Revisional surgery after restrictive procedures for morbid obesity

Laparoscopic-Guided Transversus Abdominis Plane (TAP) Block Combined with Port-Site Infiltration (PSI) for Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy in an ERABS Pathway: A Randomized, Prospective, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

PURPOSE

Patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) commonly experience moderate to severe postoperative pain. We conducted a randomized, prospective double-blind placebo-controlled study to evaluate the analgesic effect of laparoscopic-guided TAP (LG-TAP) block after LSG in a high-volume bariatric center, applying an enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery (ERABS) pathway.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

One hundred ten patients were randomly allocated to receive LG-TAP block with local anesthetic (LA) or saline solution (placebo), both combined with port-site infiltration with LA (LA-PSI). Primary outcome was pain score measured in post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) and at 6, 12, and 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative nausea and/or vomiting (PONV), analgesic requirement, time to walking, time to flatus, length of hospital stay (LOS), and surgical complications.

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed between LG-TAP and placebo groups in postoperative analgesia, with a median (IQR) NRS of 2 (4.75-0) vs. 2 (5.25-0) in PACU, 5.5 (7-3) vs. 6 (7-4) at 6 h, 2 (6-0) vs. 3 (5.25-1.75) at 12 h, and 2 (3.75-0) vs. 1 (2-0) at 24 h; all p > 0.05. A significant difference was found in PONV in PACU (LG-TAP, 46%; placebo, 25%, p-value, 0.019) and at 6 h postoperatively (LG-TAP, 69%, placebo, 41%, p-value, 0.003). No differences were observed as regards other secondary outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that LG-TAP block is not related to more effective postoperative analgesia compared to placebo when LA-PSI is performed.

Midterm results of revisional bariatric surgery postsleeve gastrectomy: resleeve versus bypass

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery has been shown to produce the most predictable weight loss results, with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) being the most performed procedure as of 2014. However, inadequate weight loss may present the need for a revisional procedure.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of laparoscopic resleeve gastrectomy (LRSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in attaining successful weight loss.

SETTING

Public hospital following SG.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on all patients who underwent SG from 2008-2019. A list was obtained of those who underwent revisional bariatric surgery after initial SG, and their demographic characteristics were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 2858 patients underwent SG, of whom 84 patients (3%) underwent either a revisional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (rLRYGB) or LRSG. A total of 82% of the patients were female. The mean weight and body mass index (BMI) before SG for the LRSG and rLRYGB patients were 136.7 kg and 49.9 kg/m² and 133.9 kg and 50.5 kg/m², respectively. The mean BMI showed a drop from 42.0 to 31.7 (P < .001) 1 year post revisional surgery for the LRSG group and 42.7 to 34.5 (P < .001) for the rLRYGB group, correlating to an excess weight loss (EWL) of 61.7% and 48.1%, respectively. At 5 years post revisional surgery, LRSG patients showed an increase in BMI to 33.8 (EWL = 45.3%), while those who underwent rLRYGB showed a decrease to 34.3 (EWL = 49.2%). Completeness of follow-up at 1, 3, and 5 years for rLRYGB and LRSG were 67%, 35%, and 24% and 45%, 21%, and 18%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Revisional bariatric surgery is a safe and effective method for the management of failed primary SG. LRSG patients tended to do better earlier on; however, it leveled off with those who underwent rLRYGB by 5 years.

Outcomes of Two-Step Revisional Bariatric Surgery: Reasons for the Gastric Banding Explantation Matter

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to determine whether the reason for gastric band explantation would influence percentage excess weight loss (%EWL) following revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG).

MATERIALS & METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study, whose data are maintained in a prospective surgical database. The study period was from January 2012 to March 2017. Revisional surgeries were performed in a two-step manner, namely, first surgery LAGB explantation and second surgery (RYGB or SG). Two-way between-groups analysis of variance was used to examine effects of reason for band explantation (failed versus complication) and type of revisional surgery (RYGB versus SG) on %EWL at 10 months, 1 and 2 years.

