Safety of one-step conversion of gastric band to sleeve: a comparative analysis of ACS-NSQIP data

Long-term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy as a Revisional Procedure Following Adjustable Gastric Banding: Variations in Outcomes Based on Indication

BACKGROUND

Significant controversy exists regarding the indications and outcomes after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) conversions to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

AIM

To comprehensively determine the long-term outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy as a revisional procedure after LAGB across a range of measures and determine predictors of outcomes.

METHODS

Six hundred revision LSG (RLSG) and 1200 controls (primary LSG (PLSG)) were included. Patient demographics, complications, follow-up, and patient-completed questionnaires were collected.

RESULTS

RLSG vs controls; females 87% vs 78.8%, age 45 ± 19.4 vs 40.6 ± 10.6 years, p = 0.561; baseline weight 119.7 ± 26.2 vs 120.6 ± 26.5 kg p = 0.961). Follow-up was 87% vs 89.3%. Weight loss in RLSG at 5 years, 22.9% vs 29.6% TBWL, p = 0.001, 10 years: 19.5% vs 27% TBWL, p = 0.001. RLSG had more complications (4.8 vs 2.0% RR 2.4, p = 0.001), re-admissions (4.3 vs 2.4% RR 1.8, p = 0.012), staple line leaks (2.5 vs 0.9%, p = 0.003). Eroded bands and baseline weight were independent predictors of complications after RLSG. Long-term re-operation rate was 7.3% for RLSG compared to 3.2% in controls. Severe oesophageal dysmotility predicted poor weight loss. RLSG reported lower quality of life scores (SF-12 physical component scores 75.9 vs 88%, p = 0.001), satisfaction (69 vs 93%, p = 0.001) and more frequent regurgitation (58% vs 42%, p = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

RLSG provides long-term weight loss, although peri-operative complications are significantly elevated compared to PLSG. Longer-term re-operation rates are elevated compared to PLSG. Four variables predicted worse outcomes: eroded band, multiple prior bands, severe oesophageal dysmotility and elevated baseline weight.

Medium Term Outcomes of Revision Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy after Gastric Banding: A Propensity Score Matched Study

PURPOSE

Revision bariatric surgery may be undertaken after weight loss failure and/or complications following primary bariatric surgery. This study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of revision laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (RLSG) after gastric banding (GB) to those of primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (PLSG).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective, propensity-score matched study was conducted to compare between PLSG (control) patients and RLSG after GB (treatment) patients. Patients were matched using 2:1 nearest neighbor propensity score matching without replacement. Patients were compared on weight loss outcomes and postoperative complications for up to five years.

RESULTS

144 PLSG patients were compared against 72 RLSG patients. At 36 months, PLSG patients had significantly higher mean %TWL than RLSG patients (27.4 ± 8.6 [9.3-48.9]% vs. 17.9 ± 10.2 [1.7-36.3]%, p < 0.01). At 60 months, both groups had similar mean %TWL (16.6 ± 8.1 [4.6-31.3]% vs. 16.2 ± 6.0 [8.8-22.4)]%, p > 0.05). Early functional complication rates were slightly higher with PLSG (13.9% vs. 9.7%), but late functional complication rates were comparatively higher with RLSG (50.0% vs. 37.5%). The differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Both early (0.7% vs 4.2%) and late (3.5% vs 8.3%) surgical complication rates were lower in PLSG patients compared to RLSG patients but did not reach statistical significance (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

RLSG after GB has poorer weight loss outcomes than PLSG in the short-term. Although RLSG may carry higher risks of functional complications, the safety of RLSG and PLSG are overall comparable.

Revisional Surgery After Adjustable Gastric Banding: Sleeve Gastrectomy or Gastric Bypass?

Adjustable gastric banding was the most common type of bariatric surgery performed in Korea prior to 2019. Many patients that have undergone this procedure require revisional bariatric surgery while removing the gastric band, and it is important to select an appropriate revisional procedure. If reoperation is performed owing to insufficient weight loss or weight regain, a 1-step procedure can be considered. However, a 2-step procedure is preferred when complications such as band erosion or stomach perforation have occurred. Previous studies from Western countries have shown that revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) can achieve more effective postoperative weight loss than revisional sleeve gastrectomy, although this procedure may also carry a higher risk of morbidity, reoperation, and readmission to hospital. In Korea, the short-term outcomes of the 2 procedures may be similar. However, the potential risk of gastric cancer in the remnant stomach after RYGB must also be considered. The type of revisional surgery should be selected following discussions with the patient regarding the advantages and disadvantages associated with each procedure.

