Intensive care unit stay not required for patients with obstructive sleep apnea after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

Obesity Surgery Mortality Risk Score as a Predictor for Intensive Care Unit Admission in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery

Background: Laparoscopic bariatric surgery provides many benefits including lower postoperative pain scores, reduced opioid consumption, shorter hospital stays, and improved quality of recovery. However, the anaesthetic management of obese patients requires caution in determining postoperative risk and in planning adequate postoperative pathways. Currently, there are no specific indications for intensive care unit (ICU) admission in this surgical population and most decisions are made on a case-by-case basis. The aim of this study is to investigate whether Obesity Surgery Mortality Risk Score (OS-MRS) is able to predict ICU admission in patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery (LBS). Methods: We retrospectively reviewed data of patients who underwent LBS during a 2-year period (2017-2019). The collected data included demographics, comorbidities and surgery-related variables. Postoperative ICU admission was decided via bariatric anaesthesiologists' evaluations, based on the high risk of postoperative cardiac or respiratory complications. Anaesthesia protocol was standardized. Logistic regression was used for statistical analysis. Results: ICU admission was required in 2% (n = 15) of the 763 patients. The intermediate risk group of the OS-MRS was detected in 84% of patients, while the American Society of Anaesthesiologists class III was reported in 80% of patients. A greater OS-MRS (p = 0.01), advanced age (p = 0.04), male gender (p = 0.001), longer duration of surgery (p = 0.0001), increased number of patient comorbidities (p = 0.002), and previous abdominal surgeries (p = 0.003) were predictive factors for ICU admission. Conclusions: ICU admission in obese patients undergoing LBS is predicted by OS-MRS together with age, male gender, number of comorbidities, previous abdominal surgeries, and duration of surgery.

Peri- and Postoperative Outcomes for Obstructive Sleep Apnoea Patients after Bariatric Surgery-a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is prevalent among patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Previous studies have reported a higher risk of complications, ICU admission and longer length of stay in patients with OSA following surgery. However, clinical outcomes following bariatric surgery are unclear. The hypothesis is that patients with OSA will have an increased risk of these outcome measures after bariatric surgery.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to answer the research question. Searches for bariatric surgery and obstructive sleep apnoea were performed using PubMed and Ovid Medline. Studies which compared OSA and non-OSA patients undergoing bariatric surgery and used outcome measures that included length of stay, risk of complications, 30-day readmission and need for ICU admission were selected for the systematic review. Comparable datasets from these studies were used for the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Patients with OSA are at greater risk of complications after bariatric surgery (RR = 1.23 [CI: 1.01, 1.5], P = 0.04), driven mostly by an increased risk of cardiac complications (RR = 2.44 [CI: 1.26, 4.76], P = 0.009). There were no significant differences between the OSA and non-OSA cohorts in the other outcome variables (respiratory complications, length of stay, 30-day readmission and need for ICU admission).

CONCLUSION

Following bariatric surgery, patients with OSA must be managed carefully due to the increased risk of cardiac complications. However, patients with OSA are not more likely to require a longer length of stay or readmission.

Patients with sleep-disordered breathing for bariatric surgery

The prevalence of patients with obesity continues to rise worldwide and has reached epidemic proportions. There is a strong correlation between obesity and sleep-disordered breathing (SDB), and, in particular, obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). OSA is often undiagnosed in the surgical population. Bariatric surgery has been recognized as an effective treatment option for both obesity and OSA. Laparoscopic bariatric procedures, particularly laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), have become the most frequently performed procedures. OSA has been identified as an independent risk factor for perioperative complications and failure to recognize and prepare for patients with OSA is a major cause of postoperative adverse events, suggesting that all patients undergoing bariatric surgery should be screened preoperatively for OSA. These patients should be treated with an opioid-sparing analgesic plan and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) perioperatively to minimize respiratory complications. With the number of bariatric surgical patients with SDB likely to continue rising, it is critical to understand the best practices to manage this patient population.

