Changes in Non-Diabetic Comorbid Disease Status Following Laparoscopic Vertical Sleeve Gastrectomy (LVSG) Versus Laparoscopic Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass (LRYGB) Procedures: a Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

The transit of oral premedication beyond the stomach in patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a retrospective observational multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Antiemetic and analgesic oral premedications are frequently prescribed preoperatively to enhance recovery after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. However, it is unknown whether these medications transit beyond the stomach or if they remain in the sleeve resection specimen, thereby negating their pharmacological effects.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed on patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and receiving oral premedication (slow-release tapentadol and netupitant/palonosetron) as part of enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery program. Patients were stratified into the Transit group (premedication absent in the resection specimen) and Failure-to-Transit group (premedication present in the resection specimen). Age, sex, body mass index, and presence of diabetes were compared amongst the groups. The premedication lead time (time between premedications' administration and gastric specimen resection), and the premedication presence or absence in the specimen was evaluated.

RESULTS

One hundred consecutive patients were included in the analysis. Ninety-nine patients (99%) were morbidly obese, and 17 patients (17%) had Type 2 diabetes mellitus. One hundred patients (100%) received tapentadol and 89 patients (89%) received netupitant/palonosetron. One or more tablets were discovered in the resected specimens of 38 patients (38%). No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups regarding age, sex, diabetes, or body mass index. The median (Q1‒Q3) premedication lead time was 80 min (57.8‒140.0) in the Failure-to-Transit group and 119.5 min (85.0‒171.3) in the Transit group; P = 0.006. The lead time required to expect complete absorption in 80% of patients was 232 min (95%CI:180‒310).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative oral analgesia and antiemetics did not transit beyond the stomach in 38% of patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. When given orally in combination, tapentadol and netupitant/palonosetron should be administered at least 4 h before surgery to ensure transition beyond the stomach. Future enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery guidelines may benefit from the standardization of premedication lead times to facilitate increased absorption.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; number ACTRN12623000187640; retrospective registered on 22/02/2023.

Late (≥5 y) Complications of Laparoscopic Vertical Sleeve Gastrectomy (LVSG) and Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (LRYGB): A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of data that compares the relative complication profiles of laparoscopic vertical sleeve gastrectomy (LVSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) at 5 years.

OBJECTIVES

The aim was to compare late complications of LVSG and LRYGB.

METHODS

We updated our previous systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of primary LVSG and LRYGB procedures in adults, to review late (5 years) complication outcomes (PROSPERO 112054). Electronic databases were searched from January 2015 to July 2021 for publications meeting inclusion criteria. The Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model was utilized to estimate weighted mean differences where meta-analysis was possible. Bias and certainty of evidence was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations.

RESULTS

Four randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria (n=531; LVSG=272, LRYGB=259). No late treatment-related mortality was reported with either procedure. A significant reduction in surgical reoperations (odds ratio: 0.47, 95% confidence interval: 0.27-0.82, P=0.01) and endoscopic interventions (odds ratio: 0.29, 95% confidence interval: 0.12-0.71, P=0.02) were reported at 5 years post-LVSG relative to LRYGB. Reoperations were more frequently performed for reflux management in LVSG and for internal hernia repairs in LRYGB. Complications requiring medical management were common following both procedures. Limitations included few eligible studies for inclusion, and varying definitions of medically managed complications.

CONCLUSIONS

LRYGB is associated with a higher proportion of surgical and endoscopic interventions at 5 years compared with LVSG. More high-quality, long-term studies are required to further elucidate both surgical and nutritional long-term outcomes post these procedures.

The impact of ursodeoxycholic acid on gallstone disease after bariatric surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials

BACKGROUND

Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is a bile acid that has been shown to reduce the formation of gallstones after significant weight loss.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of UDCA on the incidence of gallstones after bariatric surgery.

SETTINGS

An electronic search of PubMed (Medline), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Studies (CENTRAL), Scopus (Elsevier) databases, EMBASE, CINAHL, Clinicaltrials.gov, and Web of Science.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of randomized control trials was performed. The primary outcome was the incidence of gallstones after bariatric surgery. Secondary outcomes included type of operation and time interval to and characteristics associated with gallstone formation.

