Best practice approach for redo-surgeries after sleeve gastrectomy, an expert's modified Delphi consensus

Decision-making Considerations in Revisional Bariatric Surgery

OBJECTIVE

With drastic variations in bariatric practices, consensus is lacking on an optimal approach for revisional bariatric surgeries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors reviewed and consolidated bariatric surgery literature to provide specific revision suggestions based on each index surgery, including adjustable gastric band (AGB), sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD-DS), single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve (SADI-S), one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), and vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG).

RESULTS

AGB has the highest weight recurrence rate and can be converted to RYGB, SG, and BPD-DS. After index SG, common surgical options include a resleeve or RYGB. The RYGB roux limb can be distalized and pouch resized in context of reflux, and the entire anatomy can be revised into BPD-DS. Data analyzing revisional surgery after a single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve was limited. In patients with one anastomosis gastric bypass and vertical banded gastroplasty anatomy, most revisions were the conversion to RYGB.

CONCLUSIONS

As revisional bariatric surgery becomes more common, the best approach depends on the patient's indication for surgery and preexisting anatomy.

Long Narrow Pouch Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (LN-RYGB) for Recurrent Weight Gain After Sleeve Gastrectomy

PURPOSE

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most performed metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS). However, with the increase of SG in different regions, recurrent weight gain after SG is challenging for bariatric surgeons. We introduce a modified operation with a long, narrow pouch in RYGB (LN-RYGB) for weight regain after SG which enhanced the restrictive function in RYGB.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The LN-RYGB has a longer and narrow gastric pouch for 10 cm. The length of small Roux and biliopancreatic are the same as RYGB. As a revisional surgery, the post-1 year excess weight loss percentage (%EWL) was 63.1% and total weight loss percentage (%TWL) was 29.1% in 5 cases.

CONCLUSION

LN-RYGB is an optional treatment for recurrent weight gain after SG; a randomized control trial is needed to verify the long-term effect of LN-RYGB.

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.

Omentopexy versus no omentopexy in sleeve gastrectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with omentopexy (O-LSG) has been compared to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with no-omentopexy (NO-LSG) in terms of postoperative outcomes and one-year anthropometric results. This systematic review with meta-analysis aimed to compare the utility of omentopexy in sleeve gastrectomy. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis according to PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR 2 guidelines. We included studies that systematically searched electronic databases and compared the O-LSG with the NO-LSG conducted through 1st March 2023. The bibliographic research yielded 13 eligible studies. These studies included 5514 patients. The O-LSG is associated with lower leakage (OR = 0.22; 95% CI [0.08, 0.55], p = 0.001), bleeding (OR = 0.33; 95% CI [0.19, 0.57], p < 0.0001), vomiting (OR = 0.50; 95% CI [0.28, 0.89], p = 0.02), twist (OR = 0.09; 95% CI [0.02, 0.39], p = 0.001), and shorter hospital stay (MD = - 0.33; 95% CI [- 0.61, - 0.05], p = 0.02) compared with NO-LSG. The O-LSG is associated with longer operative time (MD = 8.15; 95% CI [3.65, 12.64], p = 0.0004) than the NO-LSG. There were no differences between the two groups in terms of postoperative GERD (OR = 0.53; 95% CI [0.27, 1.02], p = 0.06), readmission (OR = 0.60; 95% CI [0.27, 1.37], p = 0.23), and one-year total weight loss (MD = 2.06; 95% CI [- 1.53, 5.65], p = 0.26). In the subgroup analysis including only RCTs, postoperative GERD was lower in the O-LSG (OR = 0.26; 95% CI [0.11, 0.63], p = 0.003). Our systematic review and meta-analysis concluded that omentopexy in sleeve gastrectomy is feasible and safe It reduced leakage, bleeding, and twist. It probably increased the operative time. It may reduce vomiting, GERD, and hospital stay. We don't know if it led to an additional readmission rate or one-year total weight loss.Registration The protocol was registered in PROSPERO with the ID CRD42022336790.

