Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding: Predictive Factors for Weight Loss and Band Removal After More than 10 Years’ Follow-Up in a Single University Unit

Impact of Self-Monitoring on Weight Loss After Bariatric Surgery

BACKGROUND

Weight loss after bariatric surgery varies among patients. Patients who do not comply with self-monitoring are predicted to lose less weight than those who comply with self-monitoring.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of compliance with self-monitoring behavior on long-term %excess weight loss (%EWL) and %total weight loss (%TWL) among patients receiving laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB).

METHODS

We used retrospective analysis to evaluate the self-monitoring behavior of patients and their weight changes throughout a 2-year follow-up. The participants were divided into two groups: group 1 consisted of participants who kept self-monitoring behavior records for all follow-ups and group 2 consisted of participants who kept self-monitoring behavior records for only six months of follow-up. Our investigators used telephone interviews to collect the data. By comparing %EWL and %TWL, we assessed the possible relationship between the long-term self-monitoring behavior, weight loss outcome, and operation type.

RESULTS

There were 384 included samples. %EWL was significantly different between group 1 and group 2, and group 1 participants had better outcomes regardless of operational method. In group 2, LRYGB patients had better %EWL outcomes than LSG patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with long-term self-monitoring behaviors have better %EWL and %TWL. Patients in LRYGB group had better weight loss outcomes than the LSG group.

Decreased emotional eating behavior is associated with greater excess weight loss five years after gastric banding

While significant weight loss has been observed in the first two years following adjustable gastric banding (AGB), research on the long-term effectiveness of gastric restriction (e.g., 5 years) both on weight loss and eating behavior changes is scarce. The present study examined obese patients' changes in eating behavior preoperatively and 5 years after AGB and examined their associations with excess weight loss (EWL). Specifically, we focused on the association between the modification of three eating behavior profiles (i.e., restrained eating, emotional eating and external eating) and %EWL at 5 years. Among the 197 participants who underwent AGB, 136 completed the clinical assessments (weight, depression with the BDI, eating behavior with the DEBQ) before surgery, and after 5 years. Resultsshowed that the mean percentage of EWL was 47% after 5 years. Moreover, patients reported lower emotional eating and external eating after 5 years in comparison to the baseline, whereas there were no differences concerning restrained eating. Importantly, patients who presented higher %EWL at 5 years also reported a greater decrease in emotional eating between the two sessions than those with low %EWL. Our study underlines that eating behaviors are major variables involved in weight loss after gastric restriction. Results showed that emotional and external eating decreased significantly at 5 years whereas restrained eating behaviors did not vary between the pre- and postoperative stages. Moreover, the data suggest that a decrease in emotional eating accounts for the extent of EWL.

The fate of laparoscopic adjustable gastric band removal

Background

Long-term complications and lack of weight loss have caused a surge in laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) removal. This study reviews the trend of LAGB removal and examines outcomes of patients undergoing subsequent revision bariatric surgery at a single tertiary care centre in Canada.

Methods

All LAGB removals performed between January 2008 and December 2016 were reviewed. A subset of patients who underwent revision surgery was then analyzed for patient demographics, weight, body mass index and postoperative complications.

Results

During the study period, 211 patients underwent LAGB removal (87.7% female). Most bands were inserted out of province. Reasons for band removal included dysphagia, band slip and weight recidivism. Fifty-nine patients (28%) underwent revision surgery at a mean of 12.8 ± 9.3 (range 0–55) months after LAGB removal. Mean age was 47 ± 9.7 (range 26–63) years, and mean pre-LAGB weight was 131.0 ± 30.0 kg. Following LAGB, the mean weight decreased to 120.5 ± 26.4 kg, but most regained weight after removal to a mean prerevision weight of 125.1 ± 27.0 kg. The lowest mean weight was achieved 12 months after revision surgery (98.7 ± 30.2 kg). The mean percent total weight loss was not significantly different after revision laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass compared with revision laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (22.8 ± 9.6% v.17.5 ± 6.5%, p = 0.179). The overall revision surgery 30-day complication rate was 18.6% and increased to 23.7% long-term. No deaths occurred.

Conclusion

The number of LAGB removals is increasing. Revision bariatric surgery leads to improved weight loss; however, revision surgery is associated with complications.

A Novel Full Sense Device to Treat Obesity in a Porcine Model: Preliminary Results

PURPOSE

To evaluate the technical feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a novel full sense device (FSD) for the treatment of obesity in a porcine model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The novel FSD comprised a self-expanding metallic esophageal stent connected to a star-shaped nitinol disk. Three types of FSD were used: fully covered (type A), fully covered with barbs (type B), and uncovered with barbs (type C). Nine juvenile pigs were divided into two groups: FSD (n = 6) and control (n = 3). FSD type A was placed in the FSD group. In case of migration, either FSD type B or type C was then randomly placed. Food intake was monitored daily. Weight changes and ghrelin hormone levels were monitored weekly for 12 weeks.

RESULTS

FSD placement was technically successful in all pigs. All FSDs except one migrated to the stomach within 1 week after placement. The pig in which the FSD was retained showed decreased food intake in the first week after FSD placement, and there was a difference in the final weight between the FSD pig and control pigs. The percentage of weight gain was 116.6% in the control group and 105.3% in the FSD pig.

CONCLUSION

FSD placement under fluoroscopic and endoscopic guidance is technically feasible and safe in a porcine model. The uncovered FSD appears to decrease food intake and reduce the rate of weight gain. However, the high FSD migration rate is not encouraging.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Perioperative Nutrition, Metabolic, and Nonsurgical Support of Patients Undergoing Bariatric Procedures - 2019 Update: Cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

OBJECTIVE

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists.

METHODS

Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts.

RESULTS

New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest).

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

Clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative nutrition, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of patients undergoing bariatric procedures - 2019 update: cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

OBJECTIVE

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPG) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The Obesity Society, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the Obesity Medicine Association, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists boards of directors in adherence to the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPG, algorithms, and checklists.

METHODS

Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts.

RESULTS

New or updated topics in this CPG include contextualization in an adiposity-based, chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based, and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current healthcare arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest).

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence-based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

Outcomes of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy in super-super-obese patients (BMI ≥60 kg/m2): 6-year follow-up at a single university

BACKGROUND

Among the population of morbidly obese people, super-super-obese (SSO) individuals (body mass index >60 kg/m²) present a treatment challenge for bariatric surgeons.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the long-term outcomes between laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and to evaluate the efficacy of SG as a stand-alone bariatric procedure for SSO patients.

SETTING

University hospital, Paris, France.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the data outcomes of 210 SSO patients who underwent SG or RYGB between January 2000 and December 2011. The 6-year follow-up data were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

Follow-up data at 6 years were collected for 57.1% and 52.1% of patients in the SG group and RYGB groups, respectively. Both procedures were effective at promoting weight loss. Most weight loss was achieved at 24 months with both procedures. The average percent excess weight loss and change in body mass index of SG versus RYGB showed no significant differences at the 4-year follow-up. Except for sleep apnea, RYGB showed slightly better resolution of the evaluated co-morbidities. The composite endpoint of major short-term adverse events (<30 d) occurred in 11.7% of patients with RYGB and 6.4% of those with SG (P = .02). Postoperative complications were seen in 26% of RYGB patients and 16.1% of SG patients.

CONCLUSIONS

SG as a primary procedure for SSO patients remains effective even though RYGB achieves better midterm outcomes. SG can be proposed as the primary-option p+rocedure. Further investigations are needed to identify the ideal procedure for patients with symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease.