Three-Year Outcomes of Revisional Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass after Failed Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Case-Matched Analysis

The risk and benefit of revisional vs. primary metabolic- bariatric surgery and drug therapy - A narrative review

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) leads to long-term weight loss, reduced risk of cardiovascular events and cancer, and reduced mortality. Sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass are currently the most common surgical techniques. Weight loss after MBS was previously believed to work through restriction and malabsorption, however, mechanistic studies show that MBS techniques with long term efficacy instead alter physiological signaling between the gut and the brain. In revisional MBS, the initial surgical technique is corrected, modified, or converted to a new one. The indication for revisional MBS can be to achieve further weight loss or improvement in obesity comorbidity, but it may be necessary due to complications (e.g., gastroesophageal reflux or obstruction). Revisional MBS is associated with an increased risk of surgical complications and often less weight loss compared to the results following primary surgery. This narrative review summarizes data from revisional MBS where information is often presented with inconsistent definitions for indications and outcomes, making comparison between strategies difficult. In summary, we suggest careful weighing of potential benefits and risks with revisional MBS, bearing in mind the option of add-on therapy with new anti-obesity drugs.

Weight loss specific to indication, remission of diabetes, and short-term complications after sleeve gastrectomy conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most frequently performed bariatric procedure worldwide. Long-term complications such as insufficient weight loss (IWL) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) may necessitate SG conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). The aim of this review was to determine the indication-specific weight loss and diabetes remission after SG conversion to RYGB (STOBY). Our objective was to extract all available published data on indication for conversion, weight loss, remission of diabetes, and short-term complications after STOBY. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies reporting outcomes following STOBY. A random effects model was used for meta-analysis. The search identified 44 relevant studies. Overall short-term (12-mo) excess weight loss (EWL) was 54.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 46%-63%) in 23 studies (n = 712) and total weight loss (TWL) was 19.9% (95% CI, 14%-25%) in 21 studies (n = 740). For IWL, short-term (12-mo) pooled weight loss outcomes were 53.9% EWL (95% CI, 48%-59%) in 14 studies (n = 295) and 22.7% TWL (95% CI, 17%-28%) in 12 studies (n = 219), and medium-term (2-5 yr) outcomes were 45.8% EWL (95% CI, 38%-53%) in 7 studies (n = 154) and 20.6% TWL (95% CI, 15%-26%) in 9 studies (n = 206). Overall diabetes remission was 53% (95% CI, 33%-72%), and the perioperative complication rate was 8.2% (95% CI, 7.6%-8.7%). Revisional SG conversion to RYGB for IWL can achieve good weight loss outcomes and diabetes remission.

Conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass to Enhance Weight Loss: Single Enterprise Mid-Term Outcomes and Literature Review

Background

Suboptimal weight loss (SWL) occurs up to 30% after sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (cRYGB) has shown heterogeneous results in terms of additional weight loss and resolution of weight-related comorbidities. We aim to evaluate mid-term outcomes of cRYGB specifically for SWL after SG.

Methods

All patients who underwent cRYGB for SWL from April 2010 to June 2019 from prospective registries at three affiliated tertiary care centers were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who underwent revision or conversion for complications were excluded. Mixed-effects and polynomial regression models were used to evaluate weight loss results after conversion.

Results

Thirty-two patients underwent cRYGB from SG. About 68.7% were women with mean age of 46.6 years. Mean body mass index (BMI) before SG was 55.3 kg/m². Before conversion, mean BMI was 44.5 kg/m² with 17.3% total weight loss (TWL). All procedures were completed laparoscopically in a median surgical time of 183 min. Three major complications occurred (9.3%), one gastrojejunal (GJ) leak and two reoperations. Four cases (12.5%) of GJ stenosis were diagnosed. No mortality was registered. Mean follow-up time was 24 months and patients had 36 kg/m² mean BMI, 17.4% TWL, 27.2% had BMI >35 kg/m².

Conclusions

cRYGB after SG for SWL showed good mid-term results, better than those reported in literature.

Weight loss outcomes for patients undergoing conversion to Roux-en-Y-gastric bypass after sleeve gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Despite excellent reported outcomes after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), a percentage of patients go on to have a secondary bariatric surgery to manage side-effects or address weight regain after LSG. Reported weight loss outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) after previous LSG are variable. We sought to determine the weight-loss outcomes of patients undergoing LRYGB after LSG in the largest bariatric surgical network in Canada and to determine whether outcomes differ according to indications for conversion.

