Roux-en-Y Versus One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as Redo-Operations Following Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Study

Revision/Conversion Surgeries After One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass-An Experts' Modified Delphi Consensus

PURPOSE

There is a lack of evidence for treatment of some conditions including complication management, suboptimal initial weight loss, recurrent weight gain, or worsening of a significant obesity complication after one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). This study was designed to respond to the existing lack of agreement and to provide a valuable resource for clinicians by employing an expert-modified Delphi consensus method.

METHODS

Forty-eight recognized bariatric surgeons from 28 countries participated in the modified Delphi consensus to vote on 64 statements in two rounds. An agreement/disagreement among ≥ 70.0% of the experts was regarded to indicate a consensus.

RESULTS

A consensus was achieved for 46 statements. For recurrent weight gain or worsening of a significant obesity complication after OAGB, more than 85% of experts reached a consensus that elongation of the biliopancreatic limb (BPL) is an acceptable option and the total bowel length measurement is mandatory during BPL elongation to preserve at least 300-400 cm of common channel limb length to avoid nutritional deficiencies. Also, more than 85% of experts reached a consensus on conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) with or without pouch downsizing as an acceptable option for the treatment of persistent bile reflux after OAGB and recommend detecting and repairing any size of hiatal hernia during conversion to RYGB.

CONCLUSION

While the experts reached a consensus on several aspects regarding revision/conversion surgeries after OAGB, there are still lingering areas of disagreement. This highlights the importance of conducting further studies in the future to address these unresolved issues.

Sleeve Migration Following Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review of Current Literature

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most frequently performed bariatric procedure worldwide. The incidence and consequences of sleeve migration (SM) are not clearly understood. There is no clear consensus on appropriate measures to reduce the risk of SM. This study systematically reviewed the literature and identified 405 cases of SM from 21 studies. Age ranged from 18 to 68 years. Thirty-two percent and 11% of patients were females and males respectively, while sex was not reported in 57%. Time to diagnosis ranged from 1 day to 5 years postoperatively. A total of 9.6% and 58.8% of patients had or had no previous hiatal hernia respectively. SM incidence, risk factors, proposed mechanisms, clinical presentation, diagnosis, management, and potential preventive strategies are described in this review.

Revisional one-anastomosis gastric bypass for failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy

The study aimed to evaluate the mid-term weight loss outcomes and complications of revisional one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) following failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). A total of 586 patients underwent LSG from January 2010 to February 2018. Revisional OAGB (rOAGB) was performed in 22 (3.8%) patients. A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from 20 patients with at least 12 months of follow-up after the revisional OAGB was carried out. The indications for revisional surgery were as follows: insufficient weight loss-4 (20%), weight regain-13 (65%), weight regain and symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD)-2 (10%), and dysphagia with gastroesophageal reflux-1 (5%). The mean interval between the LSG and rOAGB was 35.3 ± 15.4 months (range 4-64). The mean follow-up time after rOAGB was 45.5 ± 17.1 months (range 12-54). At the end of the follow-up after rOAGB, %TWL was 26.4 ± 8.9%, and %EWL was 58.5 ± 21.6%, based on pre-LSG body weight. In all three patients with intractable GERD, the clinical symptoms of reflux retreated after revisional OAGB. The overall complication rate was 20%. In conclusion, the main indications for revision after LSG are weight regain, insufficient weight loss, and intractable GERD. Revisional OAGB emerges as a viable surgical alternative for unsuccessful LSG, presenting notable weight loss outcomes; however, it may be linked to an increased incidence of complications.

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as Revisional Surgery Following Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most performed metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) worldwide, some patients require conversional procedures due to weight recurrence or late complications. Recently, one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) gained popularity as a viable option to address those problems. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the safety and efficacy of conversional OAGB after primary SG in the management of patients with obesity.

METHODS

Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for articles from their inception to February 2023 by two independent reviewers using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) system. The review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42023403528).

