Systematic review on reoperative bariatric surgery: American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Revision Task Force. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2014;10:952-972. [PMID: 24776071 DOI: 10.1016/j.soard.2014.02.014]

Trends in bariatric surgery revisions: a 25-year single-institution experience

BACKGROUND

Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) is now the third most performed metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) in the USA. This study aims to describe trends in MBS revisions at a single large academic institution over 25 years.

METHODS

We identified patients who underwent an MBS revision between 2000 and 2024 at a single large quaternary referral center from a prospectively maintained database. We retrospectively reviewed the electronic medical records to collect pertinent data related to MBS history and conducted a descriptive review of the data to evaluate trends.

RESULTS

A total of 667 patients underwent a first-time bariatric surgery revision; 364 (54.5%) performed surgically and 303 (45.5%) endoscopically. There was a noticeable trend toward endoscopic revisions indicated for weight-related indications, particularly over the past decade. For surgical revisions, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) was the most revised primary MBS operation overall, surpassed by sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in recent years. A greater diversity of indications was observed for surgical compared with endoscopic revisions. Additionally, 14.9% of patients required more than one bariatric revision procedure.

CONCLUSION

Bariatric surgery revisions are increasingly common, highlighting the chronicity of obesity and the need for long-term management. We identified general trends over time toward therapeutic interventions increasingly utilizing minimally invasive surgery and transoral endoscopic techniques. Transoral endoscopic revisions were primarily used for weight-related indications after RYGB, with many other indications managed exclusively through surgery.

Weight Recidivism After Bariatric Surgery: A Narrative Review

Bariatric surgery, while effective for severe obesity, is often challenged by postoperative weight regain (WR), affecting 20-30% of patients. This review analyzes the mechanisms, risk factors, and management strategies for WR, emphasizing surgical considerations. WR is influenced by hormonal adaptations, including ghrelin rebound and leptin resistance, as well as metabolic adaptation, leading to reduced resting energy expenditure. Surgical factors, such as suboptimal technique, gastro-gastric fistulas, and stomach/anastomosis dilation, significantly contribute to WR. Specifically, inaccurate sleeve or pouch sizing, poorly calibrated anastomoses, and complications with gastric banding necessitate careful surgical planning and potential revision. Management strategies encompass lifestyle interventions (diet, exercise, behavioral therapy), pharmacotherapy (GLP-1 receptor agonists like liraglutide, semaglutide, and tirzepatide), and revisional surgery. Revisional procedures, including sleeve-to-bypass, bypass revision, sleeve-to-duodenal switch/SADI, and band removal with conversion to sleeve or bypass, address anatomical failures and enhance weight loss. Distinguishing surgical failure from patient nonadherence is crucial for appropriate intervention. Ultimately, a collaborative, multidisciplinary approach integrating these strategies optimizes long-term weight management and improves patient outcomes after bariatric surgery.

Reversal of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass to Normal Anatomy-Experience of 70 Patients

BACKGROUND

A limited subset of patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) may develop intractable symptoms that ultimately require reversal to normal anatomy. Existing literature on this subject is characterized by small cohort sizes, substantial variation in surgical techniques, and limited follow-up durations. However, this study presents the largest single-center series to date, comprising seventy patients.

METHODS

A prospective analysis was conducted on clinical data from patients who underwent laparoscopic reversal of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). The study evaluated the indications for the procedure, technical considerations, clinical outcomes, and associated complications. Patients were stratified into two groups based on their primary symptoms: Group 1 (abdominal pain; n = 47) and Group 2 (hypoglycemia, malnutrition, or other symptoms; n = 23).

RESULTS

Seventy patients were included in the study, with a mean follow-up period of 2.4 years. The majority of patients (93%, 65/70) were female, and the mean age was 44 ± 11.45 years. The mean body mass index (BMI) at baseline was 28.7 ± 6.3 kg/m2. In Group 1, 85% of patients experienced either complete or partial resolution of symptoms, while in Group 2, 96% achieved complete symptom resolution. Thromboembolic complications occurred in 7.1% of patients, and 13% required reoperation. At 12 months post-reversal, mean weight and BMI had increased by 9.1 kg and 3.2 kg/m2, respectively. At the most recent follow-up, the total weight gain (Δkg) was 14.9 kg, and the BMI increase (ΔBMI) was 5.1 kg/m2.

CONCLUSION

Reversal of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is an effective intervention for patients experiencing chronic complications. Patients with hypoglycemia and malnutrition experienced higher rates of symptom resolution compared to those with abdominal pain or small bowel adhesions. The implementation of pyloroplasty, combined with high-dose subcutaneous anticoagulant therapy, was associated with a reduction in complication rates. Given the expected weight regain following reversal, it is essential for both surgeons and patients to align their expectations with anticipated outcomes.

Laparoscopic One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as a Revisional Procedure After Failed Vertical Banded Gastroplasty: Our Center Experience

Background: Vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) was historically a popular restrictive bariatric procedure, but long-term failure rates due to weight regain, stenosis, and gastroesophageal reflux have necessitated revisional interventions. One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), also known as mini-gastric bypass, has emerged as a viable revisional option due to its technical simplicity, lower complication rates, and promising metabolic outcomes. This study evaluates the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of OAGB as a revisional procedure following failed VBG, based on our center's experience and a review of the current literature. Methods: Seventy-one patients who underwent revisional OAGB after failed open VBG between February 2014 and February 2020 were included in this retrospective study. Three years outcomes regarding weight loss (the percentage of excess body weight loss (EBWL %) and change in body mass index (BMI)), co-morbidities resolution, morbidity, and mortality were assessed. Results: The EBWL % after revisional OAGB was 68.2 ± 9.4%, 65.9 ± 2.5%, and 59.6 ± 7.4% after 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively. The mean BMI before revisional surgery was 41.8 ± 3.7 kg/m2,which decreased to 31.9 ± 4.2 kg/m2 3 years after the revisional surgery. After 1 year, there was a remarkable resolution of obesity-related co-morbidities, the remission of type 2 diabetes mellitus was 85.7%, and of hypertension was 80%. Remission of other comorbidities was also observed. Bile reflux was encountered in 6 cases (8.5%), two of them required surgical intervention. Conclusions: OAGB is a feasible and effective revisional procedure after failed open VBG. However, the risk of bile reflux should be considered to justify these findings; further prospective randomized controlled trials are required.

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.

Ring Augmentation of the Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis of 5-Year Follow-Up Results

BACKGROUND

The ring-augmented Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (raRYGB) has been reported to result in higher long-term weight loss compared to regular Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). However, the type of ring used varied within studies, leading to heterogeneity in reported results. Therefore, this study compares the 5-year results of RYGB with and without ring augmentation using a specific prefabricated gastric ring.

METHODS

All consecutive patients from a single center who received primary raRYGB between June 1, 2016, and May 31, 2018, with complete 5-year follow-up data were included and compared to a propensity score matched cohort receiving RYGB in the same period from the Dutch Audit for Treatment of Obesity. To ensure fair effect estimation of placing a ring, only RYGB procedures with alimentary and biliopancreatic limb lengths similar to those of the raRYGB were considered eligible. The primary outcome was percentage total weight loss (%TWL). Secondary outcomes included recurrent weight gain (RWG), obesity complication improvement, and complications.

RESULTS

In total, 592 matched patients were analyzed. raRYGB was associated with higher %TWL at 5 years (31.5% versus 28.0%, β = 3.59, 95% CI [2.09-5.09], p < 0.01) and lower odds on RWG (odds ratio = 0.56, 95% CI [0.38-0.83], p < 0.01). Improvement of obesity complications and short-term complication rates were comparable in both groups. After 5 years, 13 patients (4%) had experienced ring-related complications needing reoperation.

CONCLUSIONS

At 5 years, raRYGB was associated with higher %TWL and lower odds on RWG. The occurrence of ring-related complications was limited.

Metabolic/bariatric surgery optimization: a position statement by Arabic association for the study of diabetes and metabolism (AASD)

For patients considering bariatric surgery, it is essential to have clear answers to common questions to ensure the success of the procedure. Patients should understand that surgery is not a quick fix but a tool that must be complemented by lifestyle changes, including dietary adjustments and regular physical activity. The procedure carries potential risks that should be weighed against the potential benefits. Health authorities play a critical role in ensuring that bariatric surgery is performed under the highest standards of care. Recommendations are provided to determine who is an appropriate candidate for surgery, what preoperative evaluations are necessary, and how to monitor patients postoperatively to maximize outcomes and minimize risks. Additionally, authorities are responsible for ensuring access to follow-up care, including nutritional support and psychological counseling, which are vital for the long-term success of bariatric surgery.Understanding these aspects by both patients and decision-makers is critical before proceeding with bariatric surgery. The following questions guide patients and healthcare professionals in making informed decisions about the procedure and managing the expectations and outcomes associated with bariatric surgery.

Robotic bariatric surgery reduces morbidity for revisional gastric bypass when compared to laparoscopic: outcome of 8-year MBSAQIP analysis of over 40,000 cases

INTRODUCTION

Robotic-assisted metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is gaining popularity. Revisional MBS is associated with higher perioperative morbidity compared to primary MBS. The optimal surgical approach to minimize complications in these complex cases is unclear. The goal of this study was to assess robot utilization in revisional MBS and compare laparoscopic and robotic revisional MBS outcomes in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the MBSAQIP database was performed identifying revisional sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) cases from 2015 to 2022. Primary MBS, open/emergent cases, cases converted to another approach, and combined cases other than esophagogastroduodenoscopy were excluded. 30-Day outcomes for laparoscopic and robotic cases were compared using multivariate logistic regression adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, and operative variables.

RESULTS

41,404 Cases (14,474 SG; 26,930 RYGB) were identified. From 2015 to 2022, the percentage of revisional SG and RYGB cases performed robotically increased from 6.1% and 7.3% to 24.2% and 32.0% respectively. Laparoscopic SG had similar rates of overall morbidity, leak, bleeding, readmission, reoperation, and length of stay compared to robotic. Laparoscopic RYGB had significantly higher rates of overall morbidity (6.2% vs. 4.8%, p < 0.001, AOR 0.80 [0.70-0.93]), blood transfusion (1.5% vs. 1.0%, p < 0.05, AOR 0.74 [0.55-0.99]), superficial incisional SSI (1.2% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001, AOR 0.30 [0.19-0.47]), and longer length of stay (1.87 vs. 1.76 days, p < 0.001) compared to robotic. Laparoscopic operative times were significantly shorter than robotic (SG: 86.4 ± 45.8 vs. 113.5 ± 51.7 min; RYGB: 130.7 ± 64.7 vs. 165.5 ± 66.8 min, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Robot utilization in revisional bariatric surgery is increasing. Robotic surgery has lower postoperative morbidity and shorter length of stay in revisional RYGB when compared to laparoscopic. Robotic platforms may have the capacity to improve the delivery of care for patients undergoing revisional bariatric surgery.

Safety of redo sleeve gastrectomy as a primary revisional procedure

BACKGROUND

Insufficient weight loss after primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) occasionally requires revisional surgery. A few single-institution studies have examined the safety of redo LSG (RSG) and have shown mixed results.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of RSG compared with LSG over a period of 30 days.

SETTING

University of Southern California, United States; Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database.

METHODS

The 2020-2021 MBSAQIP registry was used to evaluate patients who underwent RSG. Thirty-day outcomes were evaluated using univariable analysis and multivariable logistic and linear regression.

RESULTS

A total of 226,029 patients were reviewed, of whom 1454 (.7%) underwent RSG and 224,575 (99.3%) underwent initial LSG. Patients who underwent RSG were older (45 versus 42 yr), predominantly female (86.2% versus 81.3%), had a lower body mass index (40.0 versus 43.4), fewer co-morbidities, and greater rates of gastroesophageal reflux (38.7% versus 25.1%). They demonstrated increased overall complications (3.6% versus 2.1%, P < .001) and a longer operative time (81 versus 62 min, P < .001), but there was no difference in mortality. On multivariable analysis, patients who underwent RSG were independently associated with an increased risk of overall postoperative complications (odds ratio [OR]: 1.493, P = .018), organ space infection (OR: 6.231, P < .001), staple line leak (OR: 12.838, P < .001), pneumonia (OR: 3.85, P = .013), ventilator requirement over 48 hours (OR: 6.404, P = .035), sepsis (OR: 4.397, P = .010), septic shock (OR: 8.669, P < .001), reoperation (OR: 1.808, P = .013), readmission (OR: 2.104, P < .001), reintervention (OR: 4.435, P < .001), and longer operative times (β = 12.790, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this national database study, RSG was associated with increased rates of postoperative complications and a longer operative time. Although these results are concerning, further studies are required to examine long-term outcomes.

Magnetic single-anastomosis side-to-side duodeno-ileostomy for revision of sleeve gastrectomy in adults with severe obesity: 1-year outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Uncomplicated surgical approaches that minimize anastomotic complications while improving revisional metabolic/bariatric surgical (MBS) outcomes are needed.

METHODS

This prospective single-center study assessed the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the novel linear magnetic anastomosis system (LMAS [3 cm]) in performing a side-to-side duodeno-ileostomy (MagDI) bipartition to revise clinically suboptimal primary sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Patients with severe obesity with/without type 2 diabetes (T2D) with suboptimal weight loss, regain, and/or T2D recurrence post SG underwent revisional MagDI. A distal and proximal magnet were delivered endoscopically to the ileum and duodenum and aligned via laparoscopic assistance. Gradual magnet fusion formed a DI bipartition.

PRIMARY ENDPOINTS

technical feasibility, safety (Clavien-Dindo [CD] severe adverse event classification) at 1 year. Secondary endpoints: MBS weight and T2D reduction.

RESULTS

July 29, 2022-March 28, 2023, 24 patients (95.8% female, mean age 44.9 ± 1.5 years, and body mass index [BMI] 39.4 ± 1.3 kg/m2) underwent MagDI. Feasibility was attained via correct magnet placement (mean operative time 63.5 ± 3.3 min), patent anastomoses created, and magnet passage per anus in 100.0% of patients. There were 4 CD-III mild or moderate severe AEs, 0.0% associated with the LMAS or MagDI: 0.0% anastomotic leakage, obstruction, bleeding, infection, reintervention, or death. Mean BMI reduction was 2.1 kg/m2 (p < 0.05); total weight loss 5.3%, excess weight loss 16.4%; and the patient with T2D improved.

CONCLUSION

The single-anastomosis MagDI procedure using the novel 3-cm LMAS to revise clinically suboptimal SG was technically straightforward, incurred no major complications, mitigated weight regain, and renewed clinically meaningful weight loss.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT05322122.

Stronger control of eating 3 months after sleeve gastrectomy predicts successful weight loss outcomes at one year

Background

Weight loss response to sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is variable and predicting the effectiveness of surgery is challenging and elusive. The aim of our study was to assess and quantify the association between eating control and weight loss outcomes and identify the control of eating (CoE) attributes during the early postoperative period that might predict good vs. poor response to SG at one year.

Methods

A prospective longitudinal cohort study using the Control of Eating Questionnaire (CoEQ) was designed as a series before and at 3-, 6-, and 12-months post-SG. Primary outcomes were changes in CoE attributes and percent of total weight loss (%TWL) 12-months post-surgery. Subjects were categorized based on %TWL as good (GR, ≥25 %) or poor responders (PR, <25 %). A receiver operating characteristic and logistic regression analyses were performed.

Results

We included 41 participants (80.5% females, 51.2% Hispanic, mean age 41.7±10.6, median baseline body mass index (BMI) 43.6 kg/m2 [range 35.2-66.3]) who completed the CoEQ at all four timepoints. The "Difficulty to control eating" score at 3 months revealed the highest area under the curve (AUC) (AUC 0.711; 95%CI 0.524-0.898; p=0.032). In a trade-off between a high Youden index and high sensitivity, the "Difficulty to control eating" score of 7 at 3 months was identified as the optimal cut-off for distinguishing between GRs and PRs. Score ≤7 at 3 months was strongly independently associated with a successful weight loss target of 25%TWL at one-year post-SG (Relative Risk 4.43; 95%CI 1.06-18.54; p=0.042).

Conclusion

"Difficulty to control eating" score at 3 months post-SG is an independent early predictor of optimal response (achieving a successful TWL target of ≥25 % at one-year post-SG). Our results support the utility of this easy-to-administer validated tool for predicting the effectiveness of SG and may assist in identifying individuals with suboptimal response early and helping them with interventions to attain optimal weight loss targets.

Pharmacotherapy as an Augmentation to Bariatric Surgery for Obesity

A global obesity pandemic is one of the most significant health threats worldwide owing to its close association with numerous comorbidities such as type 2 diabetes mellitus, arterial hypertension, dyslipidemia, heart failure, cancer and many others. Obesity and its comorbidities lead to a higher rate of cardiovascular complications, heart failure and increased cardiovascular and overall mortality. Bariatric surgery is at present the most potent therapy for obesity, inducing a significant weight loss in the majority of patients. In the long-term, a substantial proportion of patients after bariatric surgery experience a gradual weight regain that may, in some, reach up to a presurgical body weight. As a result, anti-obesity pharmacotherapy may be needed in some patients after bariatric surgery to prevent the weight regain or to further potentiate weight loss. This article provides an overview of the use of anti-obesity medications as an augmentation to bariatric surgery for obesity. Despite relatively limited published data, it can be concluded that anti-obesity medication can serve as an effective adjunct therapy to bariatric surgery to help boost post-bariatric weight loss or prevent weight regain.

Reoperation After Loop Duodenojejunal Bypass with Sleeve Gastrectomy: A 9-Year Experience

PURPOSE

Loop duodenojejunal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (LDJBSG) is effective for weight loss and resolution of obesity-related associated medical problems. However, a description of the reoperative surgery following LDJBSG is lacking.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, we analyzed the surgical complications and reoperation (conversion or revision) following LDJBSG from 2011 to 2019 in a single institution.

RESULTS

A total of 337 patients underwent LDJBSG during this period. Reoperative surgery (RS) was required in 10LDJBSG patients (3%). The mean age and BMI before RS were 47 ± 9 years and 28.9 ± 3.6 kg/m2, respectively. The mean interval between primary surgery and RS for early (n = 5) and late (n = 5)complications was 8 ± 11 days and 32 ± 15.8 months, respectively. The conversion procedures were Roux-en-Y gastric bypass(n = 5), followed by Roux-en-Y duodenojejunal bypass (n = 2) and one-anastomosis gastric bypass (n = 1); other revision procedures were seromyotomy (n = 1) and re-laparoscopy (n = 1). Perioperative complications were observed in four patients after conversion surgery such as multiorgan failure (n = 1), re-laparoscopy (n = 1), marginal ulcer (n = 1), GERD (n = 1), and dumping syndrome (n = 1).

CONCLUSION

LDJBSG has low reoperative rates and conversion RYGB could effectively treat the early and late complications of LDJBSG. Because of its technical demands and risk of perioperative complications, conversion surgery should be reserved for a selected group of patients and performed by an experienced metabolic bariatric surgical team.

Challenges in the care and treatment of patients with extreme obesity

Obesity is a prevalent chronic disease. The management of extreme obesity - i.e., body mass index (BMI) ≥ 50 kg/m2 or obesity class IV and V - is still far from ideal. Individuals with extreme obesity have a high risk of surgical complications, mortality, comorbidities, and reduced weight loss following bariatric surgery. Although lifestyle changes and anti-obesity medications are recommended for all patients with extreme obesity as adjuvants to weight loss, these measures are less effective than bariatric surgery. As a first step, sleeve gastrectomy or an inpatient very-low-calorie diet should be incentivized to enhance weight loss before definitive surgery. Although malabsorptive procedures lead to greater weight loss, they are associated with an increased risk of early complications and malnutrition. Nonstandard techniques employed in clinical trial protocols, such as transit bipartition, may be performed as they maintain a weight loss potency comparable to that of the classic duodenal switch but with fewer nutritional problems. Anatomical causes should be investigated in patients with postoperative suboptimal clinical response or recurrent weight gain. In these cases, the initiation of anti-obesity drugs, endoscopic therapies, or a conversion procedure might be recommended. More studies are needed to address the specific population of patients with extreme obesity, as their outcomes are expected to be distinct from those of patients with lower BMI.

Laparoscopic Conversion of Gastric Plication to One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass

Laparoscopic gastric plication (LPG) is a restrictive procedure to reduce the size of the stomach by folding and suturing the stomach to decrease its capacity. LGP has a high revision rate, mostly to sleeve gastrectomy. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first such report on the bariatric population that has been never described before.The purpose of this video was to show the feasibility and safety, as well as the main technical aspects, of a laparoscopic conversion of gastric plication to One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass.

Pharmacological treatment of non-responders following bariatric surgery

Obesity is a complex chronic disease and requires a long-term multidisciplinary management. Even patients undergoing bariatric surgery, one the most effective treatments for obesity, can have insufficient weight loss (IWL) than expected (primary non responder) or weight regain (WR) after a successful primary procedure (secondary non responder). A poor response represents a challenge of bariatric surgery that can induce persistence or recurrence of obesity-related comorbidities, prejudicing benefits of surgery. Increasing evidence suggests that weight loss medications represent a useful strategy in obesity care also after bariatric surgery procedures. This narrative review summarizes the evidence concerning anti-obesity therapy in the management of no-responders to primary bariatric surgery. Available data on liraglutide (one randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial, three prospective and three retrospective studies), naltrexone/bupropion (three retrospective studies), orlistat (one case control prospective and one retrospective studies) and topiramate and phentermine (five retrospective studies) have been considered. Available data suggest that weight loss medications could offer a significant adjunctive benefit to lifestyle and behavioral modifications in the life-long management of obesity. Newer treatment modalities including the use of anti-obesity drugs provide patients and healthcare providers with more options in the management of poor response after bariatric surgery.

Medium and Long-Term Weight Loss After Revisional Bariatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Despite the current increase in revisional bariatric surgery (RBS), data on the sustainability of weight loss remain unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess weight loss outcomes in adult patients undergoing RBS with follow-up > 2 years. Twenty-eight observational studies (n = 2213 patients) were included. The %TWL was 27.2 (95%CI = 23.7 to 30.6), and there was a drop in BMI of 10.2 kg/m2 (95%CI =  - 11.6 to - 8.7). The %EWL was 54.8 (95%CI = 47.2 to 62.4) but with a high risk of publication bias (Egger's test = 0.003). The overall quality of evidence was very low. Our data reinforce that current evidence on RBS is mainly based on low-quality observational studies, and further higher-quality studies are needed to support evidence-based practice.

30-day morbidity and mortality of revisional bariatric surgery - An international multi-centre collaborative (BROAD) study

INTRODUCTION

Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) for insufficient weight loss/weight regain or metabolic relapse is increasing worldwide. There is currently no large multinational, prospective data on 30-day morbidity and mortality of RBS. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the 30-day morbidity and mortality of RBS at participating centres.

METHODS

An international steering group was formed to oversee the study. The steering group members invited bariatric surgeons worldwide to participate in this study. Ethical approval was obtained at the lead centre. Data were collected prospectively on all consecutive RBS patients operated between 15th May 2021 to 31st December 2021. Revisions for complications were excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 65 global centres submitted data on 750 patients. Sleeve gastrectomy (n = 369, 49.2 %) was the most common primary surgery for which revision was performed. Revisional procedures performed included Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in 41.1 % (n = 308) patients, One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) in 19.3 % (n = 145), Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG) in 16.7 % (n = 125) and other procedures in 22.9 % (n = 172) patients. Indications for revision included weight regain in 615(81.8 %) patients, inadequate weight loss in 127(16.9 %), inadequate diabetes control in 47(6.3 %) and diabetes relapse in 27(3.6 %). 30-day complications were seen in 80(10.7 %) patients. Forty-nine (6.5 %) complications were Clavien Dindo grade 3 or higher. Two patients (0.3 %) died within 30 days of RBS.

CONCLUSION

RBS for insufficient weight loss/weight regain or metabolic relapse is associated with 10.7 % morbidity and 0.3 % mortality. Sleeve gastrectomy is the most common primary procedure to undergo revisional bariatric surgery, while Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is the most commonly performed revision.