Efficacy of patient selection criteria for obesity surgery in a non-high-dependency unit/intensive care unit facility

BACKGROUNDS

Publicly funded obesity surgery remains underfunded in Australia. One barrier to expansion is the perception that perioperative care requires critical care facilities. This study evaluates the effectiveness of patient selection criteria in avoiding unplanned patient transfer and adverse outcomes in obesity surgery performed at a facility without a high-dependency unit/intensive care unit (HDU/ICU).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was performed on patients undergoing obesity surgery between January 2017 and March 2020 in a centre with specific screening criteria. Criteria included: body mass index <48 for males and <52 for females with up to three stable comorbidities from a selected list. Revision sleeve or bypass procedures were contraindicated. Primary outcome was patient transfer to our main campus. Secondary outcomes included return to theatre (RTT), readmission and death. Outcomes were compared to laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LC) performed at the same centre.

RESULTS

A total of 387 obesity surgery procedures were performed; 372 patients (96%) were discharged without complication. Fifteen (3.9%) were transferred to the main campus, eight were admitted to ICU and two required re-operation. Twelve (3.1%) were readmitted within 30 days of discharge, five required re-operation. Transfer, 30-day readmission and 30-day emergency department presentation rates were similar in comparison to LC. RTT during index admission (0.5% vs. 3.0%; p = 0.006) and during 30-day post-operative period (1.8% vs. 4.4%; p = 0.025) was lower in the obesity surgery group.

CONCLUSION

Carefully selected screening criteria allow obesity surgery to be performed at a well-supported non-HDU/ICU facility with few complications and acceptable rates of unplanned patient transfer.

Impact of obstructive sleep apnea-related symptoms on surgical wound complications in breast cancer patients: pilot study in a tertiary health center in Turkey

PURPOSE

Wound healing is an important factor influencing morbidity following surgical procedures. The association of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) with numerous postoperative complications has been previously reported. In this study, we report the impact of OSA-related symptoms on wound complications in breast cancer patients in the postoperative period.

METHODS

Breast cancer patients were enrolled for a prospective observational study. Outcome measures included sociodemographic data, self-reported sleep-wake questionnaires (Berlin questionnaire, STOP-BANG, and Epworth sleepiness scale [ESS]) as well as type of surgery, smoking status, duration of anesthesia, the need for postoperative opioid drugs, and complications for surgical wounds. Patients' general preoperative health status was quantified by using American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores.

RESULTS

A total of 132 women were included in the study, of whom 61% (n = 81) underwent mastectomy, and 39% (n = 51) had breast conserving surgery. Mean ESS score of the study group was 7.7 ± 0.5. Multivariant analysis identified, either being at medium high risk by STOP-BANG questionnaire (OR:1.77, p: 0.04) or being at high risk by Berlin questionnaire (OR:1.96, p: 0.04) as well as high BMI (OR:2.76 95% CI:1.73-4.65, p: 0.02), smoking history (OR:3.04 95% CI: 2.25-3.86, p: 0.01) and type of surgery (OR:2.64 95% CI: 1.63-2.89, p: 0.03) were independent factors for wound healing.

CONCLUSIONS

The study results suggest that patients with high risk for OSA have a tendency to develop postoperative wound complications after breast cancer surgery. This study lays groundwork for further scrutiny using more robust methodology.

Cardiovascular effects of non-invasive ventilation in the treatment of breathing-related sleep disorders in bariatric patients

The article presents a non-systematic review of studies on breathing-related sleep disorders in patients with morbid obesity, and on the use of non-invasive ventilation in the pre-, peri-, and postoperative period of bariatric surgery, with an assessment of cardiovascular effects.

Clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) on bariatric surgery: update 2020 endorsed by IFSO-EC, EASO and ESPCOP

BACKGROUND

Surgery for obesity and metabolic diseases has been evolved in the light of new scientific evidence, long-term outcomes and accumulated experience. EAES has sponsored an update of previous guidelines on bariatric surgery.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary group of bariatric surgeons, obesity physicians, nutritional experts, psychologists, anesthetists and a patient representative comprised the guideline development panel. Development and reporting conformed to GRADE guidelines and AGREE II standards.

RESULTS

Systematic review of databases, record selection, data extraction and synthesis, evidence appraisal and evidence-to-decision frameworks were developed for 42 key questions in the domains Indication; Preoperative work-up; Perioperative management; Non-bypass, bypass and one-anastomosis procedures; Revisional surgery; Postoperative care; and Investigational procedures. A total of 36 recommendations and position statements were formed through a modified Delphi procedure.