RESULTS

From 1,117 studies screened, twenty studies met the eligibility criteria, with a total of 1,057 patients with obesity undergoing conversional OAGB after primary SG. The mean age ranged from 28.2 to 49.5 years, and 744 patients (75.2%) were women. At one year after revisional OAGB, the pooled mean percent excess weight loss (%EWL) was 65.2% (95%CI: 56.9, 73.4, I2 = 97%). The pooled mean %EWL after conversional OAGB was 71.1% (95%CI: 62.2, 80.0, I2 = 90%) at two years and 71.6% (95%CI: 61.0, 82.2, I2 = 50%) at five years. Additionally, resolution rates of diabetes and hypertension were 65.4% (95%CI: 0.522, 0.785, I2 = 65%) and 58.9% (95%CI: 0.415, 0.762, I2 = 89%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis demonstrated OAGB as an effective conversional procedure after primary SG in terms of weight loss and obesity-associated medical problems for selected patients. Despite the promising results, further randomized controlled studies with larger sample sizes and more extended follow-up periods are necessary to determine if the OAGB is the best conversional surgery after SG.

ReSleeve or revisional one anastomosis gastric bypass for failed primary sleeve gastrectomy with dilated gastric tube: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) has been increasingly performed due to weight loss failure (WLF). Many revisional procedures have been proposed after primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (pLSG) failure, including ReSleeve gastrectomy (ReLSG), and laparoscopic one anastomosis gastric bypass (LOAGB). Choosing the RBS post-pLSG failure represents a challenge. WLF without gastric tube (GT) dilation is undoubtedly converted to a malabsorptive procedure, but the presence of GT dilation makes it more difficult to select a RBS. This study aimed to compare two relatively simple revisional procedures after pLSG failure with dilated GT to help decision making on which procedure better done to which patient.

METHODS

Data of 52 patients who completed one year follow-up (FU) after their RBS (ReLSG: 27 or LOAGB: 25) for their failed pLSG were collected, assessed, correlated to weight loss (WL) and compared.

RESULTS

Mean operative time was 97 ± 18.4 min. with revisional LOAGB (RLOAGB) and 62 ± 11 min. with ReLSG. Six patients (11.5%) had seven postoperative procedure-specific complications. Significant hemorrhage occurred in three patients. Two cases of leakage were encountered with each procedure. LOAGB Patients had lower mean final weight (76.2 ± 10.5 vs 85.3 ± 13), lower mean Final BMI (26.4 ± 2.5 vs 29.7 ± 2.9) and higher mean percentage of excess weight loss (EWL%) (83.6 ± 13.5% vs 60.29 ± 14.6%). All RLOAGB patients and 77.8% of ReLSG patients had EWL% > 50%. RLOAGB patients had higher EWL% compared to ReLSG (p < 0.001). Insufficient WL (IWL) patients had higher EWL% compared to weight regain (WR) patients (p = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

Both procedures (RLOAGB and ReLSG) were relatively safe and effective in terms of WL. RLOAGB led to higher WL compared to ReLSG in all types of patients despite higher Caloric intake. IWL patients had more WL compared to WR patients. WL was not related to GT dilation type. Large-scale longer-FU studies are still needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PACTR202310644487566 (retrospectively registered).

Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Versus One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as Revisional Surgery After Failed Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Purpose

This study aimed to assess the outcomes of revisional procedures, namely Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) following unsuccessful laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

Materials and Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis included 817 patients (404 in OAGB group, 413 in RYGB group) from seven retrospective comparative studies. Data on sample size, demographics, perioperative complications, operative time, pre- and post-revisional body mass index, total weight loss, and global weight loss over follow-up were extracted.

Results

The mean operative time was 98.2-201 minutes for RYGB versus 78.7-168 minutes for OAGB. Despite classical RYGB gastric bypass taking longer, mini gastric bypass resulted in greater weight loss than RYGB, with a mean difference of -5.84 (95% confidence interval [CI], -6.74 to -4.94; P<0.00001; I2=0%), greater total weight loss, and a higher diabetes remission rate (odds ratio [OR], 0.32; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.71). However, OAGB was associated with a significantly higher incidence of postoperative gastroesophageal reflux than RYGB (52 vs. 31: OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.67; P=0.0005; I2=0%).