Five-year outcomes of revisional bariatric surgery: gastric band to sleeve gastrectomy or to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

BACKGROUND

Revisional bariatric surgery after an index adjustable gastric band (AGB) may be indicated to remedy weight relapse or band-related complications. We examined outcomes five years following revision from AGB to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (AGB-LSG) or to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (AGB-RYGB).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review to identify patients (men and women, age 18-80) who underwent one revisional bariatric procedure with AGB as the index procedure at two medical centers in our healthcare system between January 2012 and February 2017. We only included patients with a pre-revision BMI > 30 kg/m2 for whom 5-year follow-up data were available. We compared 5-year weight loss and remission of comorbidities in patients undergoing AGB-LSG and AGB-RYGB conversion.

RESULTS

A total of 114 patients met inclusion criteria (65 AGB-LSG, 49 AGB-RYGB). At 5-year post-revision, percent total weight loss (3.4% vs 19.9%; p < 0.001), percent excess weight loss (7.0% vs 50.8%; p < 0.001) and decrease in BMI (1.5 vs 8.8; p < 0.001) was greater in AGB-RYGB vs. AGB-LSG. No significant difference in remission or development of new comorbidities was observed.

CONCLUSION

Conversion of AGB to RYGB is associated with superior intermediate-term weight loss compared to conversion of AGB to LSG. Future multicenter studies with larger sample sizes are necessary to further describe the intermediate-term outcomes of revisional bariatric surgery.

Utilization of Anti-obesity Medications After Bariatric Surgery: Analysis of a Large National Database

PURPOSE

A significant proportion of patients experience insufficient weight loss or weight regain after bariatric surgery. There is a paucity of literature describing anti-obesity medication (AOM) use following bariatric surgery. We sought to identify prevalence and trends of AOM use following bariatric surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We utilized the IBM Explorys® database to identify all adults with prior bariatric surgery (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy). Those prescribed AOMs (semaglutide, liraglutide, topiramate, phentermine/topiramate, naltrexone/bupropion, orlistat) within 5 years of surgery were further identified. Data was analyzed to characterize AOM utilization among different age, demographic, and comorbid populations.

RESULTS

A total of 59,160 adults with prior bariatric surgery were included. Among AOMs studies, prevalence of use was highest for topiramate (8%), followed by liraglutide (2.9%), phentermine/topiramate (1.03%), naltrexone/bupropion (0.95%) semaglutide (0.52%), and orlistat (0.17%). Age distribution varied, with the highest utilization among those age 35-39 years for topiramate, 40-44 years for phentermine/topiramate and naltrexone/bupropion, 45-49 years for semaglutide, and 65-69 years for liraglutide and orlistat. African American race was associated with higher utilization across all AOMs. Among comorbidities, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes mellitus were most associated with AOM use.

CONCLUSION

Despite a relatively high incidence of weight regain, AOMs are underutilized following bariatric surgery. It is imperative that barriers to their use be addressed and that AOMs be considered earlier and more frequently in patients with insufficient weight loss or weight regain after bariatric surgery.

The risk and benefit of revisional vs. primary metabolic- bariatric surgery and drug therapy - A narrative review

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) leads to long-term weight loss, reduced risk of cardiovascular events and cancer, and reduced mortality. Sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass are currently the most common surgical techniques. Weight loss after MBS was previously believed to work through restriction and malabsorption, however, mechanistic studies show that MBS techniques with long term efficacy instead alter physiological signaling between the gut and the brain. In revisional MBS, the initial surgical technique is corrected, modified, or converted to a new one. The indication for revisional MBS can be to achieve further weight loss or improvement in obesity comorbidity, but it may be necessary due to complications (e.g., gastroesophageal reflux or obstruction). Revisional MBS is associated with an increased risk of surgical complications and often less weight loss compared to the results following primary surgery. This narrative review summarizes data from revisional MBS where information is often presented with inconsistent definitions for indications and outcomes, making comparison between strategies difficult. In summary, we suggest careful weighing of potential benefits and risks with revisional MBS, bearing in mind the option of add-on therapy with new anti-obesity drugs.

Marginal Ulcer Incidence and the Population of Gastrin Producing G cells Retained in the Gastric Pouch after Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Is There a Relationship?

INTRODUCTION

Marginal ulcers are the most prevalent endoscopic abnormality after RYGB. The etiology is still poorly understood; however, an increase in acid secretion has been strongly implicated as a causal agent. Although gastrin is the greatest stimulant of acid secretion, to date, the presence of gastrin producing G cells retained in the gastric pouch, related to the occurrence of marginal ulcers, has not been evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the density of G cells and parietal cells in the gastric pouch of RYGB patients with a diagnosis of marginal ulcer on the post-op EGD.

METHOD

We retrospectively evaluated 1104 gastric bypasses performed between 2010 and 2020. Patients with marginal ulcer who met the inclusion criteria and controls were selected from this same population. Endoscopic gastric pouch biopsies were evaluated using immunohistochemical study and HE staining to assess G cell and parietal cell density.

RESULTS

In total, 572 (51.8%) of the patients performed endoscopic follow-up after RYGB. The incidence of marginal ulcer was 23/572 (4%), and 3 patients required revision surgery due to a recalcitrant ulcer. The mean time for ulcer identification was 24.3 months (2-62). G cell count per high-power field (× 400) was statistically higher in the ulcer group (p < 0.05). There was no statistical difference in parietal cell density between groups (p 0.251).

CONCLUSION

Patients with a marginal ulcer after gastric bypass present a higher density of gastrin-producing G cells retained in the gastric pouch.

Patients' perspectives on weight recurrence after bariatric surgery: a single-center survey

BACKGROUND

Weight recurrence (WR) affects nearly 20% of patients after bariatric surgery and may decrease its benefits, affecting patients' quality of life negatively. Patient perspectives on WR are not well known.

OBJECTIVES

Assess patient needs, goals, and preferences regarding WR treatment.

SETTING

Single MBSAQIP-accredited academic center, and online recruitment.

METHODS

An 18-item, web-based survey was distributed to adults seeking treatment for WR after a primary bariatric surgery (PBS), in addition to online recruitment, between 2021 and 2023. Survey items included somatometric data, questions about the importance of factors for successful weight loss, procedure decision-making, and treatment expectations.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients with > 10% increase from their nadir weight were included in the study. Patients had initially undergone Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (62.5%), sleeve gastrectomy (28.6%), adjustable gastric banding (3.6%), or other procedures (5.3%). When assessing their satisfaction with PBS, 57.1% were somewhat/extremely satisfied, 33.9% somewhat/extremely dissatisfied, while 8.9% were ambivalent. Patients considered the expected benefits (for example, weight loss) as the most important factor when choosing a treatment option for WR. Patient goals included "feeling good about myself" (96.4% very/extremely important), "being able to resume activities I could not do before" (91% very/extremely important), and "improved quality of life" and "-life expectancy" (> 90% very/extremely important). Finally, RBS, lifestyle modification with peer support, and anti-obesity medication were ranked as first treatment options for WR by 40%, 38.8%, and 29.8% of the respondents, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients considered weight loss as the most important factor when choosing treatment modality for WR, with RBS and lifestyle changes being preferred over weight-loss medications. Large prospective randomized trials are needed to counsel this patient population better.

Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal bypass (SADI-S) as Primary or Two-Stage Surgery: Mid-Term Outcomes of a Single Canadian Bariatric Center

PURPOSE

Compare primary single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) and two-stage SADI after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in terms of weight loss, reduction/remission of comorbidities, and morbidity.

METHODS

Retrospective study including 179 patients treated laparoscopically between 2016 and 2020. A 50Fr bougie was used for the SG in the primary SADI-S (group 1) and 36/40Fr for the two-stage procedure (group 2). The duodeno-ileal anastomosis was performed at 250 cm from the ileocecal valve and at least 2 cm after the pylorus.