Safety and effectiveness of 1-stage conversion of adjustable gastric band-to-sleeve gastrectomy: a single-institution case-control study

BACKGROUND

Patients are increasingly referred for conversion of laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The safety of a 1- versus 2-stage approach to this revision is debated.

OBJECTIVES

We examined the safety and efficacy of 1-stage conversion of LAGB to SG at our institution.

SETTING

University hospital.

METHODS

An institutional database was used to retrospectively identify patients who underwent single-stage LAGB-to-SG conversion between 2010 and 2018. Patients were matched 1:1 for age, sex, and body mass index with primary SG patients during this same period. Primary endpoints were operative time, complication rate, length of hospital say, and weight loss 12 months from surgery.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and twenty-nine patients undergoing conversion of LAGB to SG were identified. Median postoperative length of hospital stay was 2 days. Two patients (.8%) developed surgical site infection. One patient (.4%) developed a postoperative myocardial infarction. There were 4 total readmissions (1.7%) and 1 reoperation within 30 days (.4%). There were no statistically significant differences in 30-day complication rates between groups. Weight loss at 12 months was significantly different: Median body mass index loss for conversion patients was 5.1 kg/m² compared with 8.85 kg/m² for patients in the primary SG group (P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

Single-stage conversion of LAGB to SG is safe and effective. Patients may not experience the same extent of weight loss as those with primary SG. Our findings represent the largest single-institutional experience to date and support a 1-stage approach whenever feasible.

Is Staple Line Reinforcement Necessary in Conversion From Laparoscopic Adjustable Band to Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy?

BACKGROUND

Once a common bariatric procedure, laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) is more frequently the subject of conversion procedures, particularly to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), due to failure of weight loss, weight regain, and band intolerance. Staple line reinforcement (SLR) in primary LSG has been studied extensively, but has not been evaluated in revision procedures. The aim of this study is to investigate commonly used SLR techniques and their effects on morbidity and mortality in single-stage bands converted to sleeves.

METHODS

The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality and Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Participant Use Data Files (PUF) for 2015-2016 were utilized to assess data for single-stage bands converted to sleeves based on CPT codes, and records were stratified by technique of staple line reinforcement. The database contained all the defined variables utilized for analysis with the exception of leak rate and overall morbidity, which had to be derived. Thirty-day outcomes were analyzed using multiple bivariate analyses and Bonferroni corrections were applied.

RESULTS

Of the 6,286 patients who underwent single-stage bands converted to sleeves for whom SLR data is available, 56.9% of surgeons utilized SLR only, 21.3% chose no reinforcement technique (No SLR), 13.4% chose SLR plus over-sewing of the staple line (SLR+OSL), and 8.4% chose OSL alone. There were no statistically significant differences in rates of death, reoperation, readmission, reintervention, number of bleeding events, and staple line leaks across groups.

CONCLUSION

Choice of SLR does not affect number of bleeding events or staple line leak rate.

Feasibility and Efficacy of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy as a Revisional Procedure After Failed Gastric Plication in Morbidly Obese Patients

Background: Failure of adequate weight loss or weight regain has been reported after laparoscopic greater curve plication (LGCP). The primary aim of this retrospective study is to analyze weight loss outcome after revision of failed LGCP into laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Patients and Methods: Patients who experienced failure (insufficient weight loss/weight regain) after LGCP performed in our center from 2009 to 2012 were included. LSG was performed for all patients. Results: Among 127 who underwent LGCP, 42 patients (33%) underwent revision. Mean body mass index (BMI) at time of LGCP was 44 ± 6 kg/m². The highest % total weight loss (%TWL) after LGCP ranged from 11% to 34% (24.1 ± 5) (corresponding to % excess weight loss [%EWL] of 12%-47% [33.5 ± 12]). The time interval between LGCP and LSG ranged from 12 to 25 months (15.4 ± 3.8). After conversion, 2 patients (5%) experienced acute leakage managed by endoscopic stenting. After LSG, mean BMI (kg/m²) was 38, 32, 30, 28, 29, 30.2, and 30.4, while mean %TWL reached 9%, 19%, 24%, 29%, 25%, 25%, and 24% and mean %EWL reached 15%, 51%, 69%, 77%, 68%, 66%, and 64% at 1 month, 6 months, 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years, respectively. Except for results at 1 month, all results showed statistical significance (P ≤ .05). After LSG, the incidence of diabetes mellitus and hypertension dropped from 15 (35%) and 13 (30%) to 2 (5%) and 3 (7%) patients, respectively. No follow-up data (0%) were missed. Conclusion: LSG after failed LGCP has promising weight loss outcomes.

