Current recommendations for procedure selection in class I and II obesity developed by an expert modified Delphi consensus

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is widely considered the most effective option for treating obesity, a chronic, relapsing, and progressive disease. Recently, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) issued new guidelines on the indications for MBS, which have superseded the previous 1991 National Institutes of Health guidelines. The aim of this study is to establish the first set of consensus guidelines for selecting procedures in Class I and II obesity, using an Expert Modified Delphi Method. In this study, 78 experienced bariatric surgeons from 32 countries participated in a two-round Modified Delphi consensus voting process. The threshold for consensus was set at an agreement or disagreement of ≥ 70.0% among the experts. The experts reached a consensus on 54 statements. The committee of experts reached a consensus that MBS is a cost-effective treatment option for Class II obesity and for patients with Class I obesity who have not achieved significant weight loss through non-surgical methods. MBS was also considered suitable for patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and a body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m2 or higher. The committee identified intra-gastric balloon (IGB) as a treatment option for patients with class I obesity and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) as an option for patients with class I and II obesity, as well as for patients with T2DM and a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2. Sleeve gastrectomy (1) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) were also recognized as viable treatment options for these patient groups. The committee also agreed that one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a suitable option for patients with Class II obesity and T2DM, regardless of the presence or severity of obesity-related medical problems. The recommendations for selecting procedures in Class I and II obesity, developed through an Expert Modified Delphi Consensus, suggest that the use of standard primary bariatric endoscopic (IGB, ESG) and surgical procedures (SG, RYGB, OAGB) are acceptable in these patient groups, as consensus was reached regarding these procedures. However, randomized controlled trials are still needed in Class I and II Obesity to identify the best treatment approach for these patients in the future.

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Single Anastomosis Duodenoileostomy with Sleeve: Comparative Analysis of 30-Day Outcomes Using the MBSAQIP

INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and single anastomosis duodenoileostomy with sleeve (SADI-S) are two highly effective bariatric procedures that have been recently endorsed by the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS). We compared the outcomes and safety profiles of SADI-S and OAGB using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis on patients who underwent SADI-S or OAGB obtained from the MBSAQIP database 2020-2021. Patients who underwent concurrent procedures (besides EGD) or had missing data were removed. Variables included age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, and pertinent medical comorbidities. Data were analyzed for 30-day postoperative morbidity, mortality, reoperation, reintervention, and readmissions. p values were calculated using Student's t-test or Fisher analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 694 and 1068 patients respectively underwent SADI-S or OAGB. Statistically significant comorbidities included age (42.2 ± 10.8 vs. 43.7 ± 12.2), BMI (50.6 ± 9.1 vs. 45.3 ± 7.1), ASA 2 (66 (9.5%) vs. 165 (15.4%)), ASA 4 [69 (9.9%) vs. 20 (1.9%)], and immunosuppressive therapy [24 (3.5%) vs. 17 (1.6%)]. Clavien-Dindo-based analysis highlighted that SADI-S had higher grade 2 (p = 0.005) and grade 4b (p = 0.001) complications. Patients who underwent SADI-S were twice as likely to be readmitted within 30 days (3.7% vs. 1.9%; p = 0.021).

CONCLUSION

SADI-S had higher readmission rates and higher Clavien-Dindo grade 2 and 4b complications. To note, SADI-S patients had higher BMIs. Further studies are needed to determine the long-term complications and efficacy of both operations.

IBC-Ox24 Routine Oversewing of Staple Lines to Prevent Leaks is Unnecessary in Patients with Normal Iintraoperative Indocyanine Green (ICG) Perfusion Studies Uundergoing Sleeve Gastrectomy

 

Anastomotic staple line leaks following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is a devastating complication. Gastric ischemia and poor tissue perfusion has been hypothesized to be a contributing factor. Various interventions including oversewing of staple lines are commonly used hoping to decrease staple line leaks. Indocyanine green (ICG) can be used to assess bowel perfusion and anastomotic viability following laparoscopic surgery. 50 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy utilizing intravenous administration of ICG to assess tissue perfusion and the need for staple line oversewing.

Methods

50 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy were studied intraoperatively after completion of sleeve gastrectomy using intravenous administration of ICG. 7.5 mg of ICG was administered intravenously. Arterial perfusion and end stage tissue perfusion of the completed sleeve gastrectomy was then evaluated. Vascular arterial inflow of the gastric cardia, body and antrum was carefully evaluated both anteriorly and posteriorly for evidence of delayed tissue perfusion or tissue ischemia.