First modified Delphi consensus statement on robotic-assisted da Vinci sleeve gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most commonly performed metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) procedure. Technical considerations related to the performance of SG are well established and reported in the literature but not in relation to robotic-assisted (RA) SG. We report the results of the first modified Delphi consensus-building exercise addressing technical considerations of RA da Vinci (dV) SG.

OBJECTIVES

Develop best practices for the performance of robotic-assisted da Vinci sleeve gastrectomy.

SETTING

Survey based consensus statement.

METHODS

A consensus building committee (CBC) was created comprising 10 experts in the field of RA surgery and MBS based on strict selection criteria. The CBC developed 49 consensus statements which were then shared with 240 experts in RA surgery. Our stopping criterion was stability in responses (≤15%). The consensus cut point was 70%.

RESULTS

The overall response rate was 49%. In the first round of voting, there was consensus agreement on 25 statements (51%), consensus disagreement on 14 (28%), and no consensus on the remaining statements (21%). In the second round of voting, we reached agreement on 3 additional statements. Experts recommended the use of the number of pauses generated by the stapler to guide choice of staple height (91.2%) and to upsize the staple height when using buttressing (92%). There was also consensus (81.4%) that the use of the closed staple height of 1.00 mm (white) is acceptable and that stapling of the antrum using a 1.5-mm staple (blue load) is also acceptable (73%).

CONCLUSIONS

Collective expert opinion structured through a modified Delphi consensus statement presents a practical guide for surgeons interested in performing dV-SG.

Revision of restrictive bariatric procedures in elderly patients: results at a 5-year follow-up

Revisional Bariatric Surgery (RBS) is increasing in popularity. Elderly patients (> 65 years old) are sometimes referred for RBS evaluation. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes of elderly patients undergoing RBS. A retrospective analysis of a cohort from a single-tertiary bariatric center. All elderly patients undergoing RBS after restrictive procedures between 2012 and 2022 were included. Thirty Nine patients undergoing RBS were included in the comparative analysis - 23 patients (57.5%) after adjustable gastric banding (s/p LAGB) and 16 patients (40%) after Sleeve Gastrectomy (s/p SG). The mean age and body mass index (BMI) of patients were comparable (67.2 ± 2.8 years and 38.3 ± 7.4, respectively). There was no difference in associated medical problems except reflux which was higher in s/p SG (68% vs. 13%; p < 0.001). The mean time interval between surgeries was 8.7 ± 5.1 years. The surgeries included One anastomosis gastric bypass (n = 22), SG (n = 8) and Roux-en-y gastric bypass (n = 9). Early major complication rates were comparable (4.3% and 12.5%; p = 0.36), and readmission rate was higher in patients s/p SG (p = 0.03). Ninety percent of patients were available to a follow-up of 59.8 months. The mean BMI and total weight loss was 29.2 and 20.3%, respectively with no difference between groups. The rate of patients with associated medical problems at last follow-up was significantly reduced. Five patients (12.5%) underwent revisional surgery due to complications during follow-up. In conclusion, RBS in the elderly is associated with a reasonable complication rate and is effective in terms of weight loss and improvement of associated medical problems in a 5-year follow-up.

Challenges of Revisional Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: A Comprehensive Guide to Unraveling the Complexities and Solutions of Revisional Bariatric Procedures