Efficiency of Laparoscopic One-Step Revision of Failed Adjusted Gastric Banding to Gastric Sleeve: a Retrospective Review of 101 Consecutive Patients

BACKGROUND

Until recently, laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) was one of the most commonly performed bariatric surgeries worldwide. Today, its high rate of complications and failure rates up to 70% requires revisional surgery. The one-stage conversion from LAGB to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has been shown to be safe, although there are some concerns on efficacy and long-term weight loss.

OBJECTIVES

To demonstrate that one-step revision of LAGB to another restrictive procedure, such as LSG, might have efficient long-term outcomes.

METHODS

The charts from 133 revisional LSGs for failed or complicated LAGB were retrospectively reviewed for the period between January 2010 and August 2017. Thirty-two patients were excluded for loss to follow-up. Demographics, complications, and percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) were determined.

RESULTS

One hundred one patients were included (85 women and 16 men), with a mean age of 48.5 years, and a mean body mass index of 47.1 kg/m². During the follow-up, 15 patients (15%) underwent a second revisional surgery for weight loss failure (8 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP), 3 biliopancreatic diversion, 3 single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass, 1 revisional LSG). Ten patients (10%) had long-term complications (8 severe reflux and 2 stenosis) during this period and underwent a second revisional surgery (10 RYGBP). The remaining 76 had a mean follow-up of 4.3 years and a mean %EWL of 53.2%.

CONCLUSION

Single-stage conversion to LSG is a safe and appropriate solution for failed or complicated LAGB with good long-term weight loss.

Assessing the Safety and Efficacy of Converting Laparoscopic Gastric Band to Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Rural Tertiary Center's Experience

Gastric banding for surgical treatment of morbid obesity has a complication rate of 20 to 50 per cent. Complications include band erosion, band slippage, and failed weight loss. One salvage procedure used is the laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. We aimed to compare our results between single-stage and two-stage conversation of gastric band with sleeve gastrectomy. We performed a retrospective review of 27 gastric band patients converted to sleeve gastrectomy. Hospital length of stay, surgical complications, and weight loss were compared. Twelve patients had a two-stage conversion and 15 patients had a single-stage conversion. There were no surgical complications in either group. There was a significant reduction in BMI after conversion, starting at one month and continuing forward to 12 months. The average BMI reduction over the two-year follow-up period was 8.19. There was no significant difference in length of hospital stay between the groups. Single-stage conversion of gastric band to sleeve gastrectomy does not lead to increased hospital length of stay or surgical morbidity. In the presence of gastric band slip or erosion, a two-stage approach is preferable. Conversion resulted in statistically significant weight loss in all patients.

Conversion to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy after failure of laparoscopic gastric band: A systematic review of the literature and cost considerations

No universal consensus has been achieved as to whether the laparoscopic adjustable gastric band to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy conversion should be performed in one or two steps. To determine the differences in operative outcomes and cost, a systematic, comprehensive review of the literature was conducted using the PubMed database from the National Institutes of Health. Nine studies were included with 809 patients. Weighted averages were calculated to compare operative outcomes, and cost analyses were conducted with these averages. Results indicate a longer operative time for the one-step approach than the two-step approach, but studies included in the meta-analysis found no statistical difference between the two. The two-step approach was found to have a longer length of hospital stay, but this finding refuted included studies that indicate no significant difference. Complication rates were higher for the one-step approach than the two-step approach, and costs associated with complications average $806 more for one-step patients than two-step patients. This suggests that the two-step approach could prove better for patient safety and cost outcomes, but both approaches are comparable in operating time and length of stay.

Which postoperative complications matter most after bariatric surgery? Prioritizing quality improvement efforts to improve national outcomes

BACKGROUND

National quality programs have been implemented to decrease the burden of adverse events on key outcomes in bariatric surgery. However, it is not well understood which complications have the most impact on patient health.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the impact of specific bariatric surgery complications on key clinical outcomes.

SETTING

The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database.

METHODS

Data from patients who underwent primary bariatric procedures were retrieved from the MBSAQIP 2015 participant use file. The impact of 8 specific complications (bleeding, venous thromboembolism [VTE], leak, wound infection, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, myocardial infarction, and stroke) on 5 main 30-day outcomes (end-organ dysfunction, reoperation, intensive care unit admission, readmission, and mortality) was estimated using risk-adjusted population attributable fractions. The population attributable fraction is a calculated measure taking into account the prevalence and severity of each complication. The population attributable fractions represents the percentage reduction in a given outcome that would occur if that complication were eliminated.

