Revisional Procedures after Sleeve Gastrectomy for Weight Recurrence or Inadequate Weight Loss: An Analysis of the MBSAQIP Database

Indications and Outcomes of Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Conversional Bariatric Surgery: An MBSAQIP Study

BACKGROUND

Conversional bariatric surgeries (CBS) are performed using laparoscopic and robotic techniques, but comprehensive data comparing these approaches remains scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the indications and outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic CBS.

METHODS

The MBSAQIP database was retrospectively analyzed from 2020 to 2022, comparing laparoscopic and robotic CBS. Primary outcomes were 30-day serious complications and mortality.

RESULTS

Of 72,189 CBS procedures, 75.4% were laparoscopic and 24.6% robotic. Mean age and BMI were similar between groups. The most common indications for both approaches were reflux, weight regain, and inadequate weight loss, with reflux being more prevalent in robotic CBS (38.3% vs 33.2%). Sleeve-to-bypass was the most common procedure in both groups (35.8% laparoscopic, 44.2% robotic). Robotic CBS had longer mean operative times (165.4 vs 121.7 min, p < 0.001) and slightly longer hospital stays (1.7 vs 1.6 days, p < 0.001). The rate of serious complications was slightly higher for robotic CBS, though not statistically significant (6.5% vs 6.1%, p = 0.08). Robotic CBS had higher rates of leak (0.9% vs 0.7%, p = 0.071), reoperation (2.8% vs 2.6%, p = 0.138), and readmission (6.7% vs 5.4%, p < 0.001). Mortality rates were similar (0.1% for both, p = 0.942).

CONCLUSIONS

Both laparoscopic and robotic CBS show similar safety profiles with comparable mortality rates. However, robotic CBS was associated with longer operative times, slightly longer hospital stays, and higher readmission rates. These findings suggest that the choice between approaches should consider individual patient factors and institutional expertise.

First-in-Human Linear Magnetic Compression Gastro-Ileostomy: Feasibility and Early Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Conventional surgical stapling/suturing requires tissue fixation with retained, potentially inflammatory materials. A novel minimally invasive magnetic compression anastomosis system that requires no fixation, enterotomy closure, or permanent implant appears to mitigate major complications associated with stapling/suturing.

OBJECTIVE

As an option for revision of clinically suboptimal sleeve gastrectomy (SG), technical feasibility, safety, and preliminary efficacy of magnetic gastro-ileostomy bipartition (MagGI procedure) were evaluated in a first-in-human case series.

METHODS

In a prospective single-center study, adults with body mass index (BMI) ≥30.0 to ≤50.0kg/m2 who were candidates for SG revision underwent the MagGI procedure. A distal magnet was delivered endoscopically with laparoscopic assistance to the ileum; a proximal magnet was positioned endoscopically in the gastric antrum; magnets were aligned in order to gradually fuse, forming a gastro-ileal bipartition. Primary safety endpoint: minimal incidence of device- and procedure-related severe adverse events (SAEs) (Clavien-Dindo [CD]). Primary efficacy endpoint: technical feasibility. Secondary endpoints: reduction of weight and metabolic parameters.

RESULTS

Between 11-27-23 and 5-27-24, 7 patients (mean BMI 38.8±0.9kg/m2) underwent revisional MagGI. Feasibility was demonstrated and patent gastro-ileal anastomoses confirmed in 100.0% with 0.0% device-related events, 1 SAE with a CD-III mild rating. No anastomotic leak, bleed, obstruction, infection, or stricture (0.0%). Total and excess weight loss, 18.9±3.9% and 52.4±11.0%; BMI reduction of 7.4kg/m2 (P<.05). Mild nutritional concerns were treated.

CONCLUSIONS

At 6-month interim evaluation, the MagGI procedure to revise clinically suboptimal SG was technically straightforward, incurred no major complications, and renewed clinically meaningful weight loss in a small cohort.

MINI ABSTRACT

In this first-in-human study, patients with obesity underwent magnetic gastro-ileostomy bipartition for weight loss. The procedure was feasible, safe, and required no stapling/suturing or retained foreign materials. 100% of patients formed patent anastomoses resulting in clinically meaningful total and excess weight loss (18.9%; 52.4%) with 0.0% major complications.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIER: #NCT06073457.

Postoperative outcomes following revision or conversion surgery after primary sleeve gastrectomy: an analysis of the MBSAQIP database

BACKGROUND

A significant proportion of patients that undergo primary sleeve gastrectomy (SG) require revision or conversion metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS). Despite various procedures performed in practice, comparative analyses of short-term outcomes remain limited.

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a retrospective comparative analysis of postoperative outcomes of revision or conversion MBS following primary SG.

SETTING

The 2020-2022 MBSAQIP database.

METHODS

We included patients who underwent any one of the following: revision SG (Re-SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (SG-RYGB), biliopancreatic diversion/duodenal switch (SG-BPD/DS), single anastomosis duodenoileal bypass (SG-SADI), or one anastomosis gastric bypass (SG-OAGB). Our primary outcome was 30-day major complications, defined as Clavien-Dindo Grade≥ II.