RESULTS

Mean age was 44.1 years old, and there were 148 women and 31 men. There were 67 (37.4%) patients in group 1 and 112 (62.6%) in group 2, with 67% completing the 4-year follow-up. Mean preoperative body mass index (BMI) was 51.1 kg/m2 and 44.6 kg/m2 for groups 1 and 2, respectively. Preoperative comorbidities were obstructive sleep apnea, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and dyslipidemia in 103 (57.5%), 93 (52%), 65 (36.3%), and 58 (32.4%) of cases. At 4 years postoperatively, excess weight loss (EWL) was 67.5% in group 1 and 67% in group 2 (p = 0.1005). Both groups had good comorbidity remission rates. Early postoperative morbidity rate was 10.4% in group 1 and 3.6% in group 2. In group1, there were mostly postoperative intra-abdominal hematomas managed conservatively (n = 4). Two revisional surgeries were needed for duodeno-ileal anastomosis leaks. Postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), daily diarrhea, vitamin, and protein levels were similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Both types of strategies are efficient at short and mid-term outcomes. Preoperative criteria will inform surgeon decision between a primary and a two-stage strategy.

The Trajectory of Revisional Bariatric Surgery: Open to Laparoscopic to Robotic

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is the most effective therapeutic intervention for patients with obesity, with sleeve gastrectomy (SG) being the most commonly performed primary MBS procedure. Long-term studies have demonstrated that 15-20% of patients require revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) due to weight-related issues or surgical complications. Despite the gold standard being laparoscopic revision, there are other available approaches such as open or robotic-assisted. An extensive literature review was performed for articles from their inception to February 2024. A descriptive review of MBS procedures (SG, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), single anastomosis duodeno-ileostomy (SADI) and biliopancreatic diversion-duodenal switch (BPD-DS)) was carried out to report and compare outcomes between primary and revisional bariatric surgery. A similar review was conducted to compare outcomes of revisional approaches (open, laparoscopic, robotic). RYGB remains the dominant RBS with a similar safety profile compared to revisional SADI and BPD-DS. In terms of the RBS surgical approach, all three options showed comparable short and long-term outcomes, with robotic RBS being associated with longer operative time and variable length of stay. Additional long-term studies are required to further validate our conclusions.

Interaction Effects of FTO and MC4R Polymorphisms on Total Body Weight Loss, Post-Surgery Weight, and Post-Body Mass Index after Bariatric Surgery

Bariatric surgery (BS) is considered the most effective intervention for patients with severe obesity and is used to maintain long-term weight loss and glycemic control. The aim of this study was to analyze the effects of genotypes and haplotypes of the fat mass and obesity-associated (FTO) and melanocortin 4 receptor (MC4R) genes on total body weight loss (TBWL), post-surgery weight, and post-BMI after bariatric surgery. We retrospectively selected 101 patients from Bajio High Specialty Regional Hospital, León Guanajuato, México, who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) to determine their body mass index (BMI), blood pressure, biochemical characteristics, and comorbidities. Post-surgery, patients were referred for registered anthropometry and blood pressure. Glucose, lipid and hepatic profiles, and insulin, leptin, and ghrelin levels were measured, and rs9939609, rs9930506, and rs1421085 FTO and rs17782313 MC4R polymorphisms were genotyped. Six (4-8) years after BS, post-surgery weight was greater in carriers of the rs9939609 and rs1421085 risk genotypes. TBWL was lower for the rs9930506 and rs1421085 risk genotypes. Insulin and HOMA-IR were greater in patients with the three FTO polymorphisms. There were significant interaction effects of the rs9930506 and rs1421085 FTO risk genotypes on weight and BMI in response to BS. No association was found with the MC4R polymorphism. The genotypes and haplotypes of the FTO gene influence post-surgery weight, TBWL, insulin levels, and HOMA-IR.

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as Revisional Surgery Following Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most performed metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) worldwide, some patients require conversional procedures due to weight recurrence or late complications. Recently, one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) gained popularity as a viable option to address those problems. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the safety and efficacy of conversional OAGB after primary SG in the management of patients with obesity.

METHODS

Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for articles from their inception to February 2023 by two independent reviewers using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) system. The review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42023403528).

RESULTS

From 1,117 studies screened, twenty studies met the eligibility criteria, with a total of 1,057 patients with obesity undergoing conversional OAGB after primary SG. The mean age ranged from 28.2 to 49.5 years, and 744 patients (75.2%) were women. At one year after revisional OAGB, the pooled mean percent excess weight loss (%EWL) was 65.2% (95%CI: 56.9, 73.4, I2 = 97%). The pooled mean %EWL after conversional OAGB was 71.1% (95%CI: 62.2, 80.0, I2 = 90%) at two years and 71.6% (95%CI: 61.0, 82.2, I2 = 50%) at five years. Additionally, resolution rates of diabetes and hypertension were 65.4% (95%CI: 0.522, 0.785, I2 = 65%) and 58.9% (95%CI: 0.415, 0.762, I2 = 89%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis demonstrated OAGB as an effective conversional procedure after primary SG in terms of weight loss and obesity-associated medical problems for selected patients. Despite the promising results, further randomized controlled studies with larger sample sizes and more extended follow-up periods are necessary to determine if the OAGB is the best conversional surgery after SG.

The outcomes of Re-Redo bariatric surgery-results from multicenter Polish Revision Obesity Surgery Study (PROSS)

The increasing prevalence of bariatric surgery has resulted in a rise in the number of redo procedures as well. While redo bariatric surgery has demonstrated its effectiveness, there is still a subset of patients who may not derive any benefits from it. This poses a significant challenge for bariatric surgeons, especially when there is a lack of clear guidelines. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of patients who underwent Re-Redo bariatric surgery. We conducted a retrospective cohort study on a group of 799 patients who underwent redo bariatric surgery between 2010 and 2020. Among these patients, 20 individuals underwent a second elective redo bariatric surgery (Re-Redo) because of weight regain (15 patients) or insufficient weight loss, i.e. < 50% EWL (5 patients). Mean BMI before Re-Redo surgery was 38.8 ± 4.9 kg/m2. Mean age was 44.4 ± 11.5 years old. The mean %TWL before and after Re-Redo was 17.4 ± 12.4% and %EBMIL was 51.6 ± 35.9%. 13/20 patients (65%) achieved > 50% EWL. The mean final %TWL was 34.2 ± 11.1% and final %EBMIL was 72.1 ± 20.8%. The mean BMI after treatment was 31.9 ± 5.3 kg/m2. Complications occurred in 3 of 20 patients (15%), with no reported mortality or need for another surgical intervention. The mean follow-up after Re-Redo was 35.3 months. Although Re-Redo bariatric surgery is an effective treatment for obesity, it carries a significant risk of complications.

Management of Malnutrition and Hepatic Impairment After Duodenal Switch

BACKGROUND

Malnutrition and liver impairment after duodenal switch (DS) are possible and undesired complications, often conservatively treated. However, in specific cases, surgical revision may be necessary. This study aims to describe outcomes achieved by two bariatric surgery centers and address effectiveness and safety of revisional surgical procedures to resolve these complications.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed in two bariatric surgery centers from 2008 to 2022. Patients who required revisional surgery to treat malnutrition and/or liver impairment refractory to nutritional and total parenteral nutrition intervention (TPN) after duodenal switch were included. No comparisons were performed due to the descriptive nature of this study.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients underwent revisional surgery, the mean age was 44.7, the 53.8% were females, and the mean preoperative BMI was 54.7 kg/m2; the mean time between DS and revisional procedure was 26.5 months, and 69.1% of patients were placed on TPN. One patient developed hepatic encephalopathy; one patient presented with ascites, pleural effusion, and renal insufficiency, undergoing reoperation after revisional procedure due to a perforated ileal loop. Mortality rate was 0%; all patients regained weight after the revisional procedure, and the mean total protein and albumin blood levels 12 months after surgery were 6.3 and 3.6 g/dl, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

While refractory malnutrition and/or liver failure are rare among patients post-DS, if underdiagnosed and untreated, this can lead to irreversible outcomes and death. All revisional procedures included in this study resulted in improvement of the nutritional status and reversal of liver impairment, with low complication rates.

Revisional bariatric surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease: characterizing patient and procedural factors and 30-day outcomes for a retrospective cohort of 4412 patients

INTRODUCTION

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a well-established potential consequence of bariatric surgery and can require revisional surgery. Our understanding of the population requiring revision is limited. In this study, we aim to characterize patients requiring revisional surgery for GERD to understand their perioperative risks and identify strategies to improve their outcomes.