RESULTS

Cohort included 171 patients-146 women (85.4%) and 25 men, median age 51 years (range 22-76). Band-related complications accounted for 55% of explantations. Overall, 95 patients (56%) underwent a revisional RYGB, and 76 patients underwent a revisional SG. There was no difference in age or gender in terms of reason for band explantation or choice of revisional surgery. There was no difference in morbidity between the two groups (SG 2.6% versus RYGB 4.2%; p = .464). Patients undergoing revisional RYGB for failed weight loss had a significantly lower %EWL at 2 years compared to patients undergoing an SG for failed weight loss (p = .014) or an RYGB for band-related complications (p = .021).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing revisional RYGB following band explantation for failed weight loss have a significantly lower %EWL at 2 years compared to patients undergoing an SG for failed weight loss or an RYGB for band-related complications.

Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Then and Now: An Updated Systematic Review of the Progress and Short-term Outcomes Over the Last 5 Years

INTRODUCTION AND AIM

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is considered one of the most popular bariatric surgeries of the present time. This review aimed to evaluate the progress and short-term outcomes of LSG over the last 5 years.

METHODS

The systematic review of electronic databases revealed 27 relevant articles, which were carefully assessed. The data extracted from the studies were analyzed and compared with data reported by a previous review published in 2010.

RESULTS

A total of 5218 patients were included in this review with a mean age of 41.1. The average preoperative body mass index (43.8±8) significantly dropped at 12 months to 30.7±3.9. The average percentage of excess weight loss at 1 year was 67.3. The mean rates of remission of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and dyslipidemia were 81.9%, 66.5%, and 64.1%, respectively. The mean complication rate across the studies was 8.7% and the average mortality rate was 0.3%. A significant drop in postoperative body mass index, higher percentage of excess weight loss, and significantly lower overall complication rate were observed in comparison with the previous systematic review.

CONCLUSIONS

LSG continues to achieve satisfactory weight loss and improvement of obesity-related comorbidities with acceptably low morbidity and mortality rates.

Quality of life, weight loss and improvement of co-morbidities after primary and revisional laparoscopic roux Y gastric bypass procedure-comparative match pair study

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of morbid obesity and its co-morbidities is dramatically increasing, as is the extent of weight loss surgery. A large number of patients after various bariatric procedures need revisional intervention for various reasons. We investigated the efficacy and the safety of revisional laparoscopic Roux Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) among our patients, who were revised as a consequence of inadequate weight loss or weight regain after previous bariatric interventions.

METHODS

A comparative, double-centre, match pair study was performed comparing the data of 44 patients after revisional surgery with 44 patients after primary gastric bypasses, focusing on weight loss, life quality and improvement of co-morbidities. Matching criteria were age, gender, preoperative BMI and follow-up period. Previous procedures consisted of 23 gastric bandings, 13 sleeve resections, 4 LRYGB and 4 vertical banded gastroplasties.

RESULTS

Extra weight loss (EWL) was significantly reduced after revisional gastric bypasses compared to primary intervention (EWL 66 vs. 91 %, p<0.05). Life quality scores were also decreased in the revisional group compared to the control group without statistical significance (SF 36 score 635 vs. 698.5, p=0.22; Moorehead-Aldert II score 1.4 vs. 2.0, p=0.10). The resolution rate of co-morbidities (T2DM, hypertension, gastro-oesophageal reflux (GER), osteoarthrosis, sleep apnoea) was also higher after primary gastric bypasses.

CONCLUSIONS

Revisional LRYGB is an effective and safe method for patients with inadequate weight loss after previous bariatric surgery concerning weight reduction, life quality and improvement of co-morbidities. Our results indicate lower efficacy of revisional compared to primary LRYGB reaching statistical significance in regard to weight loss.

Impact of sleeve gastrectomy on gastroesophageal reflux disease in a morbidly obese population undergoing bariatric surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has established popularity as a weight loss procedure based on its success. However, LSG's effect on gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the incidence of GERD after LSG and to compare the results in patients with preexisting and de novo GERD.

SETTING

Tertiary Medical center.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective review of primary LSG from 2005 to 2013 and compared patients with pre-existing and de novo GERD who underwent LSG.

