Persistent gastric fistula after sleeve gastrectomy: an analysis of the time between discovery and reoperation

Management of Gastric Leak after Sleeve Gastrectomy: A 13-year Experience in a Tertiary Referral Center

INTRODUCTION

The main complication of sleeve gastrectomy remains fistula formation. Studies have mainly focused on the endoscopic management of fistulas, and surgery is reserved for cases of hemodynamic instability or treatment failure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the management of gastric leak after sleeve gastrectomy.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the characteristics, treatments, and outcomes of patients managed for gastric leaks after sleeve gastrectomy in our center. Healing was defined as resumed oral intake without inflammatory syndrome or the presence of drainage material.

RESULTS

From 2009 to 2022, 43 patients were managed in our center for gastric leak after sleeve gastrectomy. Among them, 21 patients were referred from other centers. In 86% of cases, the gastric leak developed within the first 15 days. It was located at the proximal staple line in 84% of cases. Associated stenosis or twisting was observed in 18% of cases. Surgical treatment alone was used in 32% of patients, while 59% received combined management. Only 3 patients (6.8%) were managed exclusively by endoscopy. The overall healing rate was 91%, with a median healing time of 89 days.

CONCLUSION

The management of gastric leaks after sleeve gastrectomy depends on their location and clinical presentation and should not be limited to a solely endoscopic or surgical approach. Our study demonstrates that surgical intervention alone may be sufficient in 30% of cases. However, for most patients, a multidisciplinary approach in a referral center is recommended.

Endoscopic management of refractory leak and gastro-cutaneous fistula after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Gastro-cutaneous fistula is a rare complication after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) with incidence of occurrence 1-2%. Most of gastro-cutaneous fistulae do not respond to conservative management and need intervention either surgically or endoscopically.

METHODS

This prospective randomized clinical study included referred patients who had LSG performed at our department or other centers, and complicated with post-LSG leak or gastro-cutaneous fistula between December/2019 and March/2021. Included patients were ASA Physical status I-II. Primary and secondary outcomes were recurrence of the fistula and mortality in each group after the intervention during the 18 months follow-up period, respectively.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were randomized into two groups: Surgery Group (SG, n = 15) and Endoscopy Group (EG, n = 15). Mean age of patients was 42.3 ± 8.7 and 42.6 ± 8.3 years-old in SG and EG, respectively. Females constituted 73.3% and 80% in SG and EG, respectively. Median time-to-gastric leak post LSG was six (range: 4-7) days in both groups. SG patients were surgically managed with primary repair of the gastric fistula and gastrojejunostomy in 13 patients or converting SG into Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in two patients, while EG patients were endoscopically managed with stitching, stenting, stenting and dilation, and clipping and dilation in 5, 4, 4 and 2 patients, respectively. Incidence of recurrent leak during 1^st week was significantly higher in SG than EG (p < 0.001). No mortality reported in EG, while 2 patients died in SG (p = 0.48).

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic intervention may offer a successful modality in managing post-LSG gastric leak and gastro-cutaneous fistula that do not respond to conservative measures in stable patients.

Nutritional Support and Duration of Drainage Recommendations for Endoscopic Internal Drainage: Review of the Literature and Initial Experience

INTRODUCTION

Anastomotic leaks following foregut surgery pose a difficult scenario for surgeons. While definitive surgical options are more invasive and may result in diversion requiring subsequent surgeries, endoscopic management of these leaks has been shown to work as an alternative platform for management. An evolving option is endoscopic internal drainage. We have reviewed our experience using endoscopic internal drainage and report our outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An institution review board approved prospectively gathered database was used to identify all patients undergoing endoscopic internal drainage following esophageal and gastric leaks. Patient demographics, sentinel operation causing the leak, and outcomes of therapy were collected. The rate of healing and complications with the drainage catheter in place were the primary endpoints.