METHODS

Using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) registry, a retrospective cohort of patients who required revisional surgery for GERD in 2020 was identified. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to assess correlations between baseline characteristics and morbidity.

RESULTS

4412 patients required revisional surgery for GERD, encompassing 24% of all conversion procedures. In most cases, patients underwent sleeve gastrectomy (SG) as their original surgery (n = 3535, 80.1%). The revisional surgery for most patients was a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (n = 3722, 84.4%). Major complications occurred in 527 patients (11.9%) and 10 patients (0.23%) died within 30 days of revisional surgery. Major complications included anastomotic leak in 31 patients (0.70%) and gastrointestinal bleeding in 38 patients (0.86%). Multivariable analyses revealed that operative length, pre-operative antacid use, and RYGB were predictors of major complications.

CONCLUSION

GERD is the second most common indication for revisional surgery in patients who have undergone bariatric surgery. Patients who underwent SG as their initial procedure were the primary group who required revisional surgery for GERD; most underwent revision via RYGB. Further inquiry is needed to tailor operative approaches and pre-operative optimization for revisional surgery patients.

Effect of Primary Versus Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) on Fatty Acid Profile

INTRODUCTION

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is one option of a revisional procedure for failed sleeve gastrectomy. Moreover, it can be used as a primary bariatric procedure, and is an effective surgery resulting in significant weight loss and the resolution or improvement of obesity-associated medical problems, accompanied by low perioperative complications. However, as with any therapy, OAGB has its limitations, including micronutrient deficiency or malnutrition. In our study, we compared the fatty acid (FA) profile in serum of patients after both primary OAGB (pOAGB) and revisional OAGB (rOAGB) to identify potential postsurgical FA alterations.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study on patients with obesity who underwent OAGB procedures (pOAGB n=68; rOAGB n=17), conducted from 2016 to 2018. In blood, we analyzed a series of biochemical parameters, and in the serum, the FA profile was determined using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

The percentage of excess BMI loss (% EBMIL) after pOAGB was 73.5 ± 2.47% in comparison to 45.9 ± 4.15% in the rOAGB group (p<0.001). In contrast to the lack of effect of rOAGB on most polyunsaturated FAs, in the pOAGB group, there was a decrease in eicosapentaenoic acid, and eicosatetraenoic and docosahexaenoic acid levels (p<0.001). We also found a decrease in very long-chain FAs (VLCFAs) and an increase in branched-chain FAs (BCFAs) after both types of OAGB procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Both OAGB procedures improved the profile of most FAs, leading to a decrease in VLCFAs, which are considered harmful, and an improvement in BCFAs, which are considered to be beneficial. There is a need to further investigate the possibility of n-3 polyunsaturated FA supplementation after pOAGB, due to the large decrease in these FAs after pOAGB.

Bariatric Surgery in Obesity: Metabolic Quality Analysis and Comparison of Surgical Options

Obesity is a constantly growing health problem which reduces quality of life and life expectancy. Bariatric surgery (BS) for obesity is considered when all other conservative treatment modalities have failed. Comparison of the multidisciplinary programs with BS regarding to the weight loss showed that substantial and durable weight reduction have been achieved only with bariatric surgical treatments. Although laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is the most popular BS, it has high long-term failure rates, and it is claimed that one of every three patients will undergo another bariatric procedure within a 10-year period. Although BS provides weight loss and improvement of metabolic comorbidities, in long-term follow-up, weight gain is observed in half of the patients, while decrease in bone mass and nutritional deficiencies occur in up to 90%. Moreover, despite significant weight loss, several psychological aspects of patients are worsened in comparison to preoperative levels. Nearly one-fifth of postoperative patients with "Loss-of-eating control" meet food addiction criteria. Therefore, the benefits of weight loss following bariatric procedures alone are still debated in terms of the proinflammatory and metabolic profile of obesity.

The length of hospital stay following bariatric surgery in Australia: the impact of patient, procedure, system and surgeon

BACKGROUND

The length of a patient's stay (LOS) in a hospital is one metric used to compare the quality of care, as a longer LOS may flag higher complication rates or less efficient processes. A meaningful comparison of LOS can only occur if the expected average length of stay (ALOS) is defined first. This study aimed to define the expected ALOS of primary and conversion bariatric surgery in Australia and to quantify the effect of patient, procedure, system, and surgeon factors on ALOS.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study of prospectively maintained data from the Bariatric Surgery Registry of 63 604 bariatric procedures performed in Australia. The primary outcome measure was the expected ALOS for primary and conversion bariatric procedures. The secondary outcome measures quantified the change in ALOS for bariatric surgery resulting from patient, procedure, hospital, and surgeon factors.

RESULTS

Uncomplicated primary bariatric surgery had an ALOS (SD) of 2.30 (1.31) days, whereas conversion procedures had an ALOS (SD) of 2.71 (2.75) days yielding a mean difference (SEM) in ALOS of 0.41 (0.05) days, P < 0.001. The occurrence of any defined adverse event extended the ALOS of primary and conversion procedures by 1.14 days (CI 95% 1.04-1.25), P < 0.001 and 2.33 days (CI 95% 1.54-3.11), P < 0.001, respectively. Older age, diabetes, rural home address, surgeon operating volume and hospital case volume increased the ALOS following bariatric surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings have defined Australia's expected ALOS following bariatric surgery. Increased patient age, diabetes, rural living, procedural complications and surgeon and hospital case volume exerted a small but significant increase in ALOS.

STUDY TYPE

Retrospective observational study of prospectively collected data.

Experience of Robotic Complex Revisional Bariatric Surgery in a High-Volume Center

PURPOSE

A revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) is necessary in about 28% of the patients. The role of robotic surgery in RBS is still a subject of debate. We aim to report the outcomes of robotic-assisted RBS at our institution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We identified patients who underwent robotic-assisted RBSs between January 1, 2016, and May 31, 2022. We analyzed patient demographics and indications for surgery. Measured outcomes included peri- and postoperative morbidity, comorbidity management, and weight loss outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 106 patients were included. Primary procedures were adjustable gastric band 44 (41.5%), sleeve gastrectomy 42 (39.6%), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) 18 (17%), duodenal switch (DS) 1 (0.9%), and vertical banded gastroplasty 1 (0.9%). RBSs performed included 85 (78.7%) RYGB, 16 (14.8%) redo-gastrojejunostomy, and 5 (4.6%) DS. The median time to revision was 8 (range 1-36) years, and the main indication was insufficient weight loss (49%). Median length of hospital stay was 2 (range 1-16) days, and 9 (8.5%) patients were readmitted during the first 30 days. Only 4 (3.7%) patients had early Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher adverse events. No anastomotic leaks were documented. Median excess weight loss was 35.1%, 42.23%, and 45.82% at the 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up. Of 57 patients with hypertension, 29 (50.9%) reduced their medication dosage, and 20/27 (74.1%) reduced their diabetes mellitus medication dosage. Finally, of the 75 patients with symptoms, 64 (85.3%) reported an improvement after the RBS.

CONCLUSION

Robotic-assisted RBS is feasible, significantly improves patients' comorbidities and symptoms, and leads to considerable weight loss.

Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery in People With Human Immunodeficiency Virus: A Retrospective Analysis From the ATHENA Cohort

BACKGROUND

The implications of bariatric surgery (BS) on virologic and metabolic outcomes in people with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV; PWH) on antiretroviral therapy (ART) are unknown.

METHODS

Here, we report a retrospective analysis up to 18 months post-BS in PWH from the AIDS Therapy evaluation in The Netherlands (ATHENA) cohort with data from all dutch HIV treating Centers. Primary end points were a confirmed virologic failure (2 consecutive HIV-RNA measurements >200 copies/mL) and the percentage of patients who achieved >20% total body weight loss up to 18 months post-BS. Switches from baseline ART and trough plasma concentrations of antiretrovirals were also reported post-BS. Metabolic parameters and medication usage were compared pre- and post-BS.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients were included. One case of confirmed virologic failure and 3 cases with viral blips were detected in this cohort up to 18 months post-BS. Eighty-five percent of patients achieved >20% total body weight loss at 18 months post-BS, with a mean difference from baseline (95% confidence interval) of -33.5% (-37.7% to -29.3%). Trough plasma concentrations of measured antiretroviral agents were all above minimum effective concentrations, except for 1 sample of darunavir. Lipid profiles, but not serum creatinine and blood pressure, improved significantly (P < .01) post-BS. Total medications and obesity-related comedications declined from 203 to 103 and from 62 to 25, respectively, at 18 months post-BS.