RESULTS

A total of 919 patients underwent LSG. GERD was present in 38 (4%) of the LSG cohort. We identified 2 groups: Group A consisted of 25 (3%) patients with de novo GERD, and Group B consisted of 13 (1%) patients with pre-existing GERD. Diagnosis of GERD in both groups was determined by symptoms and history of proton pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, esophagogastroduodenoscopy, and pH manometry. In Group A, 1 (4%) patient was managed with over-the-counter drugs, 17 (68%) patients were treated with low-dose PPI, 6 (24%) patients were treated with high-dose PPI, and 1 (4%) patient was lost to follow-up. Group B consisted of 9 (69%) patients treated with low-dose PPI and 4 (31%) patients treated with high-dose PPI. Medical treatment failed in 4 patients (10.5%) who subsequently required conversion to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). In Group A, 1 patient (4%) required LRYGB, and in Group B, 3 patients (23%) required LRYGB. The outcome of conversion for Group A was incomplete resolution of symptoms in the 1 patient, whereas in Group B, all 3 patients (100%) had complete resolution of GERD symptoms after LRYGB.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, 3% of patients developed de novo GERD, but most responded to either low- or high-dose PPI, with 4% requiring conversion to LRYGB.

Psychosocial presentation of revisional LAGB patients: a qualitative study

This qualitative study offers insight into the experiences, expectations, perceptions and beliefs that may lead to laparoscopic adjustable gastric band patients' failure to achieve expected weight loss and seek revisional bariatric surgery. The 23 participants from two sites were interviewed and data were analysed from a grounded theory methodology in order to build a causal model. Analysis of participants' reports identified 'unrealistic expectations of the LAGB' as the core category. Additionally, the restriction of the band had a negative impact on participants' social interactions, leading to feelings of deprivation and, thus, to a desire for reward from food choices and consequently an increase of consumption of high-calorie-dense foods. These foods were chosen because of their specific texture or ability to provide reward. The resulting increase in weight or failure to achieve excess weight loss, led to feelings of shame and loneliness and emotional eating resulting in increased the consumption of rewarding foods. Thus, identifying unrealistic expectations of laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) and emotional eating behaviours are important in those who are present initially for primary bariatric and revisional bariatric surgery, as they may contribute specifically to these patients' weight regain and consequent failure to achieve excess weight loss.

Revisional bariatric surgery following failed primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a systematic review

Revisional bariatric surgery following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) failure presents a clinical challenge for the bariatric surgeon. Limited evidence exists in selecting the appropriate revisional operation: laparoscopic gastric bypass (LGB), laparoscopic re-sleeve gastrectomy (LRSG), or other surgical intervention (OSI), to address weight regain. We systematically reviewed the literature to assess the efficacy of existing revisional surgery. A comprehensive search of electronic databases (e.g., Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library) was completed. All randomized controlled trials, non-randomized comparison study, and case series were included. Eleven primary studies (218 patients) were identified and included in the systematic review. Studies were grouped into three main categories: LGB, LRSG, and OSI. Preoperative body mass index (BMI) was 41.9 kg/m(2) (LGB), 38.5 kg/m(2) (LRSG), and 44.4 kg/m(2) (OSI). After conversion to LGB, BMI decreased to 33.7 and 35.7 kg/m(2) at 12 and 24 months of follow-up, respectively. Excess weight loss (EWL) was 60 and 48 % over the same periods. After LRSG, BMI decreased to 30.4 and 35.3 kg/m(2) with corresponding EWL of 68 and 44 %, at 12 and 24 months, respectively. After OSI, BMI decreased to 27.3 kg/m(2) with an EWL of 75 % at 24-month follow-up but could not be analyzed due to incomplete data collection in primary studies. Both LGB and LRSG achieve effective weight loss following failed LSG. The less technically challenging nature of LRSG may be more widely applicable. Further research is required to elicit sustainability in long-term weight loss benefits.

Lifestyle management for enhancing outcomes after bariatric surgery

Bariatric surgery has been safe and effective for treatment of severe obesity and comorbidities like type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D). Nonetheless, weight loss and health outcomes vary considerably across individuals. Although the factors associated with outcomes are not fully understood, postoperative weight loss following any type of bariatric surgery is largely dependent on the extent to which patients can make and sustain changes in eating and activity. Therefore, lifestyle management including diet, exercise, and behavior modification is critical to helping patients achieve long-term weight loss. Pharmacotherapy and reoperation may also play a role after bariatric surgery. In this article, we highlight recent research findings in all of these areas to provide suggestions for how to enhance outcomes following bariatric surgery. Research on the mechanisms for weight loss and improvements in T2D following the different surgical procedures is needed to support the development of more personalized approaches to the multidisciplinary management of severe obesity.