RESULTS

Sixteen patients were identified (5 male, 11 female) that underwent endoscopic internal drainage with a mean age of 48 and mean BMI of 30.8. Overall success rate was 69% (11/16), where 4 patients required a definitive surgery, and one healed with endoluminal vacuum therapy. Of the 4 failures, 1 patient required esophagojejunostomy, 2 patients required a fistulojejunostomy, and one required a partial gastrectomy. A total of 12 patients (75%) had a prior endoscopic procedure that was unsuccessful. The mean duration of drainage catheter in place was 48 days. While the catheter was in place, 4 patients were allowed minimal PO intake in conjunction with total parenteral nutrition or tube feeds. The rest of the patients were strict NPO with other means of nutrition. There were no complications with the drainage catheters and no deaths.

CONCLUSION

Leaks following esophagogastric surgery are difficult to manage; however, endoscopic internal drainage has been shown to be effective. Duration of the technique should be around 6 to 8 weeks with nutritional support guided by the comfort of the managing clinician.

Vacuum Therapy and Internal Drainage as the First-Line Endoscopic Treatment for Post-Bariatric Leaks: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction

Several endoscopic methods can be employed to manage post-bariatric leaks. However, endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVT) and endoscopic internal drainage (EID) are relatively new methods, and studies regarding these methods are scarce. We performed a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of EVT and EID.

Methods

Databases were searched for eligible studies. The clinical success of leak closure was the primary outcome of interest. A proportional meta-analysis was performed for pooling the primary outcome using a fixed-effects model. A meta-analysis or descriptive analysis of other outcomes was performed based on the data availability.

Results

Data from 3 EVT and 10 EID studies (n = 279) were used for evidence synthesis. The leak closure rates (95% confidence interval [CI]) of EVT and EID were 85.2% (75.1%-95.4%) and 91.6% (88.1%-95.2%), respectively. The corresponding mean treatment durations (95% CI) were 28 (2.4-53.6) and 78.4 (50.1-106.7) days, respectively. However, data about other outcomes were extremely limited; thus, a pooled analysis could not be performed.

Conclusions

Both EVT and EID were effective when used as the first-line treatment for post-bariatric leaks. However, larger studies must be conducted to compare the efficacy of the 2 interventions.

Total Gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y Limb Reconstruction for Complex and Chronic Fistulas After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Single-Center Experience

PURPOSE

When a leak after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) becomes a chronic fistula, the best surgical treatment remains controversial. The aim of study was to review our experience concerning the treatment of chronic and complex fistulas after LSG.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients with a gastric fistula following LSG who were treated at our center between January 2013 and December 2018 was performed. All patients included underwent a total gastrectomy with a Roux-en-Y reconstruction (TG) for LSG chronic fistula.

RESULTS

During the period considered, 13 patients had a chronic fistula and were treated with open TG. The primary leak evolved to a gastro-cutaneos fistula in three patients (23%), to a gastro-splenic fistula in two patients (15.4%), to a gastro-pleural fistula in four patients (30.8%), and to a gastro-bronchial fistula in four patients (30.8%). During TG, a splenectomy and a spleno-pancreatectomy were needed in the two cases of gastro-splenic fistula. Five patients (38.5%) developed an early complication. Two patients developed an esophago-jejunal anastomotic leak treated with a conservative approach (15.4%). No patients needed hospitalization in the intensive care unit. Overall mean length of stay was 19 days (8-30 days). Mean BMI before LSG was 36 (± 5 kg/m2), mean BMI before TG was 30.3 (± 5.2 kg/m2), and mean BMI 2 years after TG was 23.5 (± 2.9 kg/m2).

CONCLUSION

When a more conservative and less mutilating surgical option is not possible, open TG with esophago-jejunostomy remains a valuable salvage procedure in the case of complex and extensive fistulas after LSG.

Endoscopic internal drainage for the management of leak, fistula, and collection after sleeve gastrectomy: our experience in 617 consecutive patients

BACKGROUND

Endoscopy plays a pivotal role in the management of adverse events (AE) following bariatric surgery. Leaks, fistulae, and post-operative collection after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) may occur in up to 10% of cases.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic internal drainage (EID) for the management of leak, fistula, and collection following SG.

SETTING

Retrospective, observational, single center study on patients referred from several bariatric surgery departments to an endoscopic referral center.

METHODS

EID was used as first-line treatment for the management of leaks, fistulae, and collections. Leaks and fistulae were treated with double pigtail stent (DPS) deployment in order to guarantee internal drainage and second intention cavity obliteration. Collections were treated with endoscropic ultrasound (EUS)-guided deployment of DPS or lumen apposing metal stents.