CONCLUSIONS

BS was an effective intervention for weight loss and lipid control in PWH using ART in this cohort with no clear link to poor virologic outcomes.

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy as revisional bariatric procedures after adjustable gastric banding: a retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The frequency of revisional bariatric surgery is increasing, but its effectiveness and safety are not yet fully established. The aim of our study was to compare short-term outcomes of primary (pRYGB and pSG) and revisional bariatric surgeries (rRYGB and rSG).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study assessing all patients submitted to primary and revisional (after a failed AGB) RYGB and SG in 2019. Each patient was followed-up at 6 months and 12 months after surgery. We compared pRYGB vs. rRYGB, pSG vs. rSG and rRYGB vs. rSG on weight loss, surgical complications, and resolution of comorbidities.

RESULTS

We assessed 494 patients, of which 18.8% had undergone a revisional procedure. Higher weight loss at 6 and 12 months was observed in patients undergoing primary vs. revisional procedures. Patients submitted to rRYGB lost more weight than those with rSG (%EWL 12 months = 82.6% vs. 69.0%, p < 0.001). Regarding the resolution of obesity-related comorbidities, diabetes resolution was more frequent in pRYGB than rRYGB (54.2% vs. 25.0%; p = 0.038). Also, 41.7% of the patients who underwent rRYGB had dyslipidemia resolution vs. 0% from the rSG group (p = 0.035). Dyslipidemia resolution was also more common in pSG vs. rSG (68.6% vs. 0.0%; p = 0.001). No significant differences in surgical complications were found.

CONCLUSION

Revisional bariatric surgery is effective and safe treating obesity and related comorbidities after AGB. Primary procedures appear to be associated with better weight loss outcomes. Further prospective studies are needed to better understand the role of revisional bariatric surgery.

Revisional Bariatric Surgery due to Complications: Indications and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The increasing prevalence of bariatric procedures has led to a surge in revisional surgeries. Failure of bariatric surgery can be attributed to inadequate weight loss or complications necessitating revisional surgery. In this study, we investigated the indications and outcomes of revisional surgery due to complications following primary bariatric surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted using data from the Tehran Obesity Treatment Study, which included patients who underwent revisional bariatric surgery between March 2013 and September 2021 due to complications following primary bariatric surgery.

RESULTS

Of the 5382 patients who underwent primary bariatric surgery (sleeve gastrectomy, one-anastomosis gastric bypass, and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass), 203 (3.70%) required revisional surgery, with 37 cases performed due to surgical complications. The indications of revisional operations were gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (n=17, 45.9%), protein-calorie malnutrition (PCM) (n=14, 37.8%), unexplained abdominal pain (n=5, 13.5%), and phytobezoar (n=1, 0.03%). In the postoperative follow-up, most patients exhibited improvement in signs and symptoms related to underlying causes. However, eight patients experienced early or late complications of grade III or higher according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, with one death resulting from liver failure.

CONCLUSION

Revisional bariatric surgery may effectively address complications from primary bariatric surgery, with the majority of patients experiencing improvements in symptoms. While the overall incidence of revisional surgery due to complications is relatively low, our findings suggest that GERD and PCM are the most common indications for revisional surgery.

Trends and safety of bariatric revisional surgery in Italy: multicenter, prospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) represents a further solution for patients who experience inadequate weight loss (IWL) following primary bariatric surgery (BS) or significant weight regain (WR) following initial satisfactory response. RBS guidelines are lacking; however, an increased trend in further BS offerings has been reported recently.

OBJECTIVE

Analyze trend, mortality, complication, readmission, and reoperation rates for any reason at 30 days after RBS in Italy.

SETTING

Ten Italian high-volume BS centers (university hospitals and private centers).

METHODS

Prospective, observational, multicenter study enrolling patients undergoing RBS between October 1, 2021, and March 31, 2022, registering reasons for RBS, technique, mortality, intraoperative and perioperative complications, readmissions, and reinterventions for any reason. Patients undergoing RBS during the same calendar interval in 2016-2020 were considered control patients.

RESULTS

A total of 220 patients were enrolled and compared with 560 control-group patients. Mortality was .45% versus .35% (n.s), with an overall mortality of .25%, while open surgery or conversion to open surgery was registered in 1%. No difference was found for mortality, morbidity, complications, readmission (1.3%), and reoperation rates (2.2%). IWL/WR was the most frequent cause, followed by gastroesophageal reflux disease; Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was the most used revisional procedure (56%). Sleeve gastrectomy was the most revised procedure in the study group, while gastric banding was the most revised in the control group. RBS represents up to 9% of the total BS in the Italian participating centers.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopy represents the standard approach for RBS, which appears safe. Current Italian trends show a shift toward sleeve gastrectomy being the most revised procedure and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass being the most frequent revisional procedure.

Outcome of Revisional Bariatric Surgery After Failed Sleeve Gastrectomy: a German Multicenter Study

PURPOSE

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is a common bariatric procedure that has been shown to be effective in both the short and long term, but it is not without risks, some of which necessitate revision or redo surgery (RS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

GBSR (German Bariatric Surgery Registry) data were evaluated in this multicenter analysis. Short-term results (1-year follow-up) of RS (Re-Sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, RYGB, Omega-loop gastric bypass, OLGB, and duodenal switch, DS) following primary SG (n = 27939) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of PSG patients, 7.9% (n=2195) needed revision surgery. Nine hundred ninety-four patients underwent the aforementioned four surgical procedures (95 with R-SG, 665 with RYGB, 141 with OLGB, and 93 DS). Loss of follow-up within 1 year 52.44%. The most common reasons for RS were weight regain and/or a worsening of preexisting comorbidities. Regarding the operating time, R-SG was the shortest of the four procedures, and DS was the longest. In general, there were no significant advantages of one procedure over another in terms of complication incidence in these categories. However, certain complications were seen more often after R-SG and DS than with other redo procedures. There were significant differences in BMI reduction 1 year after surgery (RYGB: 5.9; DS: 10.1; OLGB: 9.1; and R-SG: 9.1; p<0.001). GERD, hypertension, and sleep apnea demonstrated statistically significant comorbidity remission. Diabetes exhibited non-significant differences.

CONCLUSION

According to the findings of our study, all revision surgeries effectively resolved comorbidities, promoted weight loss, and lowered BMI. Due to the disparate outcomes obtained by various methods, this study cannot recommend a particular redo method as the gold standard. Selecting a procedure should consider the redo surgery's aims, the rationale for the revision, the patient's current state, and their medical history.

Is one-anastomosis gastric bypass a good revisional bariatric surgery? A single-center retrospective cohort study

<b><br>Introduction:</b> The rate of revisional surgeries following sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has increased. One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) appears to have multiple advantages as a primary bariatric procedure. OAGB as revisional surgery is still being investigated.</br> <b><br>Aim:</b> Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of OAGB performed as a post-SG revisional surgery.</br> <b><br>Materials and methods:</b> A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted using a routinely collected database of adults undergoing revisional OAGB after SG. A survey of patients was conducted, obtaining information on changes in body weight and improvement in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and obesity-related diseases.</br> <b><br>Results:</b> The study group included 74 patients: 59 women (80%) and 15 men, mean age of 41.61 9.21 years. The most common indication for OAGB was weight regain. The follow-up was up to 7 years, the mean time was 3.58 1.21 years. The mean preoperative body mass index (BMI) was 40.38 6.15. All patients experienced significant weight loss, reaching a BMI of 33.61 (27.28- 37.13) at the last observation. After surgery, 35% of patients achieved successful weight loss and 48% of patients achieved remission or improvement of GERD.</br> <b><br>Conclusions:</b> Revisional OAGB seems to be a good alternative after a failed SG in terms of obesity-related disease recurrence, not of weight regain. Long-term follow-up revealed that only a third of patients achieved successful weight loss. When proposing revisional OAGB, the risk of complications - mainly anemia and the possibility of de novo GERD should be considered.</br>.