CONCLUSION

This document summarizes the latest evidence on bariatric surgery through state-of-the art guideline development, aiming to facilitate evidence-based clinical decisions.

Postoperative Monitoring Following Adenotonsillectomy for Severe Obstructive Sleep Apnea

INTRODUCTION

Patients undergoing adenotonsillectomy (T&A) for severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) are usually admitted for observation, and many surgeons use the intensive care unit (ICU) for observation due to the risk of postsurgical airway obstruction. Given the limited resources of the pediatric ICU (PICU), there is a push to better define the patients who require postoperative monitoring in the PICU for monitoring severe OSA.

METHODS

Forty-five patients were evaluated. Patients who had cardiac or craniofacial comorbidities were excluded. Patients undergoing T&A for severe OSA were monitored in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) postoperatively. If patients required supplemental oxygen or developed hypoxia while in the PACU within the 3-hour monitoring period, they were admitted to the PICU.

RESULTS

Overall, 16 of 45 patients were admitted to the ICU for monitoring. Patients with an Apnea-Hypopnea Index (AHI) >50 or with an oxygen nadir <80% were significantly more likely to be admitted to the PICU. The mean AHI of patients admitted to the PICU was 40.5, and the mean oxygen nadir was 69.9%. Patients younger than 2 years were significantly more likely to be admitted to the PICU.

CONCLUSION

Based on the data presented here and academy recommendations, not all patients with severe OSA require ICU monitoring.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Bariatric Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations

BACKGROUND

During the last two decades, an increasing number of bariatric surgical procedures have been performed worldwide. There is no consensus regarding optimal perioperative care in bariatric surgery. This review aims to present such a consensus and to provide graded recommendations for elements in an evidence-based "enhanced" perioperative protocol.

METHODS

The English-language literature between January 1966 and January 2015 was searched, with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohort studies. Selected studies were examined, reviewed and graded. After critical appraisal of these studies, the group of authors reached a consensus recommendation.

RESULTS

Although for some elements, recommendations are extrapolated from non-bariatric settings (mainly colorectal), most recommendations are based on good-quality trials or meta-analyses of good-quality trials.

CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive evidence-based consensus was reached and is presented in this review by the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) Society. The guidelines were endorsed by the International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition (IASMEN) and based on the evidence available in the literature for each of the elements of the multimodal perioperative care pathway for patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine Guidelines on Preoperative Screening and Assessment of Adult Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

The purpose of the Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine guideline on preoperative screening and assessment of adult patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is to present recommendations based on the available clinical evidence on the topic where possible. As very few well-performed randomized studies in this field of perioperative care are available, most of the recommendations were developed by experts in the field through consensus processes involving utilization of evidence grading to indicate the level of evidence upon which recommendations were based. This guideline may not be appropriate for all clinical situations and all patients. The decision whether to follow these recommendations must be made by a responsible physician on an individual basis. Protocols should be developed by individual institutions taking into account the patients’ conditions, extent of interventions and available resources. This practice guideline is not intended to define standards of care or represent absolute requirements for patient care. The adherence to these guidelines cannot in any way guarantee successful outcomes and is rather meant to help individuals and institutions formulate plans to better deal with the challenges posed by perioperative patients with OSA. These recommendations reflect the current state of knowledge and its interpretation by a group of experts in the field at the time of publication. While these guidelines will be periodically updated, new information that becomes available between updates should be taken into account. Deviations in practice from guidelines may be justifiable and such deviations should not be interpreted as a basis for claims of negligence.

Critical Care Management of Bariatric Surgery Complications

Obesity remains a major medical disease that often requires surgical intervention in morbidly obese patients. Surgical procedures have evolved and are performed routinely in most major medical centers. Outcomes are often dependent on patient characteristics, type of procedure, and preoperative planning. Risk stratification often depends on screening and optimizing known comorbidities often encountered in this patient population. A thorough understanding of the physiologic changes seen in obese patient and the commonly performed operations will allow the physician to perform optimal treatment strategies.