RESULTS

Among 33,348 revision/conversion MBS, SG-RYGB was the most common (n = 27,393, 82.1%). Compared to SG-RYGB, the odds of 30-day major complications were lower in Re-SG (odds ratio [OR] .75, 95%- confidence interval [CI] .61-.90) and SG-SADI (OR .75, 95%-CI .57 - .97). However, both Re-SG and SG-SADI were associated with higher odds of anastomotic or staple line leak (OR 2.74; 95%-CI 1.78-4.12 and OR 2.44; 95%-CI 1.35-4.17, respectively). In addition, both Re-SG (mean difference 1.66 days, 95%-CI .44 - 2.88) and SG-SADI (MD 3.0 days, 95%-CI 1.31- 4.70) resulted in longer hospital stays upon readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

In our analysis, Re-SG and SG-SADI had lower odds of 30-day major complications compared to SG-RYGB, but had significantly higher odds of anastomotic or staple line leak and had longer hospital stays on readmission. Given its limited indications and significant potential morbidity, Re-SG should not be routinely offered as a revisional procedure for primary SG.

National trends in using revisional surgeries post-sleeve gastrectomy due to reflux and weight recurrence: a matched case-control analysis

BACKGROUND

Several options exist for surgical conversion after sleeve gastrectomy (SG), but a definitive safety profile for each option by indication for conversion remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To determine and compare 30-day risk profiles of SG conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD-DS), and single-anastomosis duodenoileostomy (SADI).

METHODS

Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program national database entries from 2020 to 2022 were used to identify 25,760 adult patients who underwent SG conversion to RYGB, BPD-DS, or SADI. Subgroup analyses were performed among 6106 conversions completed for weight-related complications (RYGB: 3053 patients; BPD-DS: 1826 patients; SADI: 1227 patients). Multivariable analysis and 1:1 nearest-neighbor matching were used to further characterize the 30-day risk profile of each conversion.

RESULTS

Patients with RYGB conversions had a lower preoperative body mass index compared with those with BPD-DS + SADI conversions (39.8 versus 46.1, P < .001) and significantly lower rates of medical comorbidities. The distribution of conversion indication for each MBS configuration varied, where most RYGB conversions were for reflux (56.1%) whereas most BPD-DS + SADI conversions were for weight-related complications (87.3%; P < .001). On 1:1 matched analysis of conversions for weight recurrence, odds of 30-day complications (odds ratio .73, P = .019) and readmission (odds ratio .77, P = .031) were lower in BPD-DS + SADI conversions compared with RYGB. There were no significant differences in odds of 30-day reintervention or reoperation between conversion to RYGB and BPD-DS + SADI. Major differing drivers of complications between conversion types included hemorrhage (RYGB 1.98% versus BPD-DS + SADI .87%; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

For weight recurrence after SG, conversion to BPD-DS + SADI does not have greater 30-day complications than RYGB and may be a safe conversion option.

Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation for Gastroesophageal Reflux After Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review

This systematic review aims to evaluate the current evidence regarding safety and efficacy of magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) carries the risk of surgical and metabolic complications and may be contraindicated in patients with normalized or near-normalized body mass index. The LINX™ procedure aims to restore LES competency and to repair the crura. We included 109 patients (14 studies) undergoing LINX™ implant after LSG. Median follow-up was 18.9 months (range 0.3-63). Both the GERD-HRQL (38 ± 13 vs. 10 ± 11; p = 0.0078) and daily PPI use (97.4% vs. 25.3%; p < 0.0001) were significantly improved. Overall, 31.8% of the patients experienced device-related adverse events, mainly self-limiting. LINX™ explant for esophageal erosion occurred in 0.9% of the patients.

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

PRIMARY ENDPOINTS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT05322122.

Outcomes of revisional surgery options after inadequate sleeve gastrectomy: A comprehensive network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the success of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in of weight loss and treatment of the medical problems associated with obesity, some concerns have arisen about the need for revisional surgeries after SG in some patients. This study aimed to present an updated and comprehensive comparison among the presently available revisional surgeries employed explicitly in cases of inadequate outcomes after SG, which is the most frequently performed bariatric surgery in contemporary practice.

METHODS

This network meta-analysis included studies that compared the outcomes of different revisional bariatric procedures after an inadequate outcome of SG.

RESULTS

Searching across the electronic databases yielded 31 eligible articles. Re-SG was associated with the highest rate of significant complications. Patients treated with single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass (SADI) had a significantly higher percentage of total weight loss (%TWL) than those treated with one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). The percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) at the end of the follow-up period was significantly higher in patients in the SADI group compared to those in the RYGB group and the OAGB, and re-SG exhibited the least values compared to SADI, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD/DS), and OAGB. Significantly lower rates of reflux worsening/de novo development were observed in the SADI group compared to the OAGB group and the re-SG group, which showed significantly higher rates than SADI and RYGB.

CONCLUSION

Our comprehensive network meta-analysis highlights SADI as a promising revisional option post-SG, demonstrating superior weight loss outcomes, lower significant complication rates, and a favorable impact on reflux compared to other procedures. While acknowledging the limitations of our study, these findings support the potential efficacy of SADI in addressing the challenges of inadequate weight loss after sleeve gastrectomy.