Conclusion

OAGB was performed more quickly and boasted greater total weight loss and higher diabetes remission rates compared to RYGB after failed sleeve gastrectomy. However, OAGB also demonstrated a higher incidence of postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease. Thus, careful patient selection is essential when considering OAGB.

Trial Registration

PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42023474966.

Does One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Expose Patients to Gastroesophageal Reflux: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the incidence of new-onset gastroesophageal reflux, reflux change, esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, and revision due to reflux, gastritis, and marginal ulcer after one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). We performed subgroup analyses based on primary and revisional OAGB and time of follow-up. Meta-analysis of 87 studies with 27,775 patients showed a 6% rate of new-onset reflux after OAGB. Preoperative reflux status did not change significantly after OAGB. The rate of esophagitis and Barrett's esophagus was 15% and 1%, respectively. The new-onset reflux rate after OAGB was significantly higher than gastric bypass but not different with sleeve gastrectomy. The current study showed a relatively low rate of reflux and its complications after OAGB, but it was significantly higher than Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG): systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to compare weight loss and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remission after one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

METHODS

In PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, a search was performed using the terms "Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus one anastomosis gastric bypass," "revisional surgery," and "sleeve gastrectomy." Only original articles in English language comparing OAGB and RYGB were included. No temporal interval was set. The primary outcome measure was weight loss (%TWL). The secondary endpoints were leak, bleeding, marginal ulcer, and GERD. PRISMA flowchart was used. Differences in continuous and dichotomous outcome variables were expressed as mean difference (MD) and risk difference (RD) with 95% CI, respectively. Heterogeneity was assessed by using I2 statistic.

RESULTS

Six retrospective comparative articles were included in the present meta-analysis. Weight loss analysis showed a MD = 5.70 (95% CI 4.84-6.57) in favor of the OAGB procedure with a statistical significance (p = 0.00001) and no significant statistical heterogeneity (I2 = 0.00%). There was no significant RD for leak, bleeding, or marginal ulcer after the two revisional procedures. After conversion to OAGB, remission from GERD was 68.6% (81/118), and it was 80.6% (150/186) after conversion to RYGB with a RD = 0.10 (95% CI -0.04, 0.24), no statistical significance (p = 0.19), and high heterogeneity (I2 = 96%). De novo GERD was 6.3% (16/255) after conversional OAGB, and it was 0.5% (1/180) after conversion to RYGB with a RD = -0.23 (95% CI -0.57, 0.11), no statistical significance (p = 0.16), and high heterogeneity (I2 = 92%).

The Effect of Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass After Sleeve Gastrectomy on Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease, Compared with Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Symptoms and Quality of Life Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is common after sleeve gastrectomy (SG). We aimed to evaluate the effect of revisional one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) on GERD, compared with revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) METHODS: A retrospective single-center study of a prospectively maintained patient registry (2018-2022). All patients with GERD undergoing OAGB and RYGB after SG were retrieved and included in the study.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight SG patients had conversion to OAGB (n=31) and RYGB (n=47). Baseline characteristics were similar except age (43.8±11.5 vs. 50.3±13.4 years; p=0.03), body mass index (39.9±8.8 vs. 30.6±6 kg/m2; p<0.001), time interval (8±2.7 vs. 6.4±3.4 years; p=0.01), and sleep apnea (29% vs 8.5%; p=0.01), respectively. There was no significant difference between groups in number of patients consuming proton pump inhibitors (70.1% vs. 72.3%; p=0.66), GERD-health-related quality of life (HRQL) score (9.6±7.2 vs. 13.1±8; p=0.06), and pathological endoscopic findings (48.4% vs. 46.8%; p=0.89). Major complication rates were 0% vs. 8.5% (p=0.09). At 32.4 months follow-up, total weight loss was 22%±12.9 and 4.4%±14.6 (p<0.001), GERD resolution 77.4% and 91.9% (p=0.03), HRQL scoring improved to 1.7±4.5 and 1.7±2.7; p=0.94 for OAGB and RYGB, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SG conversion to RYGB provides better chances for definitive treatment of GERD. OAGB results in good symptom resolution and improved quality of life and may be considered for post-SG GERD treatment. The most appropriate solution should be individualized to each patient.