RESULTS

A total of 617 patients (83.3% female; mean age, 43.1 yr) were enrolled in the study for leak (n = 300, 48.6%), fistula (n = 285, 46.2%), and collection (n = 32, 5.2%). Median follow-up was 19.5 months. Overall clinical success was 84.7% whereas 15.3% of cases required revisional surgery after EID failure. Clinical success according to type of AE was 89.5%, 78.5%, and 90% for leak, fistula, and collection, respectively. A total of 10 of 547 (1.8%) presented a recurrence during follow-up. A total of 28 (4.5%) AE related to the endoscopic treatment occurred. At univariate logistic regression predictors of failure were: fistula (OR 2.012), combined endoscopic approach (OR 2.319), need for emergency surgery (OR 1.755), and previous endoscopic treatment (OR 4.818).

CONCLUSION

Early EID for the management of leak, fistula, and post-operative collection after SG seems a safe and effective first-line approach with good long-term results.

Intrathoracic gastric fistula after bariatric surgery: a systematic review and pooled analysis

Even in the hands of highly experienced bariatric surgeons, perioperative complications are inevitable. Of these, leaks and fistulas are amongst the scariest complications. Intrathoracic gastric fistulas (ITGF) can be associated with serious morbidity, mostly when cases are misdiagnosed or detected with delay. This is a systematic review of the literature to investigate the clinical and surgical outcomes of morbidly obese adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of ITGF following bariatric surgery. A pooled analysis of 25 articles, encompassing 76 patients with post-bariatric ITGF, showed that the clinical outcome depends on the initial presentation, timing of the diagnosis in relation to symptom onset, and prompt and effective treatment. Any septic or unstable patient must undergo urgent surgical intervention, while stable patients might tolerate a step-up approach and watchful waiting for nonsurgical treatment. Among those who undergo surgery, treatment failure and the mortality rate are substantially high. Contingent upon a prompt management strategy, patients with postbariatric ITGF can generally have a favorable outcome in the long term.

Gastric leak after sleeve gastrectomy: risk factors for poor evolution under conservative management

BACKGROUND

Gastric leak (GL) is the most highly feared early postoperative complication after sleeve gastrectomy (SG), with an incidence of 1% to 2%. This complication may require further surgery/endoscopy, with a risk of management failure that may require additional surgery, including total gastrectomy, leading to a risk of mortality of 0% to 9%.

OBJECTIVES

Assess the impact of factors that may lead to a poorer evolution of GL.

SETTING

University Hospital, France, public practice.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center study of a group of patients managed for GL after SG between November 2004 and January 2019 (n = 166). Forty-three patients were excluded. The population study was divided into 2 groups: patients with easy closing of the GL (n = 73) and patients with difficult closing of the GL or failure to heal (n = 50). Patients were allocated to 1 of 2 groups depending on the time to heal (median time of 84 days). The study's primary efficacy endpoint was to determine the risk factors for a poorer evolution of GL.

RESULTS

Among 123 patients included in this study, 103 patients had undergone primary SG (83.7%). The mean time to the appearance of GL was 15.1 days (range, 1-156 d). Seventy-four patients underwent a reoperation (60%). The mean number of endoscopies per patient was 2.7 (range, 2-7 endoscopies). The mean time to healing was 89.5 days (range, 18-386 d). There were 8 cases of healing failure (6.5%). Multivariate analysis identified body mass index (>47 kg/m²), time to referral (>2 d), and serum prealbumin level (<.1 g/dL) to be independent risk factors for a poorer evolution of GL.

CONCLUSION

Improvement of nutritional status before SG and early referral for GL could reduce the risk of delayed closure or the need for further surgery.

