Medical Devices in the Treatment of Obesity

[Dental occlusal disruptor as a strategy to moderate caloric intake: two case report]

Background

Obesity is a global public health challenge, closely related with the progression of other diseases. In recent years, odontology has intervened against obesity through the implementation of intraoral devices that contribute with weight control treatments.

Objective

To study the use of a dental occlusal disruptor as a strategy to moderate caloric intake.

Material and methods

Pilot study which included 2 patients. It was used a dental occlusal disruptor that has an impact on the smaller amount of food at each bite. Patients attended five appointments in which a stomatological evaluation was carried out and anthropometric measurements were taken. All adverse effects were reported in each patient's clinical history.

Results

Patients presented weight and body fat loss, increased muscle mass and decreased both body mass index and waist and hip measurements.

Conclusions

The use of the disruptor does not alter the stomatological assessment, it promotes masticatory regulation and the decrease in body weight. It is necessary to analyze its use in a larger number of 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 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.

New endoscopic procedures for diabetes mellitus type 2 and obesity treatment

BACKGROUND

Obesity continues to be a growing epidemic worldwide. Obese patients have severe comorbidities that make risky and technically demanding the execution of bariatric surgery from both surgical and anesthetic point of view; therefore, the focus of bariatric surgeons is increasingly moving towards minimally invasive, endoscopic techniques.

METHODS

The present review presents and discusses recent endoscopic techniques employed in obesity treatment, their features and results.

RESULTS

Endoscopic treatment can be primary or revisional; we can mainly divide the endoscopic devices into five categories: space-occupying devices, restrictive procedures, bypass liner, aspiration therapy and endoscopic revision of gastric bypass for dilated gastric pouch.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic treatments for obesity are promising techniques for selected patients but each procedure should be tailored on the patient in a multimodal approach.