RESULTS

In total, 135,413 patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy (67%), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (29%), adjustable gastric banding (3%), and duodenal switch (1%) were included. The most common complications were bleeding (.7%), wound infection (.5%), urinary tract infection (.3%), VTE (.3%), and leak (.2%). Bleeding and leak were the largest contributors to 3 of 5 examined outcomes. VTE had the greatest effect on readmission and mortality.

CONCLUSION

This study quantifies the impact of specific complications on key surgical outcomes after bariatric surgery. Bleeding and leak were the complications with the largest overall effect on end-organ dysfunction, reoperation, and intensive care unit admission after bariatric surgery. Furthermore, our findings suggest that an initiative targeting reduction of post-bariatric surgery VTE has the greatest potential to reduce mortality and readmission rates.

Outcomes after bariatric surgery according to large databases: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The rapid development of technological tools to record data allows storage of enormous datasets, often termed "big data". In the USA, three large databases have been developed to store data regarding surgical outcomes: the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP), the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) National Inpatient Sample (NIS) and the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP). We aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of studies found in these databases concerning outcomes of bariatric surgery.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review using the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology guidelines. Research carried out using the PubMed database identified 362 papers. All outcomes related to bariatric surgery were analysed.

RESULTS

Fifty-four studies, published between 2005 and February 2017, were included. These articles were divided into (1) outcomes related to surgical techniques (12 articles), (2) morbidity and mortality (12), (3) 30-day hospital readmission (10), (4) outcomes related to specific diseases (11), (5) training (2) and (6) socio-economic and ethnic observations in bariatric surgery (7). Forty-two papers were based on data from ACS-NSQIP, nine on data from NIS and three on data from MBSAQIP.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides an overview of surgical management and outcomes of bariatric surgery in the USA. Large databases offer useful complementary information that could be considered external validation when strong evidence-based medicine data are lacking. They also allow us to evaluate infrequent situations for which randomized control trials are not feasible and add specific information that can complement the quality of surgical knowledge.

Comparing 30-day outcomes between thoracoscopic and open approaches for resection of pediatric congenital lung malformations: Evidence from NSQIP

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Thoracoscopic surgery has been increasingly utilized in treating pediatric congenital lung malformations (CLM). Comparative studies evaluating 30-day outcomes between thoracoscopic and open resection of CLM are lacking.

METHODS

There were 258 patients identified in pediatric NSQIP with a CLM and pulmonary resection in 2012-2013. Comparisons of patient characteristics and outcomes between surgical approaches were made using standard univariate statistics. In addition, a propensity score match was performed to evaluate outcomes in similar patient cohorts.

RESULTS

One-hundred twelve patients (43.4%) received thoracoscopic resections and 146 patients (56.6%) received open resections. Patients undergoing open resections were more likely to be less than 5 months of age and have a comorbidity/preoperative condition (47.3% vs. 25.0%, p<0.001). The extent of resection was a lobectomy in 84.8% of thoracoscopic and 92.5% of open resection patients. Median operative time was similar between both groups (thoracoscopic 172 vs. open 153.5 minutes). On univariate analysis, thoracoscopic resection was associated with decreased postoperative complications (9.8% vs. 25.3%, p=0.001) and LOS (3 vs. 4 days, p<0.001). However, after adjusting for similar patient and operative characteristics, no significant differences were encountered between techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

Thoracoscopic and open resection provide comparable 30-day outcomes and safety in the management of congenital lung malformations.

Failed Surgical Weight Loss Does Not Necessarily Mean Failed Metabolic Effects

The metabolic profile of patients after a failed surgical weight loss procedure is unknown. Long-term clinical outcomes of 31 obese diabetes patients with post-bariatric surgery excess weight loss of ≤25% were assessed. At a median follow-up of 6 years (range, 5-9 years) after surgery, remission and clinical improvement of diabetes occurred in seven (23%) and 13 (42%) patients, respectively. A long-term mean total weight loss of 7.0±4.7% and excess weight loss of 13.7±8.5% were associated with a mean reduction in fasting blood glucose level, from 158.9±66.7 to 128.4±35.3 mg/dL (P=0.03), and a significant decrease in diabetes medication requirements (P<0.001). A significant decrease in systolic blood pressure (11.1±23.4 mm Hg, P=0.01) and level of circulating triglycerides (35.7±73.4 mg/dL, P=0.04) was also observed after surgery. A modest surgical weight loss in the range of 5-10% of initial weight was associated with significant improvement in cardiometabolic risk factors of morbidly obese diabetes patients. The markedly improved glycemic control (65% remission or clinical improvement) may be partly explained by weight-independent antidiabetes mechanisms of certain bariatric surgical procedures.