Early Outcomes and Mid-Term Safety of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Are Comparable with Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Single Center Experience

Comparable results 5 years after one anastomosis gastric bypass compared to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a propensity-score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous studies comparing one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) are often limited by retrospective designs, or in randomized controlled trials, by small sample sizes or limited follow-up durations.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to compare OAGB and RYGB during 5years of follow-up in terms of weight loss, remission of comorbidities, and complications.

SETTING

This longitudinal prospective study includes all patients who underwent a primary OAGB or RYGB between 2015 and 2016 in the Netherlands, utilizing data from the nationwide registry, Dutch Audit for Treatment of Obesity.

METHODS

A 1:1 propensity-score matched (PSM) comparison between patients with OAGB and RYGB.

RESULTS

After 1:1 PSM, 2 nearly identical cohorts of 860 patients were obtained. OAGB was associated with more intraoperative complications (2.0% versus .6%; P = .031). Conversely, RYGB had a higher rate of short-term complications (7.6% versus 3.8%; P < .001). Five-year data were available from 40.7% of the patients with OAGB and 34.9% with RYGB. No significant differences were observed in percentage total weight loss after 5years (30.0% after OAGB and 28.8% after RYGB; P = .099). The total remission rate of diabetes mellitus was 60.5% for OAGB and 69.4% for RYGB (P = .656). However, OAGB resulted in a significantly higher remission rate of hypertension compared to RYGB (60.2% versus 45.5%; P = .015).

CONCLUSIONS

OAGB and RYGB yield comparable weight loss outcomes. However, OAGB had more intraoperative complications, while RYGB had more short-term complications. Both procedures show similar efficacy in diabetes mellitus remission, but OAGB is more effective in achieving hypertension remission.

Similar Rates of Symptomatic Marginal Ulcers After One-Anastomosis-Gastric Bypass Compared to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

PURPOSE

One-anastomosis-gastric-bypass (OAGB) has become a common bariatric procedure worldwide. Marginal ulcers (MU) are a significant non-immediate complication of gastric bypass surgeries. There seems to be concern among surgeons that MU are more common after OAGB compared with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) due to the constant and extensive exposure of the anastomosis to bile. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence, presentation, and management of MU between the two surgeries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study of prospectively collected data was performed to include all consecutive patients between 2010 and 2020, who underwent elective OAGB or RYGB at our institution. Patients diagnosed with symptomatic MU were identified. Factors associated with this complication were assessed and compared between the two surgeries.

RESULTS

Symptomatic MU were identified in 23/372 OAGB patients (6.2%) and 35/491 RYGB patients (7.1%) (p = 0.58). Time to ulcer diagnosis was shorter in OAGB patients (12 ± 11 vs. 22 ± 17 months, p < 0.01). Epigastric pain was the common symptom (78% OAGB vs. 88.5% RYGB, p = 0.7) and approximately 15% of ulcers presented with perforation upon admission (17% vs.11.4%, p = 0.7). Re-operation was required in 5/23 OAGB (21.7%) and 6/36 RYGB (17%) patients (p = 0.11) while the rest of the patients were managed non-operatively.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of developing a marginal ulcer is similar between patients who underwent OAGB and RYGB. Patients diagnosed with MU following OAGB tend to present earlier; however, the clinical presentation is similar to RYGB patients. The management of this serious complication seems to be associated with acceptable outcomes with comparable operative and non-operative approaches.

One anastomosis gastric bypass as a primary bariatric surgery: MBSAQIP database analysis of short-term safety and outcomes

BACKGROUND

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is described as a simpler, potentially safe, and effective bariatric-metabolic procedure that has been recently endorsed by the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVES

First, we aim to compare the 30-day outcomes between OAGB and other bypass procedures: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and single anastomosis duodenoileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S). Second, identify the odds between postoperative complications and each surgical procedure.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary OAGB, RYGB, and SADI-S were identified using the MBSAQIP database of 2020 and 2021. An analysis of patient demographics and 30-day outcomes were compared between these three bypass procedures. In addition, a multilogistic regression for overall complications, blood transfusions, unplanned ICU admissions, readmission, reoperation, and anastomotic leak stratified by surgical procedure was performed.

