Early use of self-expanding metallic stents to relieve sleeve gastrectomy stenosis after intragastric balloon removal

A Comprehensive Review of Endoscopic Management of Sleeve Gastrectomy Leaks

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery leaks result in significant morbidity and mortality. Experts report variable therapeutic approaches, without uniform guidelines or consensus.

OBJECTIVE

To review the pathogenesis, risk factors, prevention, and treatment of gastric sleeve leaks, with a focus on endoscopic approaches. In addition, the efficacy and success rates of different treatment modalities are assessed.

DESIGN

A comprehensive review was conducted using a thorough literature search of 5 online electronic databases (PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Web of Science) from the time of their inception through March 2020. Studies evaluating gastric sleeve leaks were included. MeSH terms related to "endoscopic," "leak," "sleeve," "gastrectomy," "anastomotic," and "bariatric" were applied to a highly sensitive search strategy. The main outcomes were epidemiology, pathophysiology, diagnosis, treatment, and outcomes.

RESULTS

Literature search yielded 2418 studies of which 438 were incorporated into the review. Shock and peritonitis necessitate early surgical intervention for leaks. Endoscopic therapies in acute and early leaks involve modalities with a focus on one of: (i) defect closure, (ii) wall diversion, or (iii) wall exclusion. Surgical revision is required if endoscopic therapies fail to control leaks after 6 months. Chronic leaks require one or more endoscopic, radiologic, or surgical approaches for fluid collection drainage to facilitate adequate healing. Success rates depend on provider and center expertise.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic management of leaks post sleeve gastrectomy is a minimally invasive and effective alternative to surgery. Their effect may vary based on clinical presentation, timing or leak morphology, and should be tailored to the appropriate endoscopic modality of treatment.

Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Radiological Guide to Common Postsurgical Failure

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is one of the most common bariatric procedures worldwide. It has recently gained in popularity because of a low complication rate, satisfactory resolution of comorbidities, and excellent weight loss outcome. This article reviews the surgical technique, expected postsurgical imaging appearance, and imaging findings of common complications after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Understanding of the surgical technique of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and of the normal postsurgical anatomy allows accurate interpretation of imaging findings in cases of insufficient weight loss, weight regain, and postsurgical complications.

An Algorithmic Approach to the Management of Gastric Stenosis Following Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Gastric stenosis (GS) is a potential adverse event post-laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Endoscopic management is preferred; however, there is significant variation in therapeutic strategies with no defined algorithm. This study aims to describe the safety and efficacy of a predefined step-wise algorithm for endoscopic management of GS post-LSG.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with symptomatic GS post-LSG, presenting between July 2015 and August 2016, were subjected to a predefined treatment algorithm of serial dilations using achalasia balloons, followed by a fully covered self-expanding metal stent (FCSEMS) if dilations were inadequate. Patients who did not respond or opted out of ongoing endoscopic therapy were offered revision Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

RESULTS

Total of 17 patients underwent a median of 2 (range 1-4) balloon dilations. Twelve patients (70.6%) reported clinical improvement with balloon dilation alone, while 3 (17.6%) required subsequent FCSEMS placement. One patient suffered a tear to the muscularis propria with balloon dilation, which was managed conservatively. Overall, 15 (88.2%) reported clinical improvement with endoscopic management. PAGI-SYM scores revealed that the strongest response to therapy, based on mean reduction of score ± SD, was in the following items: nausea (3 ± 1.9, P < 0.001), heartburn during day (2.8 ± 1.5, P = 0.003), heartburn on lying down (3.4 ± 1.4, P < 0.001), reflux during day (2.8 ± 1.9, P < 0.001), and reflux on lying down (3.0 ± 1.9, P < 0.001). Two (11.8%) patients failed endoscopic therapy and underwent RYGB.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic management of GS using the described algorithmic approach is safe and effective post-LSG. Patients with severe stenosis or helical stenosis are likely to require revision RYGB.

How to treat stenosis after sleeve gastrectomy?

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has increasingly gained worldwide acceptance among bariatric surgeons during the past 10 years. Numerous articles have been written about the different approaches to the management of gastric fistulas, but limited data can be found concerning gastric stenosis after LSG.

SETTING

Private hospital, France.

METHODS

A total of 18 patients received endoscopic treatment for stenosis after LSG between May 2007 and June 2015. Stenosis was classified according to the endoscopic findings as functional (the passage of the endoscope was possible, but the sleeve was twisted with various degrees of rotation) or mechanical (the passage of the endoscope was very difficult or impossible).

