Evidence-Based Classification for Post-bariatric Weight Regain from a Benchmark Registry Cohort of 18,403 Patients and Comparison with Current Criteria

INTRODUCTION

There is a need for a standardized, evidence-based classification of post-bariatric weight-regain, to investigate and compare revision procedures and to advice and treat patients in an evidence-based way.

METHODS

We used standard deviations (SD) of the highest (1-2 years) and latest (> 2 years) percentage total weight loss (%TWL) results after primary bariatric surgery from the Dutch Audit for Treatment of Obesity (DATO) bariatric registry as benchmarks for (above) average (≥ - 1SD), poor (- 1SD to - 2SD) and insufficient (< - 2SD) weight loss. Weight regain maintaining (above) average weight loss was called grade 1, weight regain towards poor weight loss grade 2, towards insufficient weight loss grade 3, with subgrades 2a/3a for below average weight loss from the start, and 2b/3b for weight regain from (above) average to below average weight loss. Patient characteristics and diabetes improvement/impairment were compared. Sensitivity and specificity of 14 existing weight regain criteria were calculated.

RESULTS

We analyzed 93,465 results from 38,830 patients (77.1% gastric bypass, 22.5% sleeve gastrectomy). The - 1SD thresholds for early and late weight loss approximated 25%TWL and 20%TWL, the - 2SD threshold for late weight loss 10%TWL. Weight regain could be analyzed for 18,403 patients (2.5-5.2 years follow-up). They regained mean 6.7 kg (5.4%TWL), with 66.8% grade 1 weight regain, 7.2% grade 2a, 7.4% grade 2b, 2.1% grade 3a, and 0.6% grade 3b. There were significant differences in comorbidities, gender, age, weight regain, diabetes impairment, and diabetes improvement across grades. Weight regain criteria from literature were extremely divers. None had high sensitivity.

CONCLUSION

The DATO classification for post-bariatric weight regain combines the extent of weight regain with evidence-based endpoints of weight loss. It differentiated weight regain maintaining (above) average weight loss, two intermediate grades, gradual weight regain with below average weight loss from the start (primary non-response) and steep weight regain towards insufficient weight loss (secondary non-response). The classification is superior to existing criteria and well supported by evidence.

Ankle Instability

Ankle sprains are a common injury among physically active populations and occur with an incidence of around 2.15 per 1000 person-years. This article discusses various surgical procedures used to treat chronic lateral ankle instability, including direct ligament repair, anatomic reconstruction, and nonanatomic reconstruction. We focus our discussion on the most common and challenging complications of ankle stabilization, both in our experience and as supported by the existing literature, including recurrent instability, superficial peroneal nerve injury, and unaddressed pathology that continues to cause symptoms and limit function. We offer possible methods to manage these conditions as well as available outcome data.

Use of short stems in revision of standard femoral stem: A case report

BACKGROUND

Short stems are usually uncemented prosthetics and are recommended in the treatment of traumatic or degenerative diseases of hip. In revision procedures for elderly patients with serious comorbidity, applying a short stem could reduce peri- and post-operative secondary surgical risks to femoral osteotomy, which are necessary for the removal of parts of the implant or acrylic cement from the medullary canal. There are no cases in the literature that apply a short stem for prosthetic revision by acrylic cement anchorage.

CASE SUMMARY

A male patient had a left hip replacement in 1995 due to coxarthrosis. At the age of eighty the patient reported an accidental trauma and walked with pain in the left thigh. The X-ray highlighted the stem breakage in the distal section without fracturing the femoral cortex. The patient had various comorbidities (diabetes, anaemia, heart deficiency, and arrhythmia) presenting a high operation risk (ASA 4). During the revision procedure, the distal apex of the stem could not be removed from the femoral cortex. Because of the poor general health of the patient, the surgeon decided not to perform a Wagner femoral osteotomy to remove the distal section of the stem and decided to implant a short stem to avoid removing the stem section of the previous implant. The patient had his left femur X-rayed 15 d post-trauma.

CONCLUSION

A field of application of short stem may be the development of a cemented short stem to reduce the complexity of the revision procedure.

Magnetic sphincter augmentation: a viable rescue therapy for symptomatic reflux following bariatric surgery

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) are commonly performed bariatric procedures in obesity management. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in this population has reported rates of 23-100%. GERD after LSG has been noted with recent studies demonstrating de novo reflux or symptom exacerbation despite weight loss. Fundoplication is not an option, and medically refractory GERD after LSG is usually treated with conversion to RYGB. GERD post-RYGB is a unique entity, and management poses a clinical and technical challenge. We evaluate safety and effectiveness of magnetic sphincter augmentation after bariatric surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was performed identifying patients that underwent LINX placement for refractory GERD after LSG, LRYGB, or duodenal switch across three institutions. Outcomes included complications, length of stay, PPI use, GERD-HRQL scores, and patient overall satisfaction.

RESULTS

From March 2014 through June 2018, 13 identified patients underwent LINX placement after bariatric surgery: 8 LSG, 4 LRYGB, and 1 duodenal switch. The patients were 77% female, with mean age 43 and average BMI 30.1. Average pre-operative DeMeester score was 24.8. Pre-operatively, 5 patients were on daily PPI, 6 on BID PPI, and 1 on PPI + H2 blocker. We noted decreased medication usage post-operatively, with 4 patients taking daily PPI, and 9 off medication completely. A GERD-HRQL score was obtained pre- and post-operatively in 6 patients with average reduction from 25 to 8.5 (p value 0.002). Two patients experienced complications requiring endoscopic dilation after LINX placement. 100% of patients reported overall satisfaction post procedure.

CONCLUSION

LINX placement is a safe, effective treatment option for surgical management of refractory GERD after bariatric surgery. It can relieve symptoms and obviate the requirement of high-dose medical management. Magnetic lower esophageal sphincter augmentation should be another tool in the surgeon's toolbox for managing reflux after bariatric surgery in select patients.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy as a revisional procedure for failed gastric banding: lessons from 300 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is a common bariatric procedure associated with a high rate of weight loss failure and/or complications in the long term. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that the conversion of failed LAGB into laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is not associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications and leads to weight loss results that are comparable to those obtained with a primary LSG.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the results of a prospective series of 1360 LSG regarding patient demographics, the indication for revision morbidity, the percentage of excess weight loss, and the rate of postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The primary LSG group contained 1060 patients and the LAGB to LSG group contained 300 patients. The rate of postoperative complications was 4.5% in the primary LSG group and 2% in the LAGB to LSG group. Two patients died in the LSG group (1 pulmonary embolus, 1 myocardial infarction). There was no significant difference with respect to the rate of leak, which was 1% in the LAGB to LSG group and 1.6% in the primary LSG group. There was a greater weight loss after primary LSG, mean % excess weight loss of 75.9%±21.4 at a mean interval of 29±19.8 months, versus 62.6%±22.2 at a mean interval of 35±24 months after LAGB to LSG (P = .008). There were 72.1% and 59.2% of patients available for follow-up after primary LSG at 24 and 60 months respectively, versus 69.3% and 55.4% after LAGB to LSG.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that the risk of leak after LSG was not increased after conversion failed LAGB into LSG when performed as a 2-step procedure.