Revisional metabolic and bariatric surgery (RMBS) presents unique challenges in addressing weight loss failure or complications arising from initial bariatric procedures. This review aims to explore the complexities and solutions associated with revisional bariatric procedures comprehensively, offering insights into the evolving terrain of metabolic and bariatric surgery. A literature review is conducted to identify pertinent studies and expert opinions regarding RMBS. Methodological approaches, patient selection criteria, surgical techniques, preoperative assessments, and postoperative management strategies are synthesized to provide a comprehensive overview of current practices and advancements in the field, including institutional protocols. This review synthesizes key findings regarding the challenges encountered in RMBS, including the underlying causes of primary procedure failure, anatomical complexities, technical considerations, and assessments of surgical outcomes. Additionally, patient outcomes, complication rates, and long-term success are presented, along with institutional approaches to patient assessment and procedure selection. This review provides valuable insights for clinicians grappling with the complexities of RMBS. A comprehensive understanding of patient selection, surgical techniques, preoperative management, and postoperative care is crucial for enhancing outcomes and ensuring patient satisfaction in the field of metabolic bariatric surgery.

Updates in Bariatric Surgery

Bariatric surgery is currently the most effective long-term treatment for morbid obesity as well as type-2 diabetes mellitus. The field of metabolic and bariatric surgery has seen tremendous growth over the past decade with dramatically reduced risks. This article aims to provide an update on bariatric surgery, highlighting the latest outcomes, improvements, and challenges in the field. Recently, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) released a major update to the indications for bariatric surgery at BMI ≥35 kg/m2 regardless of co-morbidities and 30-34.9 kg/m2 with obesity-related comorbidities. Sleeve gastrectomy has emerged as the most popular bariatric procedure in the last 10 years with its remarkable efficacy and safety profile. The implementation of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols have significantly improved the quality of care for all bariatric patients. The recent introduction and FDA approval of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists for chronic obesity has garnered significant media coverage and popularity, but no guidelines exist regarding its use in relation to bariatric surgery. This update underscores the need for tailored approaches, ongoing research, and the integration of evidence-based medicine and innovations to enhance patient care.

Reflux After Sleeve Gastrectomy: Safety and Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Ligamentum Teres Cardiopexy, a Single-Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Obesity is a well-known risk factor for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Even though symptoms may be mitigated or resolved with the weight loss caused by sleeve gastrectomy (SG), it may be associated with higher incidences of postoperative GERD. Ligamentum teres cardiopexy (LTC) is an alternative to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, the gold standard treatment for GERD.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective single-center chart review, all patients in this cohort underwent LTC to treat refractory GERD at our institution. The option for LTC was presented after patients' refusal to undergo RYGB conversion. We collected baseline characteristics, standard demographics, pre-operative tests and imaging, and SG information, as well as intraoperative and perioperative data regarding LTC, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Our cohort included 29 patients; most were Caucasian (44.8%) females (86.2%). The mean weight and BMI before LTC were 216.5 ± 39.3 lb and 36.1 ± 5.4 kg/m2, respectively. Mean total body-weight loss (TBWL) at 12 and 24 months were 28.7% ± 9.5% and 28.4% ± 12.4%, respectively. The mean interval between the index bariatric surgery and LTC was 59.9 ± 34.9 months, mean operative time was 67 ± 18.2 min, and median length of stay (LOS) was 1 day (IQR = 1-2 days). Twelve patients (57.1%) were able to discontinue antisecretory medications, while 9 (42.9%) still required them to remain asymptomatic. Mortality and reoperation rates were 0% and the incidence of complication was 19.4% (n = 6).

CONCLUSIONS

LTC is a safe and effective surgical alternative to treat refractory GERD symptoms after SG.

GERD after Bariatric Surgery: A Review of the Underlying Causes and Recommendations for Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

GERD after bariatric surgery is an ongoing concern for bariatric surgeons and their patients. This paper reviews the association of persistent or de novo GERD after multiple types of bariatric surgery, and focuses on the work up and management of GERD after SG.

RECENT FINDINGS

Two recent large, multicenter randomized clinical trials have shown stronger associations between SG and GERD compared to RYGB. A large group of internationally recognized bariatric surgeons collaborated on 72 consensus statements to help guide the bariatric community on the subject of redo surgeries after SG, including as it pertains to GERD. We present an algorithm that consolidates the best-practices recommendations of the work-up and management of GERD after sleeve gastrectomy, and mention areas of persistent controversy where future research is warranted.