Results

In all cases the staple line was examined for staple line formation and evidence of poor tissue perfusion using ICG. Both anterior and posterior evaluation was performed of the distal esophagus, gastric cardia, gastric body and antrum. Absence of tissue perfusion in the resected gastric body was used as a comparison control in all cases. ICG perfusion of the gastric cardia, body and antrum was found to be excellent and brisk in all patients. There were no areas of decreased perfusion or tissue ischemia. Oversewing of the staple line was avoided in all cases. Hemostatic clips were deployed as needed for staple line bleeding until there was no evidence of bleeding on visual inspection and final ICG administration. Patients were followed for evidence of leakage or obstruction for 30 days following completion of the sleeve gastrectomy. There were no leaks, there were no deaths. There were no obstructions and no readmissions. There were no complications related to administration of ICG. Average operative time was 48.7 minutes.

Conclusions

Our series of 50 consecutive sleeve gastrectomies utilizing ICG to assess for tissue perfusion demonstrated no evidence of tissue perfusion deficiencies along the staple line or at the angle of His. Staple line oversewing was not used in any patients. Staple line oversewing in cases without evidence of tissue perfusion deficits on ICG evaluation following sleeve gastrectomy is unnecessary. Further multicenter studies and prospective randomized series are necessary to confirm these initial findings.

IBC-Ox22 Greater Adherence to Mediterranean Diet leads to longer term weight loss

 

We were able to obtain dietary data of 134 weight loss surgery patients with an average follow up of five years with annual scoring of the 9 point Mediterranean Diet. The closer adherence to the MD showed more weight loss than those who had not.

Background

The Mediterranean Diet has been associated with decreased all cause mortality for those who adhere strongly to it, as well as decreased risk of heart disease, and cancer. The diet is rich in polyphenols with fruits, vegetables, legumes, fish, mono-unsaturated fats, whole grains, while minimizing dairy, meat and poultry, and some moderate alcohol consumption.

Methods

Pre operatively all bariatric patients patients were counseled about the Mediterranean diet, how to score the diet, and adherence to the diet was reemphasized at their follow ups. Annually they were asked to fill out their scores. We looked at other diet plans that some of the patients reported (low carbohydrate, weight watchers) and the results were not significant.

Results

Of the 134 patients there were 65 which had scores of 5 points or more and showed an absolute reduction in weight of 54% total weight loss on average, vs those of 1-3 who had 32% total weight loss (total of 60 patients). The remaining 9 patients who escorted 4 points had a wide spread of weight loss that could not be calculated (these patients predominantly followed a self-described low-carbohydrate diet). There was no difference in weight loss regarding the type of surgery that the patient had (Lap-Band (N=74) vs Gastric Sleeve (N=50) vs Gastric bypass (N=10). Nor was there any difference in weight loss when measuring physical activity.

Using the 9 point scale of the Mediterranean Diet those who had greater than 5 of the 9 points on the MD had greater weight loss over five years than those who were 0-3. Those who scored 4 points were indeterminate.

Conclusions

The Mediterranean Diet scale provides a quick and easy guide, providing targets for patients (example, less than 4 ounces per day of poultry or meat is a point, more is 0 points). The emphasis on a post operative diet for health, as opposed to weight loss, inadvertently provided a good model for post operative weight loss.

Patient Selection in One Anastomosis/Mini Gastric Bypass-an Expert Modified Delphi Consensus

PURPOSE

One anastomosis/mini gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB) is up to date the third most performed obesity and metabolic procedure worldwide, which recently has been endorsed by ASMBS. The main criticisms are the risk of bile reflux, esophageal cancer, and malnutrition. Although IFSO has recognized this procedure, guidance is needed regarding selection criteria. To give clinicians a daily support in performing the right patient selection in OAGB/MGB, the aim of this paper is to generate clinical guidelines based on an expert modified Delphi consensus.

METHODS

A committee of 57 recognized bariatric surgeons from 24 countries created 69 statements. Modified Delphi consensus voting was performed in two rounds. An agreement/disagreement among ≥ 70.0% of the experts was considered to indicate a consensus.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved for 56 statements. Remarkably, ≥ 90.0% of the experts felt that OAGB/MGB is an acceptable and suitable option "in patients with Body mass index (BMI) > 70, BMI > 60, BMI > 50 kg/m² as a one-stage procedure," "as the second stage of a two-stage bariatric surgery after Sleeve Gastrectomy for BMI > 50 kg/m² (instead of BPD/DS)," and "in patients with weight regain after restrictive procedures. No consensus was reached on the statement that OAGB/MGB is a suitable option in case of resistant Helicobacter pylori. This is likely as there is a concern that this procedure is associated with reflux and its related long-term complications including risk of cancer in the esophagus or stomach. Also no consensus reached on OAGB/MGB as conversional surgery in patients with GERD after restrictive procedures. Consensus for disagreement was predominantly achieved "in case of intestinal metaplasia of the stomach" (74.55%), "in patients with severe Gastro Esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)(C,D)" (75.44%), "in patients with Barrett's metaplasia" (89.29%), and "in documented insulinoma" (89.47%).