Clinical influence of conversion of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy to one anastomosis gastric bypass on gastroesophageal reflux disease

PURPOSE

Assess the subjective impact of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms on patients undergoing revision from laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) to one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) using the Reflux Disease Questionnaire for GERD (RDQ) and the GERD-health related quality of life score (GERD-HRQL), prior to- and following conversion.

METHODS

Patients undergoing revision from LSG to OAGB were prospectively followed between May 2015 and December 2020. Data retrieved included demographics, anthropometrics, previous bariatric history, time interval between LSG and OAGB, weight loss, and co-morbidities. Pre- and post-OAGB RDQ and GERD-HRQL questionnaires were obtained. In the case of sleeve dilatation, sleeve resizing was performed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 37 patients underwent revision from LSG to OAGB. Mean ages at LSG and pre-OAGB were 38 ± 11.74 and 46 ± 12.75, respectively. Median follow-up time was 21.5 months (range 3-65). All patients underwent sleeve resizing. RDQ and GERD-HRQL scores were obtained at a median of 14 months (range 3-51) between pre- and post-OAGB. Median RDQ score pre-OAGB vs post-OAGB was significantly reduced (30 (range 12-72) vs 14 (range 12-60), p = 0.007). All 3 parts of the GERD- HRQL questionnaires were significantly reduced between pre-OAGB and post-OAGB: Symptoms (20; 62.5% vs 10; 31.3%, p = 0.012), overall score (15 (0-39) vs 7 (0-28), p = 0.04) and subjective improvement (10; 31% vs 20; 62.5%, p = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

Conversion of LSG to OAGB showed subjective improvement of GERD symptoms both in RDQ and in GERD-HRQL.

A Long-Term Comparative Study Between One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) has become increasingly accepted in bariatric surgery and meanwhile represents the third most common procedure worldwide. While it shows promising weight loss results and comorbidity resolution, questions about issues such as reflux or nutritional deficiencies (ND) persist in the long term. On the other hand, the most frequently performed sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has to accept growing criticism regarding long-term results and reflux issues. There is a particular lack of long-term comparative data for both procedures. This study presents our long-term experience.

METHODS

We evaluated OAGB and SG patients retrospectively comparing for weight loss and resolution of comorbidities as well as perioperative and long-term complications in a follow-up period of 5 years.

RESULTS

Nine hundred eleven OAGB and 241 SG were included in the study. OAGB had a shorter operation time and hospital stay. Overall complication rate did not differ in both groups. Ulcers were more frequent in OAGB (7.7% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.001), whereas insufficient weight loss (IWL)/weight regain (WR) proved to be more prevalent in SG (25.7% vs. 6.4%, p < 0.001). The same held true for reflux (17.8% vs. 8.3%, p < .001). On the other hand, ND were more common in OAGB (20.0% vs. 12.0%, p = 0.005). Revisional surgery was more often indicated after SG. Analysis by linear mixed model showed that OAGB achieved a lower BMI/higher loss of BMI. Improvement of T2DM (94.6% vs. 85.2%, p = 0.008) and sleep apnea (88.8% vs. 78.8%, p = 0.01) was superior in OAGB.

CONCLUSIONS

OAGB had a superior effect on weight loss as well as improvement of T2DM and sleep apnea. Furthermore, long-term problems such as IWL/WR and reflux were more related to SG. On the other hand, a malabsorptive procedure such as OAGB showed a higher risk for ND. Our findings support the available data in the literature.

One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass as Revisional Surgery After Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The demand for revisional bariatric surgery after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has increased, but the ideal procedure remains unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare the outcomes of weight loss and safety of one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures for failed SG. Four retrospective comparative studies were included, comprising 499 individuals. Patients submitted to OAGB had a more significant total weight loss (TWL) (MD =  - 5.89%; 95% CI - 6.80 to - 4.97) after revisional surgery. Overall early complication rate was similar between procedures (RD = 0.04; 95% CI: - 0.05 to 0.12). Limited and heterogeneous data prevent meaningful conclusions, but the present analysis suggests that OAGB has a better TWL after revisional surgery.