Gastric Fistula in the Chest After Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Systematic Review of Diagnostic and Treatment Options

This study aimed to establish the optimal diagnostic and treatment algorithm for the management of gastric fistula in the chest (GFIC) after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) through a systematic review of published cases. A multi-database search was performed, which produced 1182 results, of which 26 studies were included in this systematic review. The initial presentation included subphrenic collections, leaks, or (recurrent) pneumonia with associated symptoms such as persistent cough, fever, and/or dyspnea. Computed tomography (CT) scan in combination with either upper gastrointestinal (UGI) series or an esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) was used to adequately diagnose the fistulas. Initial treatment was either with clips and/or clips and stents that were placed endoscopically. When unsuccessful in the majority of the cases, the surgical treatment consisted of total gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy in a laparoscopic or open fashion.

Endoscopic devices and techniques for the management of bariatric surgical adverse events (with videos)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

As the prevalence of obesity continues to rise, increasing numbers of patients undergo bariatric surgery. Management of adverse events of bariatric surgery may be challenging and often requires a multidisciplinary approach. Endoscopic intervention is often the first line of therapy for management of these adverse events. This document reviews technologies and techniques used for endoscopic management of adverse events of bariatric surgery, organized by surgery type.

METHODS

The MEDLINE database was searched through May 2018 for articles related to endoscopic management of adverse events of bariatric interventions by using relevant keywords such as adverse events related to "gastric bypass," "sleeve gastrectomy," "laparoscopic adjustable banding," and "vertical banded sleeve gastroplasty," in addition to "endoscopic treatment" and "endoscopic management," among others. Available data regarding efficacy, safety, and financial considerations are summarized.

RESULTS

Common adverse events of bariatric surgery include anastomotic ulcers, luminal stenoses, fistulae/leaks, and inadequate initial weight loss or weight regain. Devices used for endoscopic management of bariatric surgical adverse events include balloon dilators (hydrostatic, pneumatic), mechanical closure devices (clips, endoscopic suturing system, endoscopic plication platform), luminal stents (covered esophageal stents, lumen-apposing metal stents, plastic stents), and thermal therapy (argon plasma coagulation, needle-knives), among others. Available data, composed mainly of case series and retrospective cohort studies, support the primary role of endoscopic management. Multiple procedures and techniques are often required to achieve clinical success, and existing management algorithms are evolving.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopy is a less invasive alternative for management of adverse events of bariatric surgery and for revisional procedures. Endoscopic procedures are frequently performed in the context of multidisciplinary management with bariatric surgeons and interventional radiologists. Treatment algorithms and standards of practice for endoscopic management will continue to be refined as new dedicated technology and data emerge.

[SOFFCO-MM guidelines for the resumption of bariatric and metabolic surgery during and after the Covid-19 pandemic]

Face à l’émergence de la pandémie à COVID 19, l’activité de chirurgie bariatrique/métabolique a été arrêtée. Le confinement et l’arrêt de cette chirurgie ont eu un impact sous-estimé sur la population obèse avec prise de poids, et aggravation des comorbidités. Un certain nombre de candidats à cette chirurgie sont exposés à un risque important de mortalité liée à la pandémie. En effet, l’obésité et le diabète sont deux facteurs de risque majeurs de forme grave d’infection à COVID-19. Le seul traitement efficace actuel de l’obésité est la chirurgie métabolique avec un bénéfice rapide et durable. Il paraît donc nécessaire de reprendre une activité de chirurgie métabolique. Le but de ce travail est de hiérarchiser la reprise chirurgicale afin qu’elle soit progressive et cohérente. Les organigrammes proposés aideront les centres à déterminer les patients prioritaires selon la balance bénéfice-risque. Le diabète a une place centrale dans l’arbre décisionnel. Les modalités de reprise seront variables d’un centre à l’autre selon les ressources humaines, matérielles et médicamenteuses, et seront à adapter à l’évolution épidémique. Un consentement éclairé spécifique sera nécessaire. Un dépistage chez les patients obèses est à envisager dont les modalités de dépistage sont élaborées sur la base des connaissances disponibles. En cas de suspicion de COVID, la chirurgie doit être différée. Il faut insister sur les mesures et gestes barrières afin de protéger le patient et le personnel soignant. Un confinement est fortement suggéré pour le patient durant le premier mois postopératoire. Le suivi des patients sera effectué de préférence par téléconsultation.