RESULTS

1607 primary OAGBs were reported between 2020 and 2021. In terms of patient demographics, patients who underwent RYGB and SADI-S showed a higher incidence of comorbidities. On the other hand, OAGB had shorter length of stay (1.39 ± 1.10 days vs 1.62 ± 1.42 days and 1.90 ± 2.04 days) and operative times (98.79 ± 52.76 min vs 125.91 ± 57.76 min and 139.85 ± 59.20 min) than RYGB and SADI-S. Similarly, OAGB showed lower rates of overall complications (1.9% vs 4.5% and 6.4%), blood transfusions (0.4% vs 1.1% and 1.8%), unplanned ICU admission (0.3% vs 0.8% and 1.4%), readmission (2.4% vs 4.9% and 5.0%), and reoperation (1.2% vs 1.9% and 3.1%). A multilogistic regression analysis was performed, RYGB and SADI-S demonstrated higher odds of 30-day complications.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of primary OAGB has increased since its approval by ASMBS, from 0.05% reported between 2015 and 2019 to 0.78% between 2020 and 2021. OAGB had better 30-day outcomes and shorter operative times than RYGB and SADI-S and therefore, could be considered a viable alternative.

Comparison of Single Versus Double Anastomosis Bariatric Metabolic Surgery in Obesity: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Major BMS are modified through loop rather than Roux-en-Y type reconstruction recently, and this study systematically reviews the BMS from the perspective of SA (single anastomosis) and DA (double anastomosis) procedures, aiming to research the differences among bariatric procedures. A total of 39 studies compared SA- and DA-BMS were finally eligible for analysis after searching in PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Compared with DA, SA shortens operative time and decreases complications especially obstruction, internal hernia, and reoperation. SA-GB (gastric bypass) has significantly higher %TWL and T2DM remission rate than DA-GB 1- and 5-year postoperatively. SA-DS (duodenal switch) has similar 1-year %TWL and lower 5-year %TWL, and comparable 1- and 5-year T2DM remission with DA-DS. SA provides significant advantages about simplicity and safety. This, together with the shorter learning curve, makes SA a promising choice.

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass in 6722 Patients: Early Outcomes from a Private Hospital Registry

BACKGROUND

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is an emerging metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) type used in both primary OAGB (pOAGB) and revisional OAGB (rOAGB). We studied ≤30-day outcomes of pOAGB and rOAGB and identified predictors of early complications.

METHODS

Electronic medical records of all OAGBs performed between January 2017 and December 2021 at a high-volume bariatric clinic in Israel comprising four hospital centers were scanned retrospectively using specialized data software (MDClone software, version 6.1). Data gathered were patients' characteristics, surgical procedure, and ≤30-day complications with Clavien-Dindo Classification (CDC). Multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors related to early complications of pOAGB and rOAGB.

RESULTS

A total of 6722 patients underwent a pOAGB (n = 5088, 75.7%) or rOAGB (n = 1634, 24.3%) procedure at our institution. Preoperative mean age and body mass index (BMI) were 40.6 ± 11.5 years and 41.2 ± 4.6 kg/m2, respectively. Early complications occurred in 258 (3.8%) patients (176 pOAGB and 82 rOAGB) and included mainly bleeding (n = 133, 2.0%), leaks (n = 31, 0.5%), and obstruction/strictures (n = 19, 0.3%). CDC complications for grades 1-2 and grades 3a--5 were 1.5% and 1.6%, respectively. The overall mortality rate was 0.03% (n = 2). Age, operative time ≥3 h, and any additional concomitant procedure were independent predictors of early complications following pOAGB, while a diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and operative time ≥3 h were independent predictors of early complications following rOAGB.

CONCLUSIONS

OAGB was found to be a safe primary and revisional MBS procedure in the ≤30-postoperative day term. The most common complications were gastrointestinal bleeding, leaks, and obstruction/stricture.