RESULTS

Ten randomized control trials including 2583 patients were included, 1772 patients (68.6%) receiving UDCA and 811 (31.4%) receiving placebo. There was a significant reduction in gallstone formation in patients who received UDCA postoperatively (risk ratio [RR] .36, 95% confidence interval [CI] .22-.41, P  < .00001). The overall prevalence of gallstone formation was 24.7% in the control group compared to 7.3% in the UDCA group. A dose of ≤600 mg/day had a significantly reduced risk of gallstone formation compared to the placebo group (risk ratio .35; 95% CI .24-.53; P < .001). The risk reduction was not significant for the higher dose (>600 mg/day) group (risk ratio .30; 95% CI, .09-1.01, P = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

UDCA significantly reduces the risk of both asymptomatic and symptomatic gallstones after bariatric surgery. A dose of 600 mg/day is associated with improved compliance and better outcomes regardless of type of surgery. UDCA should be considered part of a standard postoperative care bundle after bariatric surgery.

Clinical Features and Short-Term Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery in Morbidly Obese Patients: Institutional Experience at a Rural Hospital

Objective: To prospectively evaluate the postoperative morbidity, mortality, and weight loss evolution of patients who underwent a bariatric procedure during 1 year of follow-up. Methods: Since July 2016, a total of 101 patients' data have been prospectively registered in a database. Comorbidities, operating time, hospital stay, early and late complications rate, and weight loss evolution after 1 year of follow-up were recorded. Results: The mean age was 38.41 ± 11.05 years with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 49.02 ± 5.89 kg/m2 (range 38-67). Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) was performed in 93 patients (92.07%) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RNYGB) in 8 patients (7.92%). Thirty-day morbidity rate was 7.92% (8/101). Within a mean 9.32 ± 2.25 (range 1-19) months follow-up time, mean percent of the excess of weight loss of 1st, 6th, and 12th months were 22.7 ± 6.1, 67.2 ± 11.2, and 81.4 ± 10.5, respectively. Diabetes (n = 38, 37.6%), hypertension (n = 13, 12.9%), and obstructive sleep apnea (n = 5, 4.9%) were resolved in 76%, 68.4%, and 100% of the patients, respectively (p < 0.001). Conclusions: LSG and RNYGB are safe and highly effective, particularly in patients with a BMI >50 kg/m2. Both techniques have been presented with better clinical outcomes regarding significant comorbidity resolution in the early evolution of weight loss.

Comparative Safety of Sleeve Gastrectomy and Gastric Bypass: An Instrumental Variables Approach

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety of sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass in a large cohort of commercially insured bariatric surgery patients from the IBM MarketScan claims database, while accounting for measurable and unmeasurable sources of selection bias in who is chosen for each operation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Sleeve gastrectomy has rapidly become the most common bariatric operation performed in the United States, but its longer-term safety is poorly described, and the risk of worsening gastroesophageal reflux requiring revision may be higher than previously thought. Prior studies comparing sleeve gastrectomy to gastric bypass are limited by low sample size (in randomized trials) and selection bias (in observational studies).

METHODS

Instrumental variables analysis of commercially insured patients in the IBM MarketScan claims database from 2011 to 2018. We studied patients undergoing bariatric surgery from 2012 to 2016. We identified re-interventions and complications at 30 days and 2 years from surgery using Comprehensive Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Disease (ICD)-9/10 codes. To overcome unmeasured confounding, we use the prior year's sleeve gastrectomy utilization within each state as an instrumental variable-exploiting variation in the timing of payers' decisions to cover sleeve gastrectomy as a natural experiment.

RESULTS

Among 38,153 patients who underwent bariatric surgery between 2012 and 2016, the share of sleeve gastrectomy rose from 52.6% (2012) to 75% (2016). At 2 years from surgery, patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy had fewer re-interventions (sleeve 9.9%, bypass 15.6%, P < 0.001) and complications (sleeve 6.6%, bypass 9.6%, P = 0.001), and lower overall healthcare spending ($47,891 vs $55,213, P = 0.003), than patients undergoing gastric bypass. However, at the 2-year mark, revisions were slightly more common in sleeve gastrectomy than in gastric bypass (sleeve 0.6%, bypass 0.4%, P = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In a large cohort of commercially insured patients, sleeve gastrectomy had a superior safety profile to gastric bypass up to 2 years from surgery, even when accounting for selection bias. However, the higher risk of revisions in sleeve gastrectomy merits further exploration.