METHODS

The Bariatric Registry is a multi-center database with prospectively collected standardized data on patients undergoing bariatric surgery at ten Bariatric Centers of Excellence within the Ontario Bariatric Network in Ontario, Canada. A retrospective analysis was performed of patients who underwent LRYGB after previous LSG between 2012 and 2019. Weight loss outcomes were compared between patients who underwent LRYGB for insufficient weight loss/weight regain and those who underwent conversion to LRYGB for other reasons.

RESULTS

Excluding patients with multiple revisions and those without follow-up data, 48 patients were included in the analysis: 33 patients (69%) underwent conversion to LRGYB for insufficient weight loss/weight regain (Group 1) and 15 patients (31%) underwent conversion for other reasons (Group 2). Mean body mass index (BMI) measured pre-LSG, pre-LRYGB, and at mid-term follow-up after LRYGB was 61, 48, and 43 kg/m² in Group 1 and 51, 39, and 34 kg/m² in Group 2, respectively. ΔBMI and %total weight loss (TWL) at mid-term follow-up were not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion to LRYGB after previous LSG resulted in an additional loss of 4 kg/m² in BMI points at mid-term follow-up. Patients lost a similar number of BMI points and cumulative %TWL was similar regardless of reason for conversion. This can help inform surgical decision-making in the setting of weight regain after LSG.

Is Revisional Gastric Bypass as Effective as Primary Gastric Bypass for Weight Loss and Improvement of Comorbidities?

BACKGROUND

Revisional gastric bypass (R-RYGB) surgery is utilized for the management of inadequate weight loss or weight regain observed after some cases of bariatric surgeries. Data on the mid-term effectiveness of primary gastric bypass (P-RYGB) compared with R-RYGB (e.g., post sleeve gastrectomy/gastric banding) are controversial.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review of all patients who received P-RYGB and R-RYGB (January 2011-June 2015) at our center. One hundred twenty patients who underwent P-RYGB and 34 R-RYGB who completed 18 months follow-up were included. We compared the effectiveness of P-RYGB with R-RYGB by assessing four anthropometric, two glycemic, and four lipid parameters, as well as the control of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), hypertension, dyslipidemia (remission, improvement, persistence, relapse, de novo), mortality and complications rates.

RESULTS

A comparison of the effectiveness of P-RYGB with R-RYGB at 18 months revealed no significant differences in patients' age, gender, and preoperative BMI between groups. However, patients who received P-RYGB had lower mean weight (P = 0.001) and BMI (P < 0.001), reflected by a higher mean delta BMI (P = 0.02), total weight loss percentage (TWL%) (P < 0.0001) and excess weight loss percentage (EWL%) (P < 0.0001). No differences in glycemic parameters, lipid profiles, control of T2DM, hypertension, and dyslipidemia were observed. No death is reported and complication rates were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

Although R-RYGB effectively addressed inadequate weight loss, weight regain, and recurrence of comorbidities after restrictive bariatric surgery, R-RYGB resulted in inferior weight loss compared with P-RYGB. Neither procedure differed in their clinical control of T2DM, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. Both procedures exhibited comparable complication rates.

Resleeve for failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite excellent long-term results, insufficient weight loss, weight regain, and pathologic gastroesophageal reflux disease may require revisional procedures after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Resleeve gastrectomy (ReSG) for failed LSG, has been proposed as an alternative to more complex malabsorptive procedures. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the current evidence on the therapeutic role and outcomes of ReSG for failed LSG. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science data sets were consulted. A systematic review and Frequentist meta-analysis were performed. Ten studies published between 2010 and 2019 met the inclusion criteria for a total of 300 patients. The age of the patient population ranged from 20 to 66 years old and 80.5% were females. The elapsed time between the LSG and ReSG ranged from 9 to 132 months. The estimated pooled prevalence of postoperative leak and overall complications were 2.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = .5%-4.7%) and 7.6% (95%CI = 3.1%-13.4%). The estimated pooled mean operative time and hospital length of stay were 51 minutes (95%CI = 49.4-52.6) and 3.3 days (95%CI = 3.13-3.51). The postoperative follow-up ranged from 12 to 36 months and the estimated pooled mean percentage excess weight loss was 61.46% (95%CI = 55.9-66.9). The overall mortality ranged from 0% to 2.2%. ReSG after failed LSG seems feasible and safe with acceptable postoperative leak rate, overall complications, and mortality. The effectiveness of ReSG in term of weight loss seems promising in the short-term but further studies are warranted to explore its effect on patients' quality of life, postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease, and long-term weight loss.

Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Safe Surgical Opportunity? Results of a Case-Matched Study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) after adjustable gastric banding (AGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) compared with primary RYGB, in regard to early and late morbidity, weight, and resolution of obesity-related comorbidities.

METHODS

The group of patients undergoing revisional RYGB was matched in a 1:1 ratio with control patient who underwent a primary RYGB, based on age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) score, preoperative body mass index (BMI), and diabetes mellitus. Demographics, anthropometrics, preoperative work-up, and perioperative data were retrieved.

RESULTS

One hundred fifteen patients (16 males and 99 females) with a mean age of 45.5 ± 1.5 years underwent revisional RYGB following either LAGB in 82 patients (71.3%) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in 33 patients (28.7%). There was no conversion and no mortality in either group. Revisional RYGB was associated with similar early (16.5 vs 15.6%, ns) and late (42.6% vs 32.2%, ns) morbidity rates with a mean follow-up of 25.3 ± 16.6 months compared to primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The revisional RYGB group had significantly less weight loss (mean %EWL 67.4 ± 20.7 vs 72.7 ± 22.9, p = 0.023 and mean %EBMI 68.1 ± 22 vs 78.3 ± 25.7, p = 0.01) at the time of 1 year. Improvement of comorbidities including hypertension (62.5 vs 70.5%; p > 0.05), diabetes (73.7 vs 79%; p > 0.05), and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (100 vs 97%; p > 0.05) was similar.

CONCLUSION

This large case-matched study suggests that conversion of SG or AGB to RYGB is feasible with early and late comparable morbidity in an accredited center; even weight results might be inferior.

Novel Trocar-Free Elastic Liver Retractor in Bariatric Surgery Patients: Comparison of a Standard Laparoscopic Retraction With the First Series Using the LiVac Sling System

During upper gastrointestinal surgery, retraction of the liver plays an essential role in the visualization and creation of an optimal surgical field. Liver retraction may be problematic, particularly in obese patients. The use of conventional liver retractors requires additional skin incision and has the potential to cause pain as well as liver injuries. The present study is the first to evaluate the performance and safety of the LiVac Sling (Livac Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Australia) trocar-free retractor system in bariatric surgery patients. In this retrospective study, data from laparoscopic primary or revisional bariatric surgeries that were performed with the LiVac Sling system and a standard retractor between May 2017 and December 2017 were collected. Demographic data, body mass index, type of surgery, number and indication of LiVac Sling system used, surgery time, and complications were analyzed. In total, 51 procedures were included. Twenty Sling devices have been used in 17 patients (13 female; 75%). The distribution of baseline characteristics was similar between the standard retractor group and LiVac Sling retractor group. In the LiVac Sling group, the number of trocars used was significantly reduced over the study period. Within 30 days postoperatively, no complications could be identified, and no device-related adverse events were reported. In this bariatric population, the use of the LiVac Sling for liver retraction was safe. No device-related adverse events were registered, and compared with standard retraction, the number of trocars used could be reduced by one.

Revisional Gastric Bypass Is Inferior to Primary Gastric Bypass in Terms of Short- and Long-term Outcomes-Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

Although Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the main primary bariatric procedure, it has also been utilized as revisional bariatric surgery. Our aim is to compare revisionary gastric bypass with primary gastric bypass through systematic review with meta-analysis.

Methods

Available literature was searched for eligible studies up to December 2017. Inclusion criteria were reports on morbidity, %EWL, or diabetes remission. Secondary outcomes involved mortality, anastomotic leakage, operative time, and length of hospital stay. Random effect meta-analyses were undertaken.

Results

Initial search yielded 1164 references. Final meta-analysis involved 21 studies and revealed significant differences in terms of morbidity (RR1.54, p < 0.001) and EWL (WMD-19.9, p < 0.001). There were no differences in diabetes remission.