SOFFCO-MM guidelines for the resumption of bariatric and metabolic surgery during and after the Covid-19 pandemic

Bariatric/metabolic surgery was paused during the Covid-19 pandemic. The impact of social confinement and the interruption of this surgery on the population with obesity has been underestimated, with weight gain and worsened comorbidities. Some candidates for this surgery are exposed to a high risk of mortality linked to the pandemic. Obesity and diabetes are two major risk factors for severe forms of Covid-19. The only currently effective treatment for obesity is metabolic surgery, which confers prompt, lasting benefits. It is thus necessary to resume such surgery. To ensure that this resumption is both gradual and well-founded, we have devised a priority ranking plan. The flow charts we propose will help centres to identify priority patients according to a benefit/risk assessment. Diabetes holds a central place in the decision tree. Resumption patterns will vary from one centre to another according to human, physical and medical resources, and will need adjustment as the epidemic unfolds. Specific informed consent will be required. Screening of patients with obesity should be considered, based on available knowledge. If Covid-19 is suspected, surgery must be postponed. Emphasis must be placed on infection control measures to protect patients and healthcare professionals. Confinement is strongly advocated for patients for the first month post-operatively. Patient follow-up should preferably be by teleconsultation.

The role of endoprostheses in the treatment of leaks after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Analysis of a Spanish registry

It has been suggested that endoprostheses are an effective treatment for fistulae after sleeve gastrectomy, but the results published are very variable. To analyze the effectiveness of stents as treatment of leakage after sleeve gastrectomy, the Spanish Society of Obesity Surgery (SECO) and the Obesity Division of the Spanish Association of Surgeons (AEC) set up a National Registry to record treatments of leaks after sleeve gastrectomy. We have analyzed patients with leaks after sleeve gastrectomy and treated with endoprostheses: 19 medical centers reported the use of endoprostheses, where 51 endoprostheses were used in 42 patients (34 women/8 men, mean age: 43.8 years, BMI: 47.6). Global effectiveness was 45%, with a complication rate of 35%. Uni- and multivariate analyses detected no factors influencing the efficacy of treatment. A larger diameter bouggie used to calibrate the stomach was related to a higher incidence of complications. No factors were found related with better stent efficacy. The effectiveness of a second stent was very low when the previous one had not been effective.

Gastric leak after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: management with endoscopic double pigtail drainage. A systematic review

Gastric leak remains the main complication after sleeve gastrectomy, but there are no standardized guidelines for its treatment. Good results have been reported using endoscopic double-pigtail stent. To estimate its effectiveness, we carried out this systematic review. Eleven eligible articles were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. A total of 385 patients met the inclusion criteria. The pooled proportion of successful leak closures by using double pigtail drainage was 83.41%. The proportion of successful leak closures by using double pigtail drainage by experienced operators as first-line treatment was 84.71%. Our review suggested that double-pigtail stent could be a valid approach to manage the postbariatric gastric leak, with low rate of complications and a good tolerance by patients. More high-quality studies with large samples sizes should be undertaken to better evaluate and compare the variety of techniques available.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of stent type in endoscopic treatment of gastric leak after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy

Background

Gastric leak is the most feared surgical postoperative complication after sleeve gastrectomy. An endoscopic procedure is usually required to treat the leak. No data are available on the cost-effectiveness of different stent types in this procedure.

Methods

Between April 2005 and July 2016, patients with a confirmed gastric leak undergoing endoscopic treatment using a covered stent (CS) or double-pigtail stent (DPS) were included. The primary objective of the study was to assess overall costs of the stent types after primary sleeve gastrectomy. Secondary objectives were the cost-effectiveness of each stent type expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER); the incremental net benefit; the probability of efficiency, defined as the probability of being cost-effective at a threshold of €30 000, and identification of the key drivers of ICER derived from a multivariable analysis.

Results

One hundred and twelve patients were enrolled. The overall mean costs of gastric leak were €22 470; the mean(s.d.) cost was €24 916(12 212) in the CS arm and €20 024(3352) in the DPS arm (P = 0·018). DPS was more cost-effective than CS (ICER €4743 per endoscopic procedure avoided), with an incremental net benefit of €25 257 and a 27 per cent probability of efficiency. Key drivers of the ICER were the inpatient ward after diagnosis of gastric leak (surgery versus internal medicine), type of institution (private versus public) and duration of hospital stay per endoscopic procedure.