Sleep apnea: is routine preoperative screening necessary?

BACKGROUND

Because perioperative complications of unrecognized obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) can be severe, many bariatric surgery programs routinely screen all patients. However, many obese non-bariatric surgery patients do not get screened. We wanted to evaluate the need for routine preoperative OSA screening.

METHODS

Morbidly obese patients with a body mass index (BMI) > 40 kg/m(2) undergoing bariatric surgery--all screened for OSA--were compared to morbidly obese orthopedic lower extremity total joint replacements (TJR) patients--not screened for OSA. Cardio-pulmonary complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Eight hundred eighty-two morbidly obese patients undergoing either bariatric (n = 467) or orthopedic TJR surgery (n = 415) were compared. As a result of screening, 119 bariatric surgery patients (25.5 %) were newly diagnosed with OSA, bringing the incidence to 42.8 % (200/467). Orthopedic surgery group had 72 of 415 (17.3 %) patients with pre-existing OSA. The unscreened orthopedic patients had a 6.7 % (23/343) cardiopulmonary complications rate compared to 2.6 % (7/267) for screened bariatric surgery patients. This difference was not statistically significant when adjusted for age and comorbidity (p = 0.3383).

CONCLUSION

Sleep apnea screening prior to bariatric surgery identifies an additional 25 % of patients as having OSA. In this study, unscreened morbidly obese patients did not have an increased incidence of cardiopulmonary complications after surgery compared to screened patients. Prospective randomized studies should be conducted to definitively assess utility and cost effectiveness of routine OSA screening of all morbidly obese patients undergoing surgery. Preoperative OSA screening may be safely omitted when randomizing patients for such a trial.

Sleep apnea syndrome is significantly underdiagnosed in bariatric surgical patients

BACKGROUND

Devastating morbidity and mortality can result when patients with undiagnosed sleep apnea syndrome (SAS) undergo bariatric surgery. We evaluated the prevalence of SAS and its rate of nondiagnosis in bariatric patients at a university hospital.

METHODS

The demographic, anthropomorphic, and co-morbidity data were collected from 1368 patients evaluated for bariatric surgery. All patients were screened for symptoms of SAS, and symptomatic patients were evaluated with polysomnography.

RESULTS

At the time of this report, 834 patients (61%) had completed the preoperative evaluation. Of these patients, 210 (25%) presented with previously diagnosed SAS. An additional 174 patients (21%) exhibited symptoms of SAS and underwent polysomnography. Most patients tested (127, 73%) had SAS that required treatment, 11 patients (6%) had mild SAS not requiring treatment, and 36 (21%) tested negative for SAS. Thus, symptom screening for SAS had a positive predictive value of 79% for predicting the presence of SAS and 73% for identifying patients who required SAS treatment. The patients with SAS tended to be older and male and have a greater body mass index (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Overall, SAS that required treatment with an oral appliance was prevalent (40%) in patients who presented for bariatric surgery. However, many of these patients with significant SAS (38%) were previously undiagnosed, despite exhibiting clear symptoms of the disease. Symptom screening appears to be effective in identifying patients who should be evaluated by polysomnography. To avoid the potential perils of undiagnosed SAS during the perioperative period, patients who undergo bariatric surgery should be screened, tested, and treated for this co-morbidity.

Postoperative pain management of the obese patient

In the obese patient, the goal of postoperative pain management is provision of comfort, early mobilisation and improved respiratory function without causing inadequate sedation and respiratory compromise. The pathophysiology of obesity, typical co-morbidities and the high prevalence of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) amongst obese patients make safe analgesic management difficult. In particular, pain control after bariatric surgery is a major challenge. Although several reviews covering anaesthesia and analgesia for obese patients are published, there is mainly expert opinion and a paucity of evidence-based recommendations. Advice on general management includes multimodal analgesic therapy, preference for regional techniques, avoidance of sedatives, non-invasive ventilation with supplemental oxygen, early mobilisation and elevation of the head of bed to 30 degrees. Finally, with regard to monitoring, sedation scoring is most relevant, but there should be a low threshold for continuous pulse oxymetry, arterial blood pressure measurement and placement in a high-dependency area for the postoperative period.