CONCLUSION

Patient selection in OAGB/MGB is still a point of discussion among experts. There was consensus that OAGB/MGB is a suitable option in elderly patients, patients with low BMI (30-35 kg/m²) with associated metabolic problems, and patients with BMIs more than 50 kg/m² as one-stage procedure. OAGB/MGB can also be a safe procedure in vegetarian and vegan patients. Although OAGB/MGB can be a suitable procedure in patients with large hiatal hernia with concurrent hiatal hernia, it should not be offered to patients with grade C or D esophagitis or Barrett's metaplasia.

Single-Port Sleeve Gastrectomy Compared With Conventional Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: 5-Year Follow-up of Weight Loss, Comorbidity Resolution, and Cost

Background. The Single-Port Instrument Delivery Extended Reach (SPIDER) surgical system is a safe revolutionary technology that defeated difficulties of single-incision surgery. We assessed the long-term outcomes of SPIDER sleeve gastrectomy (SPIDER SG) versus conventional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in morbidly obese patients. Methods. Retrospective review of patients who underwent SPIDER SG or LSG in our center matched by the date of surgery (2012-2013). We reviewed weight loss results up to 5 years, complication rates, procedure and hospitalization durations, financial cost, and effect on comorbidities. Results. Patients underwent 200 SPIDER SG and 220 LSG. At baseline, SPIDER SG versus LSG patients had a mean body mass index of 43.8 ± 5.6 and 48.6 ± 8.1 kg/m², respectively. At 1 year, both groups had comparable percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL). At 5 years, SPIDER SG had %EWL of 54.6 ± 24.8 compared with 57.8 ± 29.9 in LSG (P = .4). Nine SPIDER SG (4.5%) required conversion to LSG. Complications occurred in both groups: 4% versus 4.1% (P = .95). At 2-year follow-up, diabetes mellitus was reversed in 43% of SPIDER SG and 62% LSG. Despite a shorter hospital stay in SPIDER SG, the total cost was significantly higher ($2 041 477) compared with LSG ($1 773 834). The mean score of scar satisfaction was significantly more in SPIDER SG. Conclusions. SPIDER SG was safe with long-term effects on weight loss comparable to LSG. Despite the higher cost of SPIDER SG, a shorter hospital stay and better cosmesis were observed.

Weight Loss Outcomes of Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Band with Plication: a Single Center Experience of 66 Patients with 18-Month Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric band with plication (LAGBP) is a novel bariatric procedure, which combines the adjustability of the laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) with the restrictive nature of the vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG). The addition of plication of the stomach to LAGB should provide better appetite control, more effective weight loss, and greater weight loss potential. The purpose of the study was to analyze the outcomes of LAGBP at 18 months.

METHODS

Data from all patients who underwent a primary LAGBP procedure from December 2011 through June 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Data collected from each patient included age, gender, weight, body mass index (BMI), and excess weight loss (EWL).

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients underwent LAGBP. The mean age and BMI were 44.6 ± 12.7 years and 42.1 ± 5.1 kg/m², respectively. The patients lost an average of 49% and 46.8% EWL at 12 months (77.2% follow-up) and 18 months (66.1% follow-up), respectively. The mean band adjustments were 2.1 ± 1.7 (range, 0-7) per patient in 1 year. The mean additional adjustment volume (infusion and withdrawal of saline) was 0.6 ± 1 cc. Dysphagia was the most common long-term complication. The band removal rate was 7.5%. The mortality rate was 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

LAGBP is a relatively safe and effective bariatric procedure. In light of recent studies demonstrating poor outcomes following LAGB, LAGBP may prove to be the future for patients desiring a bariatric procedure without resection of the stomach.

Effect of early weight loss on type 2 diabetes mellitus after 2 years of gastric banding

OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is an established bariatric surgical procedure that produces meaningful weight loss and improvements in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m2. This study examined the effect of LAGB on T2DM status in severely obese patients with T2DM.

METHODS

This was a 2-year interim analysis of patients with T2DM who required daily hypoglycemic medication at baseline (N = 89) in the 5-year, open-label, prospective, observational LAP-BAND AP® EXperience (APEX) trial. Type 2 diabetes mellitus status was classified as "remission," "improved," "stable," or "worse" based on physician- and patient-reported changes in T2DM control and changes in hypoglycemic medication use.