Conclusion

Revisionary RYGB has worse weight loss effect with greater morbidity rate than primary RYGB.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11695-018-3300-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Update: 10 Years of Sleeve Gastrectomy-the First 103 Patients

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has been the most frequently performed bariatric procedure worldwide since 2014. Therefore, it is vital to look at its outcomes in a long-term follow-up based on a large patient collective. Main points of discussion are weight regain, reflux, and patients' quality of life at 10+ years after the procedure.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to present an update of data that have been published recently and, thus, achieve more conclusive results. The number of patients has been doubled, and the length of the follow-up is still 10+ years.

SETTING

Multi-center study, medical university clinic, Austria METHODS: This study includes all patients who had SG before December 2006 at the participating bariatric centers. At 10+ years, non-converted patients (67%) were examined using gastroscopy, manometry, 24-hour pH-metry, and questionnaires. Patients' history of weight, comorbidities, and reflux were established through interviews.

RESULTS

At 10+ years after SG, the authors found a conversion rate of 33%, an %EWL in non-converted patients of 50.0 ± 22.5, reflux in 57%, and Barrett's metaplasia in 14% of non-converted patients. Gastroscopies revealed that patients with reflux were significantly more likely to have de-novo hiatal hernia. A significantly lower quality of life was detected through GIQLI and BAROS in patients with reflux.

CONCLUSION

The authors recommend gastroscopies at 5-year intervals after SG to detect the possible sequelae of reflux at an early stage. Conversion to Roux-en-Y-gastric bypass (RYGB) works well to cure patients from reflux but may not be as efficient at treating weight regain.

Comparison of Repeat Sleeve Gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass in Case of Weight Loss Failure After Sleeve Gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Few series are available on the results of repeat sleeve gastrectomy (re-SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) performed to manage the failure of primary sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The objective of this study was to compare the short- and medium-term outcomes of re-SG and RYGB after SG.

MATERIAL & METHODS

Between January 2010 and December 2017, patients undergoing re-SG (n = 61) and RYGB (n = 83) for failure of primary SG were included in this study. Revisional surgery was proposed for patients with insufficient excess weight loss (EWL ≤ 50%) or weight regain. The primary endpoint was the comparison of weight loss in the re-SG group and the RYGB group at the 1-year follow-up. The secondary endpoints were overall mortality and morbidity, specific morbidity, length of stay, weight loss, and correction of comorbidities.

RESULTS

The mean interval between SG and re-SG was 41.5 vs. 43.2 months between SG and RYGB (p = 0.32). The mean operative time was 103 min (re-SG group) vs. 129.4 min (RYGB group). One death (1.7%; re-SG group) and 25 complications (17.4%; 9 in the re-SG group, 16 in the RYGB group) were observed. At the 1 year, mean body mass index was 31.6 in the re-SG group and 32.5 in the RYGB group (p = 0.61) and excess weight loss was 69.5 vs. 61.2, respectively (p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Re-SG and RYGB as revisional surgery for SG are feasible with acceptable outcomes and similar results on weight loss on the first postoperative year.

Bariatric Surgery in Septuagenarians: a Comparison with <60 Year Olds

INTRODUCTION

There is reluctance amongst many healthcare professionals to offer bariatric surgery to septuagenarians. There is only one study in the scientific literature specifically describing any experience with this group of patients and none that compares the outcomes in this group with younger patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined our prospective database to identify all those who were >70 years old at the time of bariatric surgery. This group was then compared with a matched (for sex, body mass index, surgical procedure, and time of surgery) cohort of younger (<60 year old) patients. Information was obtained from our database, case notes, hospital electronic records, by interviewing team members, and from general practitioners.

RESULTS

A total of 10 septuagenarians were compared with 10 younger patients (mean age 41 years). There were one early complication and 1 late complication in the over 70 group as opposed to no early complication and 2 late complications in the younger group. There was no mortality or early reoperation in either group. Excess weight loss of 50.4, 67.4, and 74.0% in the >70 age group at 6, 12, and 24 months, respectively, was no different to 51.3, 70.8, and 73.9% in <60 year olds. The effect on the co-morbidity resolution was similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSION

In carefully selected septuagenarians, bariatric surgery can be performed with safety and efficacy comparable to those <60 years old.