Vertical Sleeve Gastrectomy Attenuates the Progression of Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis in Mice on a High-Fat High-Cholesterol Diet

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG) attenuates fibrosis in mice on a high-fat high-cholesterol (HFHC) diet.

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery mitigates non-alcoholic steatohepatitis in 85-90% of obese patients. While animal models demonstrate similar results on a high-fat diet, none have observed the effects of bariatric surgery on a combined HFHC diet.

METHODS

Mice on a HFHC diet were used to confirm the development of hepatic fibrosis at 8 (n = 15) and 24 (n = 15) weeks. A separate cohort of mice on a HFHC diet for 12 weeks was subjected to either VSG (n = 18) or sham (n = 12) operations and remained on a HFHC diet for an additional 20 weeks. Changes in weight, dyslipidemia, and the development of steatosis and fibrosis were documented. Serum was obtained for bile acid analysis by liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry, while hepatic gene expression by RT-PCR was performed to evaluate intrahepatic lipid metabolism.

RESULTS

Hepatic steatosis and fibrosis developed after 8 weeks on the HFHC diet. After VSG, mice demonstrated a sustained decrease in weight with a significant decrease in fibrosis compared to sham mice. Serum total cholesterol, HDL, and LDL were significantly reduced following surgery, while serum bile acids were significantly elevated. Intra-hepatic cholesterol excretion was not upregulated based on hepatic gene expression of CYP7A1 and ABCG5/8.

CONCLUSIONS

VSG attenuates the development of hepatic fibrosis in diet-induced obese mice, presumably through enhancement of cholesterol elimination at the intestinal level.

Cardiovascular Effects of Metabolic Surgery on Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Cardiovascular, together with renal disease, claims a significant proportion of morbidity and mortality in association with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and obesity. To improve the long-term renal and cardiovascular outcome, there is the incorporation of bariatric surgery (BS), which seems to be a pivotal intervention. Areas Explored: Cohort studies and randomized controlled trial (RCT) research of BS among patients with T2DM, were conducted by screening, and then information on renal effects and the cardiovascular outcome was gathered. Metabolic surgery (MS) and BS reduce both mortality and the risk of cardiovascular disorder, chronic kidney diseases and albuminuria. MS refers to a surgical approach, the primary intent of which is the control of metabolic alterations/hyperglycemia in contrast to BS which is a mere weight-reduction therapy. Patients suffering from poor glycaemic control and other macro and micro-vascular diseases will benefit from a surgical approach. The approach implicates hypertension glomerular remission, gut microbiota shift, reduced renal inflammation and fewer instances of chronic cardiac remodelling.

CONCLUSION

MS is beneficial where the main aim is to attain significant and long-lasting weight loss results. The RCTs have depicted the superiority which surgical mechanisms hold over medically- based therapy, for enhancing glycaemic control, and achieving remission of diabetes. This type of surgery improves life quality, reduces incidences of other obesity and diabetes related diseases like microvascular disases, sleep apnea, fatal disorder, and fatty liver disease.

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is as safe as laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Results of a comparative cohort study

Background

A meta-analysis and six randomized controlled trials show higher 30-day complication rates with laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) than with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

Aim

To identify any difference in 30-day outcomes of patients treated with LRYGB or LSG when a standardized technique and identical post-operative protocol was followed with all procedures being conducted either by or under the supervision of a single consultant surgeon who had significant experience in bariatric surgery prior to commencing independent practice.

Methods

A prospectively collected database of all patients under primary LRYGB or LSG, between March 2010 and February 2017, was analyzed. Data on demographics, length-of-stay (LOS), conversion to open, 30-day complications and mortality were reviewed.

Results

Over a seven-year period, 485 patients (LRYGB-279 and LSG-206) were included. There were no significant demographic differences and no difference in the pre-operative risk scoring [American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) and obesity surgery mortality risk score (OSMRS)] between the groups. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of LOS (p = 0.275), complications (p = 0.920), re-admissions (p = 0.593) or re-operations (p = 0.366) within 30-days. There were no conversions to open or in-patient mortality in either group.

Conclusions

Unlike previous studies, we found no difference in early complication rates between LRYGB and LSG in a comparable cohort when performed by a surgeon with sufficient experience in bariatric surgery.

•

Low complication rates with both procedures.

•

Most complications were minor (Clavien-Dindo ≤ IIIa).