Conclusion

DPS for the treatment of gastric leak is more cost-effective than CS and should be proposed as the standard regimen whenever possible.

Endoscopic treatment of fistulas after sleeve gastrectomy: a comparison of internal drainage versus closure

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Fistulas after sleeve gastrectomy are major adverse events of bariatric surgery. The endoscopic management strategy evolved from closure to internal drainage after 2013. The main objective of our study was to evaluate and compare these different approaches.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all patients treated for fistulas after sleeve gastrectomy in a referral center. Closure management was defined as initial treatment that used a covered metal stent and/or endoclips. Internal drainage management was defined as initial treatment by nasocystic drain and/or a double-pigtail stent.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients (women N = 78, mean [± standard deviation {SD}] age 42 ± 12 years) were included between 2007 and 2015. The mean (± SD) delay between sleeve gastrectomy and the first endoscopy was 82 ± 125 days. The overall success of endoscopic treatment was 86% within 6 ± 27 months. Two patients died. The primary success of internal drainage and closure management occurred in 19 of 22 (86%) and 49 of 77 (63%) patients, respectively. Among patients in failure for closure management, 22 had secondary internal drainage (18 being successful). Success of initial management was significantly higher for internal drainage (P = .043). Factors associated with failure of closure management were in multivariable analysis: collection >5 cm (P = .013). Factors associated with a time >6 months for achieving leakage closure were in multivariable analysis: reoperation before endoscopy (P = .044) and purulent flow at endoscopy (P = .043).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic management of fistulas after sleeve gastrectomy was successful in 86% of cases. In cases of collections >5 cm, internal drainage should be proposed first. Surgical reintervention before endoscopy delays treatment success.

Management of acute intra-abdominal sepsis caused by leakage after one anastomosis gastric bypass

BACKGROUND

Leakage after one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is fortunately rare (<1%), but it remains the most severe complication. Few published data exist on this specific issue.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the results from patients who presented with acute intra-abdominal sepsis (AIAS) caused by leakage after OAGB.

SETTING

A university public hospital in France.

METHODS

Between October 2006 and February 2016, 17 consecutive patients with a diagnosis of AIAS caused by leakage after OAGB were included. Preoperative characteristics, clinical symptoms, radiologic findings, management, morbidity, and mortality were assessed.

RESULTS

All 17 patients were included in the study. There were 4 men (23.5%), the median age was 48 years, and median preoperative body mass index (BMI) was 51 kg/m². The most frequent clinical sign was tachycardia (65%). An oral contrast computed tomography scan was performed in 15 patients (88%) and showed a diagnosis of AIAS in 93% of cases. The median time between OAGB and leak diagnosis was 4 days. A gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA) leak was the most frequent origin (41%). Sixteen patients (94%) were managed surgically (laparotomy n = 11, laparoscopy n = 5) and one medically. There were no deaths. The overall morbidity rate was 47% (major = 41%). Six patients underwent an emergency conversion into Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (in cases of GJA, gastric-tube, and biliary-limb leakages) and were compared to 6 patients who did not undergo conversion but who could have benefited. We observed a tendency toward a reduced overall morbidity rate (16.7% versus 83.3%, P = .08) and shorter lengths of stay in the "conversion to RYGB" group.

CONCLUSION

The management of AIAS caused by leakage after OAGB was safe, effective, and mostly surgical. Emergency conversion to RYGB in cases of GJA, gastric-tube, or biliary-limb perforation was feasible and safe.

MEDIUM-TERM FOLLOW-UP RESULTS WITH LAPAROSCOPIC SLEEVE GASTRECTOMY

Background

: The indications for sleeve gastrectomy in the surgical treatment of morbid obesity have increased worldwide. Despite this, several aspects related to results at medium and long term remain in constant research.

Aim

: To present the experience of sleeve gastrectomy in a center of excellence in bariatric surgery by analyzing clinical outcomes, complications and follow-up in the medium term.

Methods

: The study included 120 morbidly obese patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy and who were followed for at least 24 months. Aspects related to surgical technique, surgical complications and clinical outcome were analyzed.