RESULTS

At baseline, 89 (22.5%) of 395 patients required daily hypoglycemic medication; 66 patients had data available after 2 years. Remission of T2DM occurred in 32 (48.5%) patients, improvement occurred in 31 (47.0%) patients, and no change occurred in 3 (4.5%) patients. Overall, 95.5% of patients experienced remission or improvement in T2DM status. Duration of T2DM in patients with remission or improvement after 2 years was 4.0 and 6.7 years, respectively (P = 0.082 between groups), and was associated with change in T2DM status (logistic regression, P = 0.069). Baseline BMI, change in BMI, and percent weight loss were not significantly different between the T2DM response groups. Percent excess weight loss was numerically, but not statistically significantly, greater in remitted (-56.1%) compared with the improved response (-42.9%) group (P = 0.134), and was correlated with change in T2DM status (logistic regression, P = 0.052). After 2 years, patients experienced remission or improvement of other obesity comorbidities. The rate of revisional surgery or explantation was 3.4%, and it was not significantly different between patients with and without T2DM (P = 0.687).

CONCLUSION

Shorter duration of T2DM and greater percent excess weight loss were associated with an increased likelihood of remission or improvement in T2DM status through LAGB after 2 years. Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding is a potential adjunctive treatment for obese patients with T2DM.

Effect of adjustable gastric banding on changes in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and quality of life

OBJECTIVE

Bariatric surgery is an effective treatment for the reduction of weight in obese patients (BMI ≥ 40 kg/m(2) or 30 kg/m(2) with ≥1 comorbidities), who are refractory to behavioral and medical therapies. This study examined the effect of the adjustable gastric band (AGB) system on changes in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and patient-reported outcomes, including measures of quality of life.

METHODS

Two-year interim analysis of patients (N = 171) in the 5 year, prospective APEX study who reported GERD prior to the AGB procedure. An unrecorded number of hiatal hernia repairs were conducted during the APEX study.

RESULTS

At baseline, 171 of 395 patients (43%) reported GERD requiring daily medical therapy. After 2 years, 122 patients had sufficient data to assess outcome (71%). Complete resolution of GERD was reported in 98 patients (80%), improvement in 13 (11%), no change in 9 (7%), and worsening in 2 (2%). Overall, 91% of GERD patients experienced resolution and/or improvement of GERD. Baseline BMI was not significantly different among the GERD response categories (resolved, improved, and stable/worse), p = 0.4581. Mean ΔBMI and percentage excess weight loss (%EWL) were: -8.8 kg/m(2)/-0.9%, -11.4 kg/m(2)/-53.9%, -6.4 kg/m(2)/-36.1%, and -7.1 kg/m(2)/-31.2%, respectively. There were no significant differences in reductions in BMI or %EWL between responder groups (resolved versus stable/worse ΔBMI p = 0.1031, %EWL p = 0.0667 OR resolved/improved versus stable/worse ΔBMI p = 0.0918, %EWL p = 0.0552). After 2 years, resolution or improvement occurred in pre-existing comorbidities: type 2 diabetes (96%), hypertension (91%), hyperlipidemia (77%), obstructive sleep apnea (86%), osteoarthritis (93%), and depression (75%). Patient satisfaction with AGB was assessed as: very satisfied/satisfied (87%), very satisfied (50%), dissatisfied (5.0%). Quality of life measured by the Obesity and Weight-Loss Quality of Life Instrument (GERD patients) significantly improved from baseline.

CONCLUSION

Obese patients with GERD had meaningful improvement in patient-reported outcomes with the AGB system. In addition, other obesity-related comorbidities and measures of quality of life improved.

Safety and effectiveness of bariatric surgery: Roux-en-y gastric bypass is superior to gastric banding in the management of morbidly obese patients: a response

Background

The recent article by Guller, Klein, Hagen was reviewed and discussed by the authors of this response to critically analyze the validity of the conclusions, at a time when patients and providers depend on peer reviewed data to guide their health care choices. The authors of this response all have high volume bariatric surgery practices encompassing experience with both gastric bypass and gastric banding, and have made significant contributions to the peer reviewed literature. We examined the assumptions of the paper, reviewed the main articles cited, provided more evidence from articles that were included in the materials and methods of the paper, but not cited, and challenge the conclusion that Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is superior to gastric banding.

Results and discussion

The paper by Guller et al was subject to significant bias. The authors did not demonstrate an understanding of gastric banding, selectively included data with unfavorable results towards gastric banding, did not provide equal critique to the literature on gastric bypass, and deliberately excluded much of the favorable data on gastric banding.

Conclusion

The paper's conclusion that gastric bypass is the procedure of choice is biased, unsubstantiated, not supported by the current literature and represents a disservice to the scientific and health care community.