Non-response After Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy-the Theoretical Need for Revisional Bariatric Surgery: Results from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry

BACKGROUND

Revisional surgery is a second-line treatment option after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and gastric bypass (GBP) in patients with primary or secondary non-response. The aim was to analyze the theoretical need for revisional surgery after SG and GBP when applying four indication benchmarks.

METHOD

Based on data from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry, SG and GBP were compared regarding four endpoints: 1. excess weight loss (%EWL) < 50%, 2. weight regain of more than 10 kg after nadir, 3. fulfillment of previous IFSO-guidelines, or 4. ADA criteria for bariatric metabolic surgery 2 years after primary surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 60,426 individuals were included in the study (SG: n = 7856 and GBP: n = 52,570). Compared to patients in the GBP group, more SG patients failed to achieve a %EWL > 50% (23.0% versus 8.5%, p < .001), regained more than 10 kg after nadir (4.3% versus 2.5%, p < .001), and more often fulfilled the IFSO criteria (8.0% versus 4.5%, p < .001) or the ADA criteria (3.3% versus 1.8%, p < 001) at the 2-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

SG is associated with a higher risk for weight non-response compared to GBP. To offer revisional bariatric surgery to all non-responders exceeds the bounds of feasibility and operability. Hence, individual prioritization and intensified evaluation of alternative second-line treatments are necessary.

How to address weight regain after bariatric surgery in an individualized way

Bariatric surgery is the most effective obesity treatment. As a chronic and progressive disease, weight loss response to surgery will vary individually. Thus, insufficient weight loss or regain can happen after surgery, but they lack a standard definition. There are different mechanisms underlying weight regain and/or insufficient weight loss, such as genetics, maladaptive eating behaviors, and the inadequate choice of index operations, among others. Patients with weight regain or insufficient weight loss should be submitted to an individualized and comprehensive evaluation by a multidisciplinary team. This may help identify the causes and direct the appropriate treatment individually. Options for patients with insufficient weight loss and/or weight regain following bariatric surgery include repair of postoperative complications, conversion into another operation, endoscopic therapies with inconsistent outcomes, and dietary/behavioral counseling. Revision and conversion surgeries have higher complication rates than primary operations. Although there is no standard pharmacological regimen for that indication, the new agents seem efficient and safe to promote the loss of the regained weight and even be adjunctive to selected patients before they reach the plateau. This review aims to summarize the knowledge of the best approach for patients with weight regain/insufficient weight loss and suggests an algorithm to customize the approach and therapeutic options after bariatric surgery.

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.

Bariatric Surgeon Perspective on Revisional Bariatric Surgery (RBS) for Weight Recurrence

BACKGROUND

Weight recurrence (WR) after bariatric surgery occurs in nearly 20% of patients. Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) may benefit this population but remains controversial among surgeons.

OBJECTIVES

Explore surgeon perspectives and practices for patients with WR after primary bariatric surgery (PBS).

SETTING

Web-based survey of bariatric surgeons.

METHODS

A 21-item survey was piloted and posted on social media closed groups (Facebook) utilized by bariatric surgeons. Survey items included demographic information, questions pertaining to the definition of suboptimal and satisfactory response to bariatric surgery, and general questions related to different WR management options.

RESULTS

One hundred ten surgeons from 19 countries responded to the survey. Ninety-eight percent responded that WR was multifactorial, including behavioral and biological factors. Failure of PBS was defined as excess weight loss < 50% by 31.4%, as excess weight loss <25% by 12.8%, and as comorbidity recurrence by 17.4%. Surgeon responses differed significantly by gender (P = .036). 29.4% believed RBS was not successful, while 14.1% were unsure. Nevertheless, 73% reported that they would perform RBS if sufficient evidence of benefit existed. Most frequently performed revisional procedures included conversion of sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), adjustable gastric band to RYGB, and RYGB revision (21.9% versus 18.2% versus 15.3%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This survey demonstrates significant variability in surgeon perception regarding causes and the effectiveness of RBS. Moreover, they disagree on what constitutes a nonsatisfactory response to PBS and to whom they offer RBS. These findings may relate to limited available clinical evidence on best management options for this patient population. Clinical trials investigating the comparative effectiveness of various treatment options are needed.

Bariatric Surgeries, from Weight Loss to Weight Regain: A Retrospective Five-Years Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Bariatric surgery may lead to unsatisfactory weight loss, weight loss plateau, and even weight regain after various types of surgery. Despite the numerous studies, the mid-term results of surgery, after repetitive weight fluctuations remain a major concern. The aim of the present study was to determine the key time points of weight changes after three types of bariatric procedures, as well as to determine 5-year weight loss outcome after surgery.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study including patients with morbid obesity conducted in the Minimally Invasive Surgery Research Center. The patients underwent one of the three types of bariatric surgeries including laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), who had been followed up for weight loss trend during 5 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

The mean excessive weight loss (%EWL) and total weight loss (%TWL) of 2,567 participants with obesity (mean age = 39.03, mean BMI = 45.67) in the first 6 months after surgery was independent of the type of surgery (p > 0.05). OAGB and RYGB showed significantly higher weight loss compared to LSG in ninth and 24th month after surgery, respectively (p < 0.05). The 5 years %WL could be comparable with %WL in 6, 9, and 12 months after LSG, RYGB, and OAGB, respectively.

CONCLUSION

OAGB provides the fastest and highest %EWL and %TWL, while LSG induced the earliest and largest weight plateau and weight regain during 5-years post-surgery. The pattern of early weight loss could predict the mid-term outcome of bariatric surgery. So, early identification of suboptimal weight loss could enhance long-term weight loss.

Weight-Related Outcomes After Revisional Bariatric Surgery in Patients with Non-response After Sleeve Gastrectomy-a Systematic Review

Weight non-response after sleeve gastrectomy is an emerging issue. This systematic review compared revisional procedures for weight-related outcomes. We searched several databases for relevant articles and included adult patients with revisional bariatric procedures after primary sleeve gastrectomy. Twelve trials with 1046 patients were included, covering five revisional procedures. There were no randomised controlled trials, and 10 studies had a critical risk of bias. Significant variations in inclusion criteria, therapy benchmarks, follow-up schemes, and outcome measurements were observed, preventing meaningful comparison of results. Evidence-based treatment strategies for weight non-response after sleeve gastrectomy cannot be deduced from the current literature. Prospective studies with well-defined indications, standardised techniques, and strict adherence to outcome measurements are needed.

Preoperative Depression Status and 5 Year Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Outcomes in the PCORnet Bariatric Study Cohort

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether depression status before metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) influenced 5-year weight loss, diabetes, and safety/utilization outcomes in the PCORnet Bariatric Study.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Research on the impact of depression on MBS outcomes is inconsistent with few large, long-term studies.

METHODS

Data were extracted from 23 health systems on 36,871 patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy (SG; n=16,158) or gastric bypass (RYGB; n=20,713) from 2005-2015. Patients with and without a depression diagnosis in the year before MBS were evaluated for % total weight loss (%TWL), diabetes outcomes, and postsurgical safety/utilization (reoperations, revisions, endoscopy, hospitalizations, mortality) at 1, 3, and 5 years after MBS.

RESULTS

27.1% of SG and 33.0% of RYGB patients had preoperative depression, and they had more medical and psychiatric comorbidities than those without depression. At 5 years of follow-up, those with depression, versus those without depression, had slightly less %TWL after RYGB, but not after SG (between group difference = 0.42%TWL, P = 0.04). However, patients with depression had slightly larger HbA1c improvements after RYGB but not after SG (between group difference = - 0.19, P = 0.04). Baseline depression did not moderate diabetes remission or relapse, reoperations, revision, or mortality across operations; however, baseline depression did moderate the risk of endoscopy and repeat hospitalization across RYGB versus SG.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with depression undergoing RYGB and SG had similar weight loss, diabetes, and safety/utilization outcomes to those without depression. The effects of depression were clinically small compared to the choice of operation.