•

LRYGB is as safe as SG in the early post-operative period when performed by a surgeon with adequate experience.

•

Bariatric fellowships play an important role in ensuring optimal outcomes.

MANAGEMENT OF ENDOCRINE DISEASE: Which metabolic procedure? Comparing outcomes in sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en Y gastric bypass

Obesity and its associated comorbidities have become one of the largest challenges for health care in the near future. Conservative therapy for obesity and related comorbidities has a very high failure rate and poor long-term results. Similarly, the conservative and medical management of the majority of metabolic diseases such as type 2 diabetes mellitus are only able to slow down disease progression but have no causal effect on the disease process. Obesity surgery has evolved as a highly effective therapy for severe obesity achieving long-lasting weight loss. Furthermore, several studies have demonstrated the beneficial effects of obesity surgery on reduction of overall mortality, reduction of cardiovascular events and superior control of obesity-related diseases such as type 2 diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia and also the non-alcoholic steatohepatitis compared to medical therapy. Based on these findings, the term 'metabolic surgery' with the focus on treating metabolic diseases independent of body weight has been coined. Of great interest are recent studies that show that even existing complications of metabolic diseases such as diabetic nephropathy or the non-alcoholic steatohepatitis can be reversed by metabolic surgery. Although metabolic surgery has proven to be a safe and effective treatment for obesity, resolution of comorbidities and enhancing quality of life, it is still uncertain and unclear, which surgical procedure is the most effective to achieve these metabolic effects. The aim of this review is to compare the effects of the two currently most widely used metabolic operations, the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and the sleeve gastrectomy in the treatment of obesity and its related comorbidities.

Obesity metabolic and hormonal disorders associated with obstructive sleep apnea and their impact on the risk of cardiovascular events

OBJECTIVE

To analyze metabolic and hormonal disorders resulting from the association between obesity and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) syndrome that predispose to cardiovascular diseases and investigate the clinical benefits obtained from treatment approaches for both conditions.

METHODS

A literature review between 1997 and 2017 was conducted in the PubMed search database.

RESULTS

Obesity is the most important risk factor for OSA, and the progressive increase in its prevalence also affects OSA incidence. In addition, OSA may aggravate weight gain and obesity comorbidities. Both conditions lead to an increase in the risk of cardiovascular events and mortality. The gold standard treatment for moderate to severe OSA is CPAP, but significant reduction in major cardiovascular events was not observed in clinical trials. Body weight reduction appears effective to improve OSA, as long as it is maintained. Lifestyle modifications and drug therapy seem to be the preferred approach to treat obesity, but in severe obesity and moderate to severe OSA, bariatric surgery is probably the most adequate treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Weight control is essential to decrease the risk of cardiovascular events and mortality potentially linked to both obesity and OSA. CPAP seems to treat only OSA without decreasing these risks. Other treatment strategies are lifestyle modifications and drug therapy, which need further investigation as well as bariatric surgery for severe cases.

Comparison of safety and effectiveness between laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass is a newly emerged surgical procedure in recent years. Owe to safe and simple process and effective outcomes, laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass has quickly become one of the most popular procedures in some countries. The safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy remain unclear.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library from inception to May 20, 2017. The methodological quality of Randomized Controlled Trials and non-Randomized Controlled Trials were, respectively, assessed by Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias and Newcastle-Ottawa scale. The meta-analysis was performed by RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Patients receiving mini-gastric bypass had a lot of advantageous indexes than patients receiving sleeve gastrectomy, such as higher 1-year EWL% (excess weight loss), higher 5-year EWL%, higher T2DM remission rate, higher hypertension remission rate, higher obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) remission rate, lower osteoarthritis remission rate, lower leakage rate, lower overall late complications rate, higher ulcer rate, lower gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) rate, shorter hospital stay and lower revision rate. No significant statistical difference was observed on overall early complications rate, bleed rate, vomiting rate, anemia rate, and operation time between mini-gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy.

CONCLUSION

Mini-gastric bypass is a simpler, safer, and more effective bariatric procedure than laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Due to the biased data, small sample size and short follow-up time, our results may be unreliable. Large sample and multicenter RCT is needed to compare the effectiveness and safety between mini-gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy. Future study should also focus on bile reflux, remnant gastric cancer, and long term effectiveness of mini-gastric bypass.