Causes and outcomes of revisional bariatric surgery: initial experience at a single center

Purpose

Bariatric surgery has become more prevalent owing to the worldwide obesity epidemic. With the growing number of bariatric procedures performed annually, the requirement for revisional and secondary operations is increasing accordingly. This study aimed to evaluate the initial experience of revisional bariatric surgery at a single specialized center.

Methods

A retrospective review of the prospectively established database identified all patients who underwent revisional bariatric surgery between January 2008 and August 2013. The causes, surgical outcomes, and efficacy of the revisional surgeries were analyzed.

Results

Twenty-two revisional surgeries were performed laparoscopically during the study period (13 laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding, 9 laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy). The most common indication for revision was weight regain or insufficient weight loss (12/23, 52.2%), and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) was the most commonly performed secondary procedure (17/23, 73.9%, including four resectional RYGB procedures). Gastric pouch leak occurred in one patient following revisional RYGB, which required reoperation on the first postoperative day. The mean body mass index decreased from 35.9 to 28.8 kg/m² at a mean follow-up period of 10 months after revision. The percent excess weight losses at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively were 18.8%, 41.1%, 40.1%, and 47.4%, respectively.

Conclusion

Revisional bariatric surgery can be successfully performed via a laparoscopic approach with acceptable risk. Deliberate selection for the proper revisional procedure can efficiently manage undesirable results from the primary surgery.

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass after successful weight loss with a laparoscopic adjustable gastric band: rationales and early outcomes in patients of body mass index<35 kg/m(2.)

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has a number of well-established acute and chronic issues that can require revisional surgical procedures. There is no existing data to evaluate conversion of band patients with body mass index (BMI)<35 kg/m(2) from LAGB to a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). This study aims to report on the indications for and the safety profile of conversion of the LAGB to RYGB in patients with BMI<35 kg/m(2).

METHODS

A review of data from 200 consecutive conversions of LAGB to RYGB was conducted. Fifty-two patients whose BMI was<35 kg/m(2) were included in this analysis. Indications for conversion, technical details, early morbidity, length of hospital stay, and weight loss data were assessed.

RESULTS

Laparoscopic conversion to RYGB was performed in 100% of patients. The median BMI pre-RYGB was 32.8 kg/m(2). The most common indication for surgery was weight regain after removal of LAGB (28.8%). There was no mortality. Early morbidity was seen in 25% of patients; the most common complication was stricture of the gastrojejunal anastomosis (9 patients).

CONCLUSION

Morbidity resulting from conversion of LAGB to RYGB in patients with BMI <35 kg/m(2) is similar to that seen in the BMI>35 kg/m(2) population. The procedure is technically challenging and morbidity rates are higher than those reported for surgically 'naïve' patients. It is recommended that this procedure be undertaken by appropriately trained surgeons in high-volume bariatric centers to optimize safety and outcomes.

Comparison between laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding for morbid obesity: a meta-analysis

Bariatric surgery is now widely accepted for treatment of morbid obesity. This study compared the effects of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) on excess weight loss (EWL) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). PubMed and Embase were searched for publications concerning LAGB and LSG from 2000 to 2012, with the last search on August 17, 2012. EWL and T2DM improvement over 6 and 12 months were pooled and compared by meta-analysis. Odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences were calculated with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Eleven studies involving 1,004 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with LAGB, LSG achieved greater EWL. The mean percentage EWL for LAGB was 33.9 % after 6 months in six studies and 37.8 % after 12 months in four studies; for LSG, EWL was 50.6 % after 6 months and 51.8 % after 12 months in the same studies. LSG was also superior to LAGB in treating T2DM. In five studies, T2DM was improved in 42 of 68 (61.8 %) patients after LAGB and 66 of 80 (82.5 %) after LSG, representing a pooled OR of 0.34 (95 % CI 0.16–0.73) and pooled mean differences of −12.55 (95 % CI −15.66 to −9.43) and −4.97 (95 % CI −7.58 to −8.36), respectively. LSG is more effective than LAGB in morbid obesity, with higher percentage EWL and greater improvement in T2DM.

