Technical Variations and Considerations around OAGB in IFSO-APC and IFSO-MENAC Chapters, an Expert Survey

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the technical variations of one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) among IFSO-APC and MENAC experts.

BACKGROUND

The multitude of technical variations and patient selection challenges among metabolic and bariatric surgeons worldwide necessitates a heightened awareness of these issues. Understanding different perspectives and viewpoints can empower surgeons performing OAGB to adapt their techniques, leading to improved outcomes and reduced complications.

METHODS

The scientific team of IFSO-APC, consisting of skilled bariatric and metabolic surgeons specializing in OAGB, conducted a confidential online survey. The survey aimed to assess technical variations and considerations related to OAGB within the IFSO-APC and IFSO-MENAC chapters. A total of 85 OAGB experts participated in the survey, providing their responses through a 35-question online format. The survey took place from January 1, 2024, to February 15, 2024.

RESULTS

Most experts do not perform OAGB for children and adolescents younger than 18 years. Most experts create the gastric pouch over a 36-40-F bougie and prefer to create a gastrojejunostomy, at the posterior wall of the gastric pouch. An anti-reflux suture during OAGB is performed in all patients by 51.8% of experts. Most experts set a common limb length of > 4 m in revisional and conversional OAGBs to prevent nutritional complications.

CONCLUSION

The ongoing debate among metabolic and bariatric surgeons regarding the technical variations and patient selection in OAGB remains a significant point of discussion. This survey demonstrated the variations in technical aspects and patient selection for OAGB among MBS surgeons in the IFSO-APC and IFSO-MENAC chapters. Standardizing the OAGB technique is crucial to ensure optimal safety and efficacy in this procedure.

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.

Religious Fasting of Muslim Patients After Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: a Modified Delphi Consensus

BACKGROUND

Fasting during Ramadan is one of the five pillars of the Muslim faith. Despite the positive effects of fasting on health, there are no guidelines or clear recommendations regarding fasting after metabolic/bariatric surgery (MBS). The current study reports the result of a modified Delphi consensus among expert metabolic/bariatric surgeons with experience in managing patients who fast after MBS.

METHODS

A committee of 61 well-known metabolic and bariatric surgeons from 24 countries was created to participate in the Delphi consensus. The committee voted on 45 statements regarding recommendations and controversies around fasting after MBS. An agreement/disagreement ≥ of 70.0% was regarded as consensus.

RESULTS

The experts reached a consensus on 40 out of 45 statements after two rounds of voting. One hundred percent of the experts believed that fasting needs special nutritional support in patients who underwent MBS. The decision regarding fasting must be coordinated among the surgeon, the nutritionist and the patient. At any time after MBS, 96.7% advised stopping fasting in the presence of persistent symptoms of intolerance. Seventy percent of the experts recommended delaying fasting after MBS for 6 to 12 months after combined and malabsorptive procedures according to the patient's situation and surgeon's experience, and 90.1% felt that proton pump inhibitors should be continued in patients who start fasting less than 6 months after MBS. There was consensus that fasting may help in weight loss, improvement/remission of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, dyslipidemia, hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus among 88.5%, 90.2%, 88.5%, 85.2% and 85.2% of experts, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Experts voted and reached a consensus on 40 statements covering various aspects of fasting after MBS.

The First Consensus Statement on One Anastomosis/Mini Gastric Bypass (OAGB/MGB) Using a Modified Delphi Approach

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of surgeons worldwide are now performing one anastomosis/mini gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB). Lack of a published consensus amongst experts may be hindering progress and affecting outcomes. This paper reports results from the first modified Delphi consensus building exercise on this procedure.

METHODS

A committee of 16 recognised opinion-makers in bariatric surgery with special interest in OAGB/MGB was constituted. The committee invited 101 OAGB/MGB experts from 39 countries to vote on 55 statements in areas of controversy or variation associated with this procedure. An agreement amongst ≥ 70.0% of the experts was considered to indicate a consensus.

RESULTS

A consensus was achieved for 48 of the 55 proposed statements after two rounds of voting. There was no consensus for seven statements. Remarkably, 100.0% of the experts felt that OAGB/MGB was an "acceptable mainstream surgical option" and 96.0% felt that it could no longer be regarded as a new or experimental procedure. Approximately 96.0 and 91.0% of the experts felt that OAGB/MGB did not increase the risk of gastric and oesophageal cancers, respectively. Approximately 94.0% of the experts felt that the construction of the gastric pouch should start in the horizontal portion of the lesser curvature. There was a consensus of 82, 84, and 85% for routinely supplementing iron, vitamin B₁₂, and vitamin D, respectively.

CONCLUSION

OAGB/MGB experts achieved consensus on a number of aspects concerning this procedure but several areas of disagreements persist emphasising the need for more studies in the future.

A 6-year experience with 1,054 mini-gastric bypasses-first study from Indian subcontinent

BACKGROUND

We started laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass (MGB) for the first time in India in February 2007 for its reported safety, efficacy, and easy reversibility.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively maintained data of all 1,054 consecutive patients (342 men and 712 women) who underwent MGB at our institute from February 2007 to January 2013 was done.

RESULTS

Mean age was 38.4 years, preoperative mean weight was 128.5 kg, mean BMI was 43.2 kg/m(2), mean operating time was 52 ± 18.5 min, and mean hospital stay was 2.5 ± 1.3 days. There were 49 (4.6%) early minor complications, 14 (1.3%) major complications, and 2 leaks (0.2%). In late complications, one patient had low albumin and one had excess weight loss; MGB was easily reversed in both (0.2%). Marginal ulcers were noted in five patients (0.6%) during follow-up for symptomatic dyspepsia, and anemia was the most frequent late complication occurring in 68 patients (7.6%). Patient satisfaction was high, and mean excess weight loss was 84, 91, 88, 86, 87, and 85% at years 1 to 6, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms previous publications showing that MGB is quite safe, with a short hospital stay and low risk of complications. It results in effective and sustained weight loss with high resolution of comorbidities and complications that are easily managed.

Analysis of the five-year outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy and mini gastric bypass: a report from the Indian sub-continent

BACKGROUND

Few reports have compared laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y procedure (LRNY). This study aims at comparing the 5-year follow-up results of mini gastric bypass (MGB or omega gastric bypass (OGB)) and LSG in terms of weight loss, weight regain, complications, and resolution of co-morbidities.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the prospectively collected database was done from the start of our bariatric practice from February 2007 to August 2008 (minimum 5-year follow-up). During this period, 118 patients underwent LSG. These patients were matched in age, gender, preoperative weight, and BMI to 104 patients who underwent MGB in the same time period. The results were compared.

RESULTS

Follow-up was achieved in 72 MGB vs 76 LSG patients up to 5 years. The mean BMI for the MGB and LSG group was 44 ± 3.1 and 42 ± 5.2 kg/m(2), respectively (P < 0.001). The average percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) for MGB vs LSG was 63 vs 69 % at 1 year and 68 vs 51.2 % at 5 years (P = 0.166), respectively. Post-op gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) was seen in 2.8 % MGB patients and marginal ulcer was diagnosed in 1 MGB patient (1.4 %). GERD was seen in 21 % post-LSG patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Both MGB and LSG are safe, short, and simple operations. Weight loss is similar in MGB and LSG in the first years, but lesser %EWL with LSG at 5 years (68 % in MGB vs 51 % in LSG). Post-op GERD is more common after LSG.