The Art of Sleeve Gastrectomy

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has historically evolved from gastroplasty and anti-reflux procedures into one of the most commonly performed primary metabolic surgeries in the United States and worldwide. Initially initiated in the 1980s as part of the duodenal switch procedure, its standalone effectiveness and simplicity have led to increasing popularity globally. The rise in obesity rates transcends age boundaries, alarmingly affecting not only adults but also the younger demographic. This escalating trend is concerning, as it predisposes these populations to numerous future health complications, as well as highlighting the critical necessity for a safe and potent weight loss strategy. Although sleeve gastrectomy carries a higher risk for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) compared to other bariatric procedures, it stands out as a reliable, safe and effective surgical solution for obesity. It is particularly beneficial for adolescents and patients with complex medical comorbidities, including, but not limited to, heart failure and immunocompromisation. It has also served as a bridge for transplants in morbidly obese patients with end-stage heart, liver and kidney disease due to its favorable safety profile.

National trends in utilization and safety of gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy and conversion surgery in patients with GERD

BACKGROUND

While some studies have reported improvement in gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms after sleeve gastrectomy (SG), others have reported higher incidence of de-novo GERD, worsening of prior GERD symptoms and erosive esophagitis post SG. Furthermore, GERD unresponsive to medical management is one of the most common indications for conversion of SG to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Real-world data on safety of primary SG, primary RYGB and SG to RYGB conversion for obese patients with GERD would be helpful for informing surgeons and patient procedure selection. We sought to evaluate the trends in utilization and safety of primary RYGB and primary SG for patients with GERD requiring medications, and compare the peri-operative outcomes between primary RYGB and conversion surgery from SG to RYGB for GERD using the MBSAQIP database.

METHODS

A comparative analysis of post-operative outcomes within 30 days was performed for primary RYGB and primary SG after 1:1 nearest neighbor propensity score matching for patient demographics and preoperative comorbidities using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) registry from 2015 to 2021. This was followed by comparison of peri-operative outcomes between conversion surgery from SG to RYGB for GERD and primary RYGB using MBSAQIP 2020-2021 data.

RESULTS

Utilization of primary RYGB increased from 38% in 2015 to 45% in 2021, while primary SG decreased from 62% in 2015 to 55% in 2021 for bariatric patients with GERD. Post-operative outcomes including reoperation, reintervention, readmission, major complications, and death within 30 days were significantly higher for patients undergoing primary RYGB compared to primary SG. Increased readmissions and ED visits were seen with conversion surgery. However, there was no difference in rates of reoperation, reintervention, major complications, or death between primary RYGB and SG conversion to RYGB cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

This data suggests that a strategy of performing a primary SG and subsequent SG-RYGB conversion for those with recalcitrant GERD symptoms is not riskier than a primary RYGB. Thus, it may be reasonable to perform SG in patients who are well informed of the risk of worsening GERD requiring additional surgical interventions. However, the impact of such staged approach (SG followed by conversion to RYGB) on long-term outcomes remains unknown.

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.

Comparison of weight loss after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in Helicobacter pylori-negative and Helicobacter pylori eradicated patients during five years follow-ups

PURPOSE

Helicobacter pylori (HP) is the most common human infection that has affected up to 50% of the population worldwide. The relationship between HP eradication and weight loss is under debate. The present study aimed to compare weight loss outcomes after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in HP-negative (HP-) and HP-eradicated (HPe) patients during five years follow-ups.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted on 305 patients aged 18 and more with severe obesity, who underwent primary RYGB from February 2014 to November 2017. The HP-negative and HP-eradicated patients were evaluated for weight loss outcomes during five years follow-ups.