Visual Analysis of Nutrient Deficiency and Treatment Protocols in Bariatric Surgery Based on VOSviewer

Objective

To analyze the global literature on nutritional deficiencies in bariatric surgery (BS) since January 1, 1985, and to discuss the current status of research, research hotspots, and new development trend and treatment of nutritional deficiency in bariatric surgery. It provides ideas and basis for promoting the development of bariatric surgery and new alternative therapy or treatment protocols.

Methods

The Web of Science (WOS) database core collection was used as the data source, and VOSviewer 1.6.17 software was used to search the literature on the topic of “nutritional deficiencies in bariatric surgery.” The number of published literature, the distribution of authors, institutions, and countries, keyword cooccurrences, and journal cocitations were visualized and analyzed.

Results

A total of 1015 relevant publications was obtained after searching and screening, and the overall trend of literature published was on the rise. The most published countries, institutions, and authors were USA, University of Sao Paulo, Ramalho, Andrea; Obesity Surgery has been the most frequently cited journal (7943 citations), and the top 10 journals had high impact factors. Keyword cooccurrence analysis showed that “bariatric surgery” and “nutritional deficiencies” are the hot topics of research in this field.

Conclusion

There is an urgent need for bariatric surgery issuing institutions and authors to strengthen cross-institutional, cross-team, and multicenter and multidisciplinary cooperation, to promote and facilitate the exchange and cooperation in the field of bariatric surgery between developed countries in Europe and America and developing countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, to draw the attention of developing countries to the health problems caused by obesity, and to encourage and support the development of developing countries in this field. Bariatric surgery, obesity, weight loss, Y-type gastric bypass, gastric bypass, and nutritional deficiency are the hot research topics in the field of nutritional deficiency in bariatric surgery, and metabolic surgery, single anastomosis gastric bypass, micronutrient supplementation, micronutrient deficiency, intestinal microbiology, and guidelines are the new trends in this field.

Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Angiography During Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: A Pilot Study

Aims

Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence angiography (FA) is used for several purposes in general surgery, but its use in bariatric surgery is still debated. The objective of the present pilot study is to evaluate the intraoperative utility of ICG-FA during bariatric surgery in order to focus future research on a reliable tool to reduce the postoperative leak rate.

Methods

Thirteen patients (4 men, 30.8%, 9 women, 69.2%) with median age of 52 years (confidence interval, CI, 95% 46.2–58.7 years) and preoperative median body mass index of 42.6 kg/m² (CI, 95% 36 to 49.3 kg/m²) underwent bariatric surgery with ICG-FA in our center. Three mL of ICG diluted with 10 cc sterile water were intravenously injected after gastric tube creation during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and after the gastric pouch and gastro-jejunal anastomosis creation during laparoscopic gastric by-pass (LGB). For the ICG-FA, Karl Storz Image 1S D-Light system (Karl Storz Endoscope GmbH & C. K., Tuttlingen, Germany) placed at a fixed distance of 5 cm from the structures of interest and zoomed vision modality were used to identify the vascular supply. The perfusion pattern was assessed by the surgical team according to a score. The score ranged from 1 (poor vascularization) to 5 (excellent vascularization) based on the intensity and timing of fluorescence of the vascularized structures.

Results

Fom January 2021 to February 2022, six patients underwent LSG (46.2%), three patients underwent LGB (23.1%), and four patients underwent re-do LGB after LSG (30.8%). No adverse effects to ICG were observed. In 11 patients (84.6%) ICG-FA score was 5. During two laparoscopic re-do LGB, the vascular supply was not satisfactory (score 2/5) and the surgical strategy was changed based on ICG-FA (15.4%). At a median follow-up of five months postoperatively, leaks did not occur in any case.

Conclusions

ICG-FA during bariatric surgery is a safe, feasible and promising procedure. It could help to reduce the ischemic leak rate, even if standardization of the procedure and objective fluorescence quantification are still missing. Further prospective studies with a larger sample of patients are required to draw definitive conclusions.