RESULTS

This study included 13 women and 5 men, with an average age of 37.2±8.4 years and an average body mass index of 41.6±8.7 kg/m². The average number of endoscopic procedures was 1.3 (range, 1-4). No patient had stent migration. The successful rate of endoscopic approach for stenosis of LSG was 94.4%, with one patient requiring conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The mean time from the LSG to the first endoscopic intervention was 28.2 days. All patients presented with midsleeve stricture, located near the incisura angularis, and no patient showed a stenosis in the upper part of the gastric tube.

CONCLUSIONS

The treatment of stenosis after LSG must be tailored to the clinical status of the patient and endoscopic findings. Both balloon dilation and stent deployment are useful and safe tools and must be used when appropriate.

Evolving endoscopic management options for symptomatic stenosis post-laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity: experience at a large bariatric surgery unit in New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic stenosis is an increasingly recognised complication following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) to treat obesity with a reported prevalence between 0.1 and 3.9 %. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and management options for symptomatic stenosis (SS) after LSG.

METHODS

A total of 857 patients underwent LSG at Counties Health Auckland New Zealand between May 2008 and June 2013. All cases referred for management of symptomatic stenosis after LSG were recorded.

RESULTS

Symptomatic stenosis developed in 26 (3.03 %) out of 857 receiving LSG confirmed by barium swallow. Three of these 26 patients developed a fixed stenosis in the proximal stomach. These were all successfully treated by one dilatation of controlled radial expansion (CRE) balloon of <20 mm. Of the 23 patients that showed a fixed stenosis at the incisura angularis, 16 were initially treated with dilatation by a CRE balloon. Seven of these patients were successfully dilated although one needed two dilatations. Of the nine failures, six were successfully treated using a 30-mm achalasia balloon dilator and the other three required temporary placement of a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS). Based on this experience, seven other patients who presented with strictures at the incisura >3 cm long were initially treated with the achalasia balloon. Five were successfully dilated, but two required temporary placement of a SEMS. None of the 26 patients required a surgical procedure to correct their stenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a 30-mm achalasia balloon and a SEMS is an effective and safe treatment for patients with SS post-LSG who do not respond to dilatation. Achalasia balloon could be the first-line treatment in selected cases.

Comparison between orogastric tube/bougie and a suction calibration system for effects on operative duration, staple-line corkscrewing, and esophageal perforation during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy

Introduction

Placement of a bougie for sleeve sizing during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is recommended. We compared this standard with a suction calibration system (SCS) that performs all functions with one insertion, and measured each step’s duration.

Methods

Primary LSG was performed using a bougie and SCS in alternating order. Number of tube movements to achieve optimal placement, durations of decompression, leak testing, and overall operative time, and remnant linear measurements were obtained.

Results

LSG was performed in 26 patients (15 women, 11 men; mean age 36.8 years; mean BMI 45.3 kg/m²). The mean number of tube movements was significantly greater for the bougie than for the SCS (8.13 vs. 3.58; p < 0.0001). Percent reductions achieved using the SCS were: time to full decompression of the stomach, 62 % (21 vs. 8 s; p < 0.138); tube placement, 51 % (101 vs. 49 s; p < 0.0001); leak testing, 78 % (119 vs. 26 s; p < 0.0003); and mean operative duration (from tube insertion to end of stapling), 21 % (875 vs. 697 s; p < 0.019). Variance of the staple-line distance, measured from the greater curvature to the staple line, was 1.64 and 0.92 for the bougie and SCS, respectively, indicating a reduction in corkscrewing, for a 43.9 % straighter sleeve.

Conclusion

SCS maintained the gastric wall in place, thereby preventing corkscrewing, and reducing total operating time. Reducing the number of tube insertions may prevent esophageal damage and accidental tube stapling.

Therapy of stenosis after sleeve gastrectomy: stent and surgery as alternatives--case reports

AIM

The growing enthusiasm to perform laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in morbidly obese patients exposes also the complications associated with this type of surgery. LSG is not only performed in super-super-obese patients, but in addition has also its standing as a procedure in patients with multiple intraabdominal adhesions based on prior surgeries or after failed gastric banding. However, over the years there are characteristic complications as demonstrated by the increasing number of surgical interventions. Beside the risk of an insufficiency at the staple line, there is just as well the risk of a stenosis.

CASE REPORTS

The case reports will present several ways of the treatment that can be regarded as alternative approaches.

CONCLUSION

The final decision to perform a surgery or to implant a stent needs to be calculated from case to case. This demonstrates the importance of an experienced team of surgeons and endoscopists.