Redo Surgery after Failed Open VBG: Laparoscopic Minigastric Bypass versus Laparoscopic Roux en Y Gastric Bypass-Which Is Better?

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.

Use of a Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent for Management of Pouch Outlet Stenosis After Vertical Banded Gastroplasty

Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) offer a novel alternative for the treatment of anastomotic strictures or short, benign gastrointestinal strictures. In the bariatric realm, LAMSs provide a potentially safer, efficacious, and nonsurgical approach to surgical revision. Here, we present a case where a LAMS was successfully used to manage pouch outlet stenosis from a previous vertical banded gastroplasty.

IFSO Update Position Statement on One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB)

The International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) issued a position statement on the role of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) in the field of bariatric/metabolic surgery in 2018 De Luca et al. (Obes Surg. 28(5):1188-206, 2018). This position statement was issued by the IFSO OAGB task force and approved by the IFSO Scientific Committee and IFSO Executive Board. In 2018, the OAGB task force recognized the necessity to update the position statement in the following 2 years since additional high-quality data could emerge. The updated IFSO position statement on OAGB was issued also in response to inquiries to the IFSO by society members, universities, hospitals, physicians, insurances, patients, policy makers, and media. The IFSO position statement on OAGB has been reviewed within 2 years according to the availability of additional scientific evidence. The recommendation of the statement is derived from peer-reviewed scientific literature and available knowledge. The IFSO update position statement on OAGB will again be reviewed in 2 years provided additional high-quality studies emerge.

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus one anastomosis-mini gastric bypass as a rescue procedure following failed restrictive bariatric surgery. A systematic review of literature with metanalysis

BACKGROUND

Although different procedures have been proposed as revisional surgery for patients who had previously undergone a failed primary restrictive procedure, the ideal revisional procedure is still a matter of debate.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in all electronic databases to find studies comparing one anastomosis-mini gastric bypass (OAGB-MGB) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional bariatric surgery for weight regain or intolerance/complications of a primary restrictive procedure. The data regarding sample size, patients' gender, age, primary surgery type, number of perioperative complications, operative time, pre- and post-revisional body mass index (BMI), and excess weight loss % (EWL%) at 1-year follow-up were extracted. Five studies were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

The primary bariatric procedures were represented by vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG), laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). About perioperative complications, both RYGB and OAGB-MGB showed a similar rate of leaks but OAGB-MGB had a lower rate of bleedings; considering the progression from pre- to post-revisional BMI, OAGB-MGB reveals a better outcome as well as a shorter operative time.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis has shown OAGB-MGB, used as revisional intervention after failed restrictive surgery, achieves outcomes comparable to RYGB in terms of perioperative complications providing a simpler and more effective technique.

Revisional Bariatric Surgery

Revisional bariatric surgery is a growing subset of all bariatric procedures. Although revisions can be associated with higher morbidity rates and less optimal outcomes than those seen with primary procedures, they can be safely performed, with excellent outcomes and improved quality of life for patients. Facility and familiarity with revisional principles and techniques are necessary components of bariatric surgical practice.

One Anastomosis/Mini-Gastric Bypass (OAGB/MGB) as Revisional Surgery Following Primary Restrictive Bariatric Procedures: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB) has gained popularity in the past decade. International databases were searched for articles published by September 10, 2020, on OAGB/MGB as a revisional procedure after restrictive procedures. Twenty-six studies examining a total of 1771 patients were included. The mean initial BMI was 45.70 kg/m2, which decreased to 31.52, 31.40, and 30.54 kg/m2 at 1, 3, and 5-year follow-ups, respectively. Remission of type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) following OAGB/MGB at 1-, 3-, and 5-year follow-up was 65.16 ± 24.43, 65.37 ± 36.07, and 78.10 ± 14.19%, respectively. Remission/improvement rate from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Also, 7.4% of the patients developed de novo GERD following OAGB/MGB. Leakage was the most common major complication. OAGB/MGB appears to be feasible and effective as a revisional procedure after failed restrictive bariatric procedures.

Revisional One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass After Restrictive Index Surgery-a Metaanalysis and Comparison with Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

BACKGROUND

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) was established as a recognized bariatric procedure in the 2018 International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) position statement. This study evaluates the outcomes of revisional OAGB (rOAGB) after a restrictive index procedure, and to compare it to revisional RYGB (rRYGB).

METHODS

A literature search was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines on papers published from inception till February 2020. Original studies involving patients who underwent rOAGB after a primary failed restrictive procedure were included. The primary outcome measured was postrOAGB weight loss. Secondary outcome measures include comorbidity resolution, operative duration, length of stay, morbidity, and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies with 1377 patients were included. Five studies compared rOAGB versus rRYGB. Majority of the patients (76%) were female, with mean age of 43.5 years old. Mean body mass index (BMI) before revisional surgery was 41.6 kg/m². The most common biliopancreatic limb length was 200 cm. Percentage of excess weight loss after rOAGB increases to a maximum of 76.0% at 48 months postsurgery. rOAGB resulted in a pooled prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and obstructive sleep apnea resolution of 74.9%, 48.4%, 63.2%, and 75.7% respectively. When compared to rRYGB, rOAGB demonstrated greater weight loss, comparable metabolic syndrome resolution, but with a shorter operating time. Morbidity and mortality rates were low across all studies.