RESULTS

Patients' mean age, mean weight, and mean body mass index were 38.78 ± 9.9, 114.8 ± 13.6, and 43.37 ± 2.55, respectively. 27.2% of patients who were HP-positive were treated before RYGB. There was no significant difference between the HP- and HPe patients in terms of total weight loss percent (%TWL), 12 to 60 months after RYGB. Excess weight loss percent (%EWL) was higher in HPe patients compared to HP- patients (P = 0.04) at 12-month after RYGB. However, there was no difference in %EWL between these two groups of patients, 36 and 60 months after RYGB.

CONCLUSION

The results of the present study showed that TWL% had no significant difference in HP- and HPe groups during five years follow-ups after RYGB. The %EWL was higher in HPe patients only at 12 months after RYGB and the difference did not persist over time.

Safety and Efficacy of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass in Children and Adolescents: a 5-Year Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Childhood obesity is an important worldwide issue of serious medical and social concern. One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is an approved, effective, and long-lasting procedure for weight loss and the remission of obesity-associated medical problems in the adult patients, but its efficacy and safety in children and adolescents are still on debate. This study aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of OAGB compare to SG and RYGB during a 5-year follow-up.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study on children and adolescents with severe obesity who underwent primary OAGB, sleeve gastrectomy (SG), and Roux-e-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) at an academic hospital, between March 2016 and December 2020.

RESULTS

Two hundred twenty-eight patients with 24 to 60 months of follow-up including 107 SG, 37 RYGB, and 84 OAGB were included in the final analysis. The mean age, preoperative weight, and BMI were 15.71 ± 2.09 years (range, 9-18 years), 126.3 ± 22.0 kg (74.5-215 kg), and 45.1 ± 6.9 kg/ m2 (36.4-79.3 kg/m2), respectively. The mean of follow-up was 30.05 ± 19.98 months. The mean of ∆BMI was 30.2 ± 5.1, 30.0 ± 5.4, and 31.1 ± 6.8 at 12th, 36th, and 60th months postoperative. At the 60-month follow-up, there were statistically significant differences in ΔBMI between SG and OAGB and SG and RYGB.

CONCLUSION

OAGB is a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of obesity in children and adolescents in 24 to 60 months follow-ups.

Establishment of a Nomogram Based on Inflammatory Response-Related Methylation Sites in Intraoperative Visceral Adipose Tissue to Predict EWL% at One Year After LSG

Background

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is considered as an effective bariatric and metabolic surgery for patients with severe obesity. Chronic low-grade inflammation of adipose tissue is associated with obesity and obesity-related complications.

Objective

This study intends to establish a nomogram based on inflammatory response-related methylation sites in intraoperative visceral adipose tissue (VAT) to predict excess weight loss (EWL)% at one-year after LSG.

Methods

Based on EWL% at one-year after LSG, patients were divided into two groups: the satisfied group (group-A, EWL%≥50%) and the unsatisfied group (group-B, EWL%<50%). Next, we defined genes corresponding to the methylation sites in the 850 K methylation microarray as methylation-related genes (MRGs). We then took the intersection of MRGs and inflammatory response-related genes. After that, inflammatory response-related methylation sites were identified based on overlapping genes. Moreover, difference analysis was carried out to obtain inflammatory response-related differentially methylated sites (IRRDMSs) between group-A and group-B. LASSO analysis was used to identify the hub methylation sites. Finally, we developed a nomogram based on the hub methylation sites.

Results

There were 26 patients in the study, with 13 in group-A and 13 in group-B. After data filtering and difference analysis, 200 IRRDMSs were identified (143 hypermethylated sites and 57 hypomethylated sites). Then, we identified three hub methylation sites (cg03610073, cg03208951, and cg18746357) by LASSO analysis and built a predictive nomogram (Area under the curve=0.953).

Conclusion

The predictive nomogram based on three inflammatory-related methylation sites (cg03610073, cg03208951, and cg18746357) in intraoperative visceral adipose tissue can predict one-year EWL% after LSG effectively.