Weight loss after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and single anastomosis duodenoileostomy following failed sleeve gastrectomy

OBJECTIVE

While sleeve gastrectomy (SG) results in sustained weight loss for the majority of patients, some will experience inadequate weight loss or weight regain requiring revision. The objective of this study was to evaluate differences in weight loss over time between patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or single anastomosis duodenoileostomy (SADI) after SG.

METHODS

We queried a single institution's bariatrics registry to identify patients who underwent RYGB or SADI after previous SG over a three-year period. Demographics, operative characteristics, and post-operative complications were evaluated. Interval total body weight loss (TBWL) and excess body weight loss (EBWL) were calculated from available follow-ups within 2 years.

RESULTS

We identified 124 patients who underwent conversion to RYGB (n = 61) or SADI (n = 63) following previous SG. There were no differences in sex, age, or medical comorbidities between groups. The median initial BMI was higher in the SADI group (44.9 vs. 41.9 for RYGB, p = 0.03) with greater excess body weight (56.7 vs. 64.3 kg, p = 0.04). The SADI group had a shorter median operative duration (157 vs. 182 min for RYGB, p < 0.01) and lower readmission rates (0 vs. 14.75%, p < 0.01). There was no difference in post-operative complications or need for rehydration therapy between the groups. Among 122 patients (98.4%) that had follow-up weights available, there were no differences in TBWL between groups. RYGB patients had a higher EBWL at 2, 3, and 6 months (p < 0.05 for all comparisons), but there were no differences between RYGB and SADI at 1 or 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Both RYGB and SADI conversions proved effective for further weight loss following failed SG at our academic center. While neither demonstrated clear superiority in long-term (> 1 year) weight loss, RYGB's restrictive gastric pouch may explain its early weight loss advantage.

Primary Versus Revisional Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery in Patients with a Body Mass Index ≥ 50 kg/m2-90-Day Outcomes and Risk of Perioperative Mortality

BACKGROUND

Bariatric and metabolic surgery (BMS) is an effective treatment for patients with severe obesity. Patients with higher body mass index (BMI) and patients undergoing revisional surgery have a higher rate of major complications. This study purpose is to evaluate perioperative outcomes of patients with BMI ≥ 50 kg/m2.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients with a BMI ≥ 50 kg/m2 undergoing BMS between 2015 and 2023 was conducted. A comparative analysis was performed between patients undergoing primary versus revisional surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 263 patients were included in the study. Primary procedures were performed in 220 patients (83.7%) and revisional procedures in 43 patients (16.3%). BMS included one anastomosis gastric bypass (n = 183), sleeve gastrectomy (n = 63), and other procedures (n = 17). Mean BMI was 54.6 with no difference between groups. There was no difference in baseline characteristics except the revisional group was older (44.8 ± 9.6 versus 39 ± 13 years; p = 0.006), had higher rates of gastroesophageal reflux disease (21% vs 7.3%; p = 0.005), and fatty liver disease (74% vs 55%; p = 0.02). There was perioperative mortality in three cases (1.1%) with no significant difference between groups. Leak rates were higher, and length of stay (LOS) was longer in the revisional group (4.6% vs 0.45%; p = 0.018 and 2.9 vs 3.7; p = 0.006, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Revisional BMS in patients with a BMI ≥ 50 kg/m2 is associated with increased leak rates and LOS. Mortality rate is 1.1% and is insignificantly different between groups. Further prospective and large-scale studies are needed to clarify the optimal surgical approach to patients with extreme BMI including revisional surgery.

One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OABG) vs. Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass (SADI) as revisional procedure following Sleeve Gastrectomy: results of a multicenter study

PURPOSE

Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG) is the most performed bariatric surgery, but a considerable number of patients may require revisional procedures for suboptimal clinical response/recurrence of weight (SCR/RoW). Conversion options include One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) and Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass (SADI). The study aims to compare SADI vs. OAGB as revisional procedures in terms of early and mid-term complications, operative time, postoperative hospital stay and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

All patients who underwent OAGB or SADI as revisional procedures following SG for SCR/RoW at three high-volume bariatric centers between January 2014 and April 2021 were included. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed. Demographic, operative, and postoperative outcomes of the two groups were compared.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-eight patients were identified. After PSM, the two groups included 42 OAGB and 42 SADI patients. Early (≤ 30 days) postoperative complications rate did not differ significantly between OAGB and SADI groups (3 bleedings vs. 0, p = 0.241). Mid-term (within 2 years) complications rate was significantly higher in the OAGB group (21.4% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.007), mainly anastomotic complications and reflux disease (12% of OAGBs). Seven OAGB patients required conversion to another procedure (Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass-RYGB) vs. none among the SADI patients (p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

SADI and OAGB are both effective as revisional procedures for SCR/RoW after SG. OAGB is associated with a significantly higher rate of mid-term complications and a not negligible rate of conversion (RYGB). Larger studies are necessary to draw definitive conclusions.