Revisional surgery after failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has emerged as one of the most commonly performed bariatric procedures worldwide. Unfortunately, revisional surgery is required in 20-30 % of cases. Several revisional strategies have been proposed, but there is no consensus regarding the best surgical option. This systematic review was designed to determine which revisional surgery (laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, or laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch) is best suited to enhance weight loss following failed LAGB due to complications or inadequate weight loss.

METHODS

EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Clinical Trials were searched using the most comprehensive timeline for each database. A total of 24 relevant articles were identified. Two investigators independently extracted data, and differences were resolved by consensus. The weighted means were calculated for weight loss measurements.

RESULTS

A total of 106, 514, and 71 patients underwent conversion from LAGB to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), and laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion and duodenal switch (BPDDS), respectively. Before revisional surgery, the weighted mean body mass index (BMI) was 38.8 (6.9), 43.3 (8.1), and 41.3 (7.2) kg/m(2) for the LSG, LRYGB, and BPDDS groups, respectively. The majority of data was reported at 12-24 months follow-up. The mean BMI within this interval was 28 (10.5), 32.2 (6.4), and 33 (5.7) kg/m(2) for the LSG, LRYGB, and BPDDS groups, respectively. In addition, the mean excess weight loss (EWL) was 22 % (2.8), 57.8 % (11.7), 47.1 % (14) for the LSG, LRYGB, and BPDDS groups, respectively. The EWL reached 78.4 % (35) in the BPPDS group after 2-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Failed LAGB is best managed with conversion to another bariatric procedure. Stable weight loss occurs with salvage LRYGB. Although results for revisional BPPDS appear promising, additional research, with higher methodological quality, is needed.

Revisional bariatric surgery

With the increase in bariatric surgical procedures, an increase in revision operations is expected. A thorough preoperative work-up is essential to formulate an appropriate revision strategy. Outcomes vary according to the primary operation and chosen approach to revision. Recent studies have shown acceptably low complication rates and good weight loss with the associated health benefits. Although there is no direct evidence in the form of randomized studies indicating which patients with inadequate weight loss or weight regain will benefit most from revision, or to support one particular revision approach rather than another, it is possible to develop general, effective strategies.

Failure of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy--further procedure?

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, the incidence of morbid obesity is increasing, and surgery is the only effective longterm treatment. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is associated with acceptable weight loss and reduced comorbidities. It is considered a safe procedure with sporadic complications. This publication aims to describe failures of LSG in terms of ineffective weight loss or early weight regain, and analyze secondary treatment options.

METHODS

From October 2001 to December 2010, 937 patients underwent LSG in our department. Initially, all procedures were scheduled as a two-stage procedure (LSG followed by biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch). However, the second procedure was not performed in 64 patients (body mass index > 60 kg/m(2)). Since 2005, the frequency of second stage procedures after weight regain has been increasing; their outcome is analyzed.

RESULTS

Of the 937 patients, 17 (1.8%) experienced staple line leakage. Mean time to first reintervention or endoscopic stent placement was 15.6 ± 22 days (range 2-78). From 2005 to 2010, 106 secondary procedures were performed. Insufficient weight loss or weight regain were the indications in 88 cases. Sixteen (15%) patients had severe gastroesophageal reflux which was resolved by Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Stenosis was observed in 2 (2.6%) patients, which required endoscopic dilatation and stent placement in one case and gastric bypass in the other.

CONCLUSIONS

LSG is a feasible and popular bariatric procedure. Mortality (0.4%) was much higher than after gastric bypass (0.03%) and gastric banding (0%) The knowledge of potential complications and their management is crucial. All restrictive procedures require patient compliance, but increased food uptake after RYGB and LSG is common. Malabsorptive procedures are more effective for long-term weight loss. Duodenal switch and omega-loop gastric bypass are more efficient second stage procedures than re-sleeve or RYGB.