CONCLUSIONS

rOAGB has potential as an alternative revisional surgery, with weight loss profiles and rates of metabolic syndrome resolution that are comparable to rRYGB.

Twelve-Year Experience with Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass as a Conversional Procedure for Vertical Banded Gastroplasty: Are We on the Right Track?

BACKGROUND

Vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) has high rates of long-term complications. Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is considered optimal; however, there are limited data on the late results of these conversions. We aimed to analyze our single-center long-term outcomes of patients requiring conversional RYGB for a failed VBG.

METHODS

The records of patients who underwent RYGB as a conversional procedure after VBG from November 2004 to December 2016 were reviewed. Follow-up data were obtained by direct telephone calls with patients, electronic files, and general practitioner reports. Characteristics, indications of conversion, long-term (> 30 days) morbidities, weight records, obesity-related comorbidities, and overall patient satisfaction were analyzed.

RESULTS

Overall, 305 VBG patients (82% female) underwent conversional RYGB during the study period. The mean pre-RYGB body mass index (BMI) was 35.6 (23-66) kg/m². Conversions were indicated in 61% of patients because of simultaneous VBG complications and weight regain. After a median follow-up of 74.3 (5-151) months, 225 (73.8%) patients agreed to participate. The mean BMI and percentage of total weight loss (%TWL) were 28.6 (18-45) kg/m² and 17.4%, respectively. Nearly all conversion indications were addressed effectively. Surgical reintervention was mandatory in 28 of 225 patients (12.4%) due to complications. Approximately 85% of patients reported complete remission of obesity-related comorbidities, and four-fifths were fully satisfied.

CONCLUSION

RYGB resolves VBG complications, improves quality of life, and results in prolonged stable weight loss. It has a key role in the management of obesity-related comorbidities and in expert hands is the preferred conversional procedure for patients with failed VBG.

Mini Gastric Bypass-One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (MGB-OAGB)-IFSO Position Statement

PREAMBLE

The International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) has played an integral role in educating both the metabolic surgical and the medical community at large about the role of innovative and new surgical and/or endoscopic interventions in treating adiposity-based chronic diseases.The mini gastric bypass is also known as the one anastomosis gastric bypass. The IFSO has agreed that the standard nomenclature should be the mini gastric bypass-one anastomosis gastric bypass (MGB-OAGB). The IFSO commissioned a task force (Appendix 1) to determine if MGB-OAGB is an effective and safe procedure and if it should be considered a surgical option for the treatment of obesity and metabolic diseases.The following position statement is issued by the IFSO MGB-OAGB task force and approved by the IFSO Scientific Committee and Executive Board. This statement is based on current clinical knowledge, expert opinion, and published peer-reviewed scientific evidence. It will be reviewed in 2 years.

What Makes Bariatric Operations Difficult-Results of a National Survey

Background and objective: The most commonly performed bariatric procedures include laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), and one anastomosis gastric bypass-mini gastric bypass (OAGB-MGB). A study comparing the degree of difficulty among those procedures could serve as a guide for decision making in bariatric surgery and further improve training programs for general surgery trainees. The aim of this study was to compare the subjective level of technical difficulty of LSG, LRYGB, and OAGB-MGB as perceived by surgeons and surgical residents. Materials and Methods: An anonymous internet-based survey was designed to evaluate the subjective opinions of surgeons and surgical residents in training in Poland. It covered baseline characteristics of the participants, difficulty of LSG, OAGB-MGB, LRYGB and particular stages of each operation assessed on a 1-5 scale. Results: Overall, 70 surgeons and residents participated in our survey. The mean difficulty degree of LSG was 2.34 ± 0.89. The reinforcing staple line with sutures was considered most difficult stage of this operation (3.17 ± 1.19). The LRYGB operation had an average difficulty level of 3.87 ± 1.04. Creation of the gastrojejunostomy was considered the most difficult stage of LRYGB with a mean difficulty level (3.68 ± 1.16). Responders to our survey assessed the mean degree of difficulty of OAGB-MGB as 2.34 ± 0.97. According to participating surgeons, creating the gastrojejunostomy is the most difficult phase of this operation (3.68 ± 1.16). Conclusion: The LSG is perceived by surgeons as a relatively easy operation. The LRYGB was considered to be the most technically challenging procedure in our survey. Operative stages, which require intra-abdominal suturing with laparoscopic instruments, seem to be the most difficult phases of each operation.