Results

: Seventy-five patients were women (62.5%) and the average age was 36 years. The body mass index preoperatively ranged from 35.5 to 58 kg/m²(average of 40.2 kg/m²). The length of stay ranged from 1 to 4 days (mean 2.1 days). Comorbidities observed were hypertension (19%), type 2 diabetes mellitus (6.6%), dyslipidemia (7.5%), sleep apnea (16.6%), reflux esophagitis (10%) and orthopedic diseases (7.5%). The mean body mass index and total weight loss percentage with 3, 12, 18 and 24 months were 32.2 kg/m²-19,9%; 29.5 kg/m²-26,5%; 28.2 kg/m²-30,3% and 26.9 kg/m²-32,7%, respectively. Remission of diabetes and dyslipidemia occurred in all patients. In relation to hypertension, there was improvement or remission in 86%. There were only two complications (bronchial pneumonia and dehydration), with good response to clinical treatment. There was no evidence digestive fistula and mortality was zero. Eleven patients (9.1%) had regained weighing more than 5 kg.

Conclusion

: The sleeve gastrectomy is surgical technique that has proven safe and effective in the surgical treatment of obesity and control of their comorbidities in postoperative follow-up for two years.

New endoscopic technique for the treatment of large gastric fistula or gastric stenosis associated with gastric leaks after sleeve gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Covered stent (CS) is required when gastric leak (GL) after sleeve gastrectomy is combined with gastric stenosis (GS) or when a large (>2 cm in diameter) gastric fistula is present (increasing the likelihood of double pigtail stent [DPS] migration).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the results of our previous endoscopic management of large GL or GS associated with GL (using CS only) with those of our new endoscopic treatment (using combined CS and DPS).

SETTING

University hospital, France, public practice.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between January 2009 and June 2015, all patients treated for large GL or GS associated with GL after sleeve gastrectomy (n = 20 patients) were included. Our previous endoscopic management required CS placement (CS group), whereas our new endoscopic treatment required combined CS and DPS placement (CS+DPS group). The primary efficacy endpoint was the treatment duration after CS placement until closure of the GL. The secondary efficacy endpoints were the number of endoscopic procedures, the stent migration rate, and the failure rate.

RESULTS

Nine patients were treated by CS only (CS group), whereas 11 patients were treated by both CS and DPS (CS+DPS group). The median time to GL closure after CS placement was 84 days (33-130) in the CS group and 32 days (26-89) in the CS+DPS group (P≤.05). The median number of endoscopic procedures at the time of CS placement was 2 (1-3) in the CS group and 1 (1-2) in the CS+DPS group (P≤.05). The stent migration rate after CS placement was 33.3% in the CS group and 0% in the CS+DPS group (P = .21), and the failure rate was 11% and 0% (P = .36).

CONCLUSION

The combination of CS and DPS constitutes an effective treatment for large GL or GS associated with GL, allowing significantly fewer endoscopic procedures and a shorter treatment duration.

Gastric fistula secondary to drainage tube penetration: A report of a rare case

Cases of gastric fistula secondary to drainage tube penetration have rarely been reported. The current study presents a case of gastric penetration caused by misplacement of a drainage tube after a splenectomy. The patient was admitted to the Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery, (Shaoxing People's Hospital, Shaoxing Hospital of Zhejiang University, Shaoxing, Zhejiang, China) for blunt abdominal trauma due to injuries sustained in an automobile accident. A ruptured spleen was found and successfully removed surgically. On post-operative day 7, the patient complained of slight discomfort and tenderness in the left upper quadrant of the abdomen. In addition, 500 ml of bile-colored fluid with small food particles was noted in the drainage tube. Barium X-ray revealed a gastric fistula in the upper gastrointestinal tract. Gastroscopy indicated infiltration of the drainage tube into the gastric cavity. No significant peritoneal effusion was observed, as revealed by abdominal ultrasound examination. These results confirmed the diagnosis of a gastric fistula secondary to perforation by the drainage tube. Following conservative treatment with antibiotics and total parenteral nutrition, the general condition of the patient improved significantly. The drainage tube was withdrawn progressively, as the amount of fluid being discharged was decreasing. Gastroenterography confirmed perforation closure and the tube was finally removed on post-operative day 44.