Efficacy and Safety of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass for Obesity: a Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

The objective of this review is to systematically review the efficacy and safety outcomes of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). From inception to July 4, 2022, a systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for randomized clinical trials comparing OAGB with RYGB in obesity. A meta-analysis performed using the RevMan 5.4.1 software evaluations was completed. We identified 1217 reports; after exclusions, eight trials with a total of 931 patients were eligible for analysis. Compared with RYGB, OAGB had multiple advantageous indexes. Examples include percent of excess weight loss (%EWL) at 12 months (P = 0.009), body mass index (BMI) at 2 years (P < 0.00001), early postoperative complication (P = 0.04), remission of dyslipidemia (P < 0.0001), and operative time (P < 0.00001). No significant statistical difference was observed in BMI at 6 months, %EWL at 6 months, BMI at 12 months, percent of excess body mass index loss (%EBMIL) at 2 years, BMI at 5 years, intraoperative complications, late postoperative complications, remission of type 2 diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidemia or gastroesophageal reflux disease remission between OAGB and RYGB. OAGB is no less effective than RYGB; no significant differences in weight loss efficacy were observed, and more large and long-term randomized controlled trials are needed to verify this. In addition, studies have shown that OAGB has a shorter operation time, fewer early postoperative complications, and a shorter learning curve, making it easier for young surgeons to perform.

Nutritional Complications After Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass: A Comparative Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out involving studies that compared the nutritional complications of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB); these included the incidence of malnutrition as well as deficiencies of other nutritional elements, such as total protein, albumin, calcium and iron. A comprehensive search strategy was implemented in PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Effect sizes included the pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs), as well as mean differences (MDs) and 95% CIs of the percentage total weight loss (%TWL) and excess weight loss percentage (%EWL). Thirteen studies were included (12,964 patients, 66.27% females, 53.82% underwent OAGB). At the longest follow-up period (≥3 years), OAGB was associated with significantly higher %TWL (MD=5.41%, 95%CI, 1.52 to 9.29) and %EWL (MD=13.81%, 95%CI, 9.60 to 18.02) compared to RYGB. However, OAGB procedures were associated with malnutrition (OR=3.00, 95%CI, 1.68 to 5.36, p<0.0001), hypoalbuminemia (OR=2.38, 95%CI, 1.65 to 3.43, p<0.0001), hypoproteinemia (OR=1.85, 95%CI, 1.09 to 3.14, p=0.022), anemia (OR=1.38, 95%CI, 1.08 to 1.77, p=0.011), and hypocalcemia (OR=1.78, 95%CI, 1.01 to 3.12, p=0.046). On subgroup analyses, the proportions of anemia and hypoalbuminemia remained significantly higher at longer follow-up periods and in studies published in Asia. Despite the favorable weight loss profile, the unfavorable nutritional consequences of OAGB merits further investigations to explore the malabsorptive element, ethnic variation, and the role of biliopancreatic limb length.

Lamotrigine therapy in patients after bariatric surgery: Potentially hampered solubility and dissolution

Bariatric surgery is an effective treatment of obesity and related comorbidities. With surgery, the stomach undergoes major anatomical/physiological changes that may affect the oral exposure of drugs, especially marginally soluble weak bases, such as lamotrigine. The aim of this work was to study the solubility/dissolution of lamotrigine in conditions simulating the stomach before vs. after bariatric surgery. Lamotrigine solubility was studied in-vitro, as well as ex-vivo in gastric content aspirated from patients before vs. after bariatric surgery. We then compared the dissolution kinetics of various marketed lamotrigine products in pre- vs. post-operative stomach conditions, different in volume, pH, agitation strength and speed. Decreased lamotrigine solubility with increasing pH (from 1.37 ± 0.09 (pH = 1) to 0.22 ± 0.03 mg/mL (pH = 7)) was obtained. Twelve-fold higher lamotrigine solubility was revealed in gastric content aspirated before vs. after surgery (8.5 ± 0.7 and 0.7 ± 0.01 mg/mL, respectively). Dissolution studies showed that only the lowest dose (25 mg) fully dissolved in the post-surgery stomach conditions, while at higher doses, lamotrigine tablet dissolution was impaired. Neither fast-dissolving tablet, nor tablet crushing, helped resolving this problem. Based on these results, and given that dissolution of the drug dose governs the subsequent absorption, close monitoring of this essential drug is advised after bariatric surgery.