subjects invited for clinical revaluation (n = 585), only those who performed RYGB and attended the hospital visit were included in the study (n = 281). The pre-operative mean body mass index (BMI) was 44.4 ± 6.1 kg/m². Mean post-operative time was 12.2 ± 1.1 years. After surgery, mean BMI was significantly lower 33.4 ± 5.8 kg/m² (p < 0.0001), 29.5% with a BMI < 30 kg/m². Mean Total Weight Lost (%TWL) was 24.3 ± 11.4%, reaching a %TWL ≥ 20% in 70.1% with a mean %TWL of 30.0 ± 7.0%. Co-morbidities remission rate was 54.2% for type 2 diabetes, 34.1% for hypertension, 52.4% for hyperlipidemia and 50% for obstructive sleep apnea. Early complications rate was 13.2% and revision surgery occurred in 2.8% of patients. Four patients died of RYGB complications within the first 90 days after surgery.

Conclusion

RYGB has a high rate of long-term successful weight loss and obesity-associated comorbidity improvement. Weight loss failure requiring revision surgery occurs in a small proportion of patients. Our data confirms the long-term effectiveness of RYGB as primary bariatric intervention.

Graphical abstract

What Is Weight Loss After Bariatric Surgery Expressed in Percentage Total Weight Loss (%TWL)? A Systematic Review

Percentage total weight loss (%TWL) might be better than percentage excess weight loss to express weight loss in bariatric surgery. In this systematic review, performed according to the PRISMA statement, results of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) are assessed in %TWL. A total of 13,426 studies were screened and 49 included, reporting data of 24,760 patients. The results show that, despite limiting data, LRYGB is favorable over LSG in terms of weight loss in short-term follow-up. Although recent guidelines recommend to use %TWL when reporting outcome in bariatric surgery, this study shows that there is still insufficient quality data in %TWL, especially on LSG. The use of %TWL as the primary outcome measure in bariatric surgery should be encouraged.

Pharmacotherapies for Post-Bariatric Weight Regain: Real-World Comparative Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare outcomes of treatment strategies for weight regain after bariatric surgery.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of 207 individuals treated for post-bariatric weight regain at an academic center from January 1, 2014, through November 25, 2019. Percentage body weight loss was compared after 3, 6, 9, and 12 months of treatment among an intensive lifestyle modification (ILM) group, a non-glucagon-like-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1-RA)-based weight-loss pharmacotherapy (WLP) group, and a GLP-1-RA-based WLP group (the latter two groups in conjunction with ILM).

RESULTS

The percentage body weight loss was significantly different between groups after 3 months (1.4% vs. 2.2% vs. 4.5% [P < 0.001] for ILM, non-GLP-1-RA-based WLP, and GLP-1-RA-based WLP groups, respectively), 6 months (0.8% vs. 2.9% vs. 6.7% [P < 0.001]), and 9 months (-1.6% vs. 5.6% vs. 6.9% [P = 0.007]). There was a significant difference in the percentage of individuals achieving ≥5% weight loss after 3, 6, and 9 months, with most occurring in the GLP-1-RA-based WLP group. In a multiple regression analysis including bariatric surgery type, treatment group was the only significant predictor of percentage weight change.

CONCLUSIONS

GLP-1-RA-based WLP therapies were found to be more effective for treating post-bariatric weight regain than non-GLP-1-RA-based WLP or ILM, regardless of surgery type.

Weight Regain and Insufficient Weight Loss After Bariatric Surgery: Definitions, Prevalence, Mechanisms, Predictors, Prevention and Management Strategies, and Knowledge Gaps-a Scoping Review

Some patients experience weight regain (WR) or insufficient weight loss (IWL) after bariatric surgery (BS). We undertook a scoping review of WR and IWL after BS. We searched electronic databases for studies addressing the definitions, prevalence, mechanisms, clinical significance, preoperative predictors, and preventive and treatment approaches including behavioral, pharmacological, and surgical management strategies of WR and IWL. Many definitions exist for WR, less so for IWL, resulting in inconsistencies in the reported prevalence of these two conditions. Mechanisms and preoperative predictors contributing to WR are complex and multifactorial. A range of the current knowledge gaps are identified and questions that need to be addressed are outlined. Therefore, there is an urgent need to address these knowledge gaps for a better evidence base that would guide patient counseling, selection, and lead to improved outcomes.

Standardized reporting of co-morbidity outcome after bariatric surgery: low compliance with the ASMBS outcome reporting standards despite ease of use

BACKGROUND

Despite the publication of the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) Outcome Reporting Standards in 2015, there is still a great variety in definitions used for reporting remission of co-morbidities after bariatric surgery. This hampers meaningful comparison of results.

OBJECTIVE

To assess compliance with the ASMBS standards in current literature, and to evaluate use of the standards by applying them in a report on the outcomes of 5 co-morbidities after bariatric surgery.

SETTING

Two clinics of the Dutch Obesity Clinic, location Den Haag and Velp, and three affiliated hospitals: Haaglanden Medical Center in Den Haag, Groene Hart Hospital in Gouda, and Vitalys Clinic in Velp.

METHODS

A systematic search in PubMed was conducted to identify studies using the ASMBS standards. Besides, the standards were applied to a cohort of patients who underwent a primary bariatric procedure between November 2016 and June 2017. Outcomes of co-morbidities were determined at 6 and 12 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Ten previous studies applying ASMBS definitions were identified by the search, including 6 studies using portions of the definitions, and 4 using complete definitions for 3 co-morbidities or in a small population. In this study, the standards were applied to 1064 patients, of whom 796 patients (75%) underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and 268 patients (25%) underwent sleeve gastrectomy. At 12 months, complete remission of diabetes (glycosylated hemoglobin <6%, off medication) was reached in 63%, partial remission (glycosylated hemoglobin 6%-6.4%, off medication) in 7%, and improvement in 28% of patients (n = 232/248, 94%). Complete remission of hypertension (normotensive, off medication) was noted in 8%, partial remission (prehypertensive, off medication) in 23% and improvement in 63% (n = 397/412, 96%). Remission rate for dyslipidemia (normal nonhigh-density lipoprotein, off medication) was 57% and improvement rate was 19% (n = 129/133, 97%). Resolution of gastroesophageal reflux disease (no symptoms, off medication) was observed in 54% (n = 265/265). Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome improved in 90% (n = 157/169, 93%).

CONCLUSIONS

Compliance with the ASMBS standards is low, despite ease of use. Standardized definitions provided by the ASMBS guideline could be used in future research to enable comparison of outcomes of different studies and surgical procedures.

Missing Something? Comparisons of Effectiveness and Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery Procedures and Their Preferred Reporting: Refining the Evidence Base

Comparisons of effectiveness of bariatric surgery (BS) procedures encompass weight loss, metabolic/clinical outcomes, and improvements or worsening of comorbidities. Post-operative physical activity (PA) and diet influence such outcomes but are frequently not included in comparisons of effectiveness. We assessed the value and necessity of including post-operative PA/diet data when comparing effectiveness of BS. Including post-operative PA/diet data has significant benefits for BS and patients. The paper proposes an explicit preferred reporting system (Preferred REporting of post-operative PHYsical activity and Diet data in comparisons of BS effectiveness: PRE-PHYD Bariatric). Including post-operative PA/diet data could result in more accurate appraisals of effectiveness of BS procedures. This could translate into better 'individualized' BS by achieving a better 'fit' between patient and procedure.