One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass: First 407 Patients in 1 year

Novel Surgical Interventions for the Treatment of Obesity

Metabolic and bariatric surgery is widely recognized as the most effective and durable treatment for the disease of obesity and its associated comorbidities. In recent years, the field has seen significant advancements, introducing numerous innovative surgical options. This review aims to comprehensively examine these emerging surgical techniques, which have recently received endorsement from the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS). Additionally, we will explore new technologies and methodologies supported by the latest scientific evidence. Our analysis will include a critical evaluation of the efficacy, safety, and long-term outcomes of these novel approaches, providing a detailed update on the current state of metabolic and bariatric surgery, highlighting key developments and their potential implications for clinical practice.

Primary versus Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass: Outcomes of Patients with at Least 8-Year Follow-Up

INTRODUCTION

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) prevalence is increasing worldwide and shows good mid- to long-term results. Data on long-term outcomes of revisional OAGB (rOAGB) is limited. This study's objective was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing primary OAGB (pOAGB) and rOAGB.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained patient registry at a single-tertiary center. Patients undergoing OAGB from January 2015 to May 2016 were included and grouped into pOAGB and rOAGB.

RESULTS

There were 424 patients, of which 363 underwent pOAGB, and 61 underwent rOAGB. Baseline characteristics were insignificantly different between groups except for the type 2 diabetes (T2D) rate which was higher in pOAGB (26% vs. 11.5%, p = 0.01). The mean follow-up time was 98.5 ± 3.9 months, and long-term follow-up data were available for 52.5% of patients. The mean total weight loss (TWL) was higher in the pOAGB group (31.3 ± 14 vs. 24.1 ± 17.6, p = 0.006); however, TWL was comparable when relating to the weight at primary surgery for rOAGB. The rate of T2D and hypertension resolution was 79% and 72.7% with no difference between groups. Thirteen patients (5.9%) underwent OAGB revision during follow-up, with no difference between groups. Two deaths occurred during follow-up, both non-related to OAGB.

CONCLUSION

OAGB is effective as a primary and as a revisional procedure for severe obesity with good long-term results in terms of weight loss and resolution of associated diseases. In addition, the revisional surgery rates and chronic complications are acceptable. Further large prospective studies are required to clarify these data.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on GERD after OAGB: rate, treatments, and success

INTRODUCTION

This review aims to investigate the gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) as one of the important concerns for both surgeons and patients after one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB).

METHOD

PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane were reviewed by the end of the 2021 with keywords relating to GERD, OAGB, and their equivalents. Data regarding OAGB, number of patients with GERD, treatment for GERD, endoscopy findings, the interval between GERD and OAGB were retrieved by two independent investigators. The primary effect/effect size measure was prevalence.

RESULTS

40 studies examining 17,299 patients were included revealing that 2% of patients experience GERD following OAGB. Reflux after revisional OAGB is six times higher than primary OAGB. Despite being unclear, medical and surgical treatments for GERD after OAGB were used in 60% and 41% of patients with estimated success rate of 85% and 100%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Based on how GERD was identified after OAGB, its rate ranged from 0 to 55%; the pooled rate of 2% is near to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. GERD symptoms can be mild to be tolerated without medical treatment, moderate that respond to acid-reducing agents, or severe enough that are categorized as interactable and would need a surgical intervention.

Management of leaks following one-anastomosis gastric bypass: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of 44 318 patients

INTRODUCTION

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) complication, such as leakage, can be dangerous and should be managed properly, yet little data exist in the literature regarding the management of leaks after OAGB, and there are no guidelines to date.

METHODS

The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature and 46 studies, examining 44 318 patients were included.

RESULTS

There were 410 leaks reported in 44 318 patients of OAGB published in the literature, which represents a prevalence of 1% of leaks after OAGB. The surgical strategy was very variable among all the different studies; 62.1% of patients with leaks had to undergo another surgery due to the leak. The most commonly performed procedure was peritoneal washout and drainage (with or without T-tube placement) in 30.8% of patients, followed by conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in 9.6% of patients. Medical treatment with antibiotics, with or without total parenteral nutrition alone, was conducted in 13.6% of patients. Among the patients with the leak, the mortality rate related to the leak was 1.95%, and the mortality due to the leak in the population of OAGB was 0.02%.

CONCLUSION

The management of leaks following OAGB requires a multidisciplinary approach. OAGB is a safe operation with a low leak risk rate, and the leaks can be managed successfully if detected in a timely fashion.

Standardization of the One-anastomosis Gastric Bypass Procedure for Morbid Obesity: Technical Aspects and Early Outcomes

BACKGROUND

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) has become an accepted metabolic/bariatric surgery procedure. This study aimed to describe our center's standardized OAGB operative technique and report early (≤30 d) safety outcomes in patients with severe obesity.

METHODS

The medical records of patients who had undergone either primary (n=681, 88.0%) or revisional OAGB (n=93, 12.0%) were retrospectively evaluated. Patient demographics, operative time, length of hospital stay, readmissions, reoperations, and ≤30-day morbidity and mortality rates were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 774 consecutive patients with severe obesity (647 female, 83.6%) underwent OAGB between January 2016 and December 2021. Their mean age was 36.2±10.8 years (range: 18 to 70 y) and mean body mass index was 42.7±4.2 kg/m 2 (range: 17.2 to 61 kg/m 2 ). Mean operating time was 52.6±19.9 minutes (range: 25 to 295 min) and length of hospital stay was 1.6±0.9 days (range: 1 to 9 d). Early postoperative complications occurred in 16 cases (2.1%), including 2 leaks with an intra-abdominal abscess (0.3%), bleeding (n=3, 0.4%), acute kidney failure (n=1, 0.15%), urinary tract infection (n=2, 0.3%), and intensive care unit stay (n=4, 0.5%). Seventy patients (9.1%) were readmitted, and re-laparoscopy was performed in 1 patient (0.1%). There was no mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In the very early term, OAGB was a safe primary and revisional metabolic/bariatric surgery operation. Consistent performance of a standardized OAGB procedure contributed to low rates of morbidity and mortality in the hands of metabolic/bariatric surgeons with good laparoscopic skills at a high-volume center.

IFSO Update Position Statement on One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB)

The International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) issued a position statement on the role of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) in the field of bariatric/metabolic surgery in 2018 De Luca et al. (Obes Surg. 28(5):1188-206, 2018). This position statement was issued by the IFSO OAGB task force and approved by the IFSO Scientific Committee and IFSO Executive Board. In 2018, the OAGB task force recognized the necessity to update the position statement in the following 2 years since additional high-quality data could emerge. The updated IFSO position statement on OAGB was issued also in response to inquiries to the IFSO by society members, universities, hospitals, physicians, insurances, patients, policy makers, and media. The IFSO position statement on OAGB has been reviewed within 2 years according to the availability of additional scientific evidence. The recommendation of the statement is derived from peer-reviewed scientific literature and available knowledge. The IFSO update position statement on OAGB will again be reviewed in 2 years provided additional high-quality studies emerge.

IFSO (International Federation for Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders) Consensus Conference Statement on One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB-MGB): Results of a Modified Delphi Study

BACKGROUND

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB-MGB) is currently the third performed primary bariatric surgical procedure worldwide. However, the procedure is hampered by numerous controversies and there is considerable variability in surgical technique, patient selection, and pre- and postoperative care among the surgeons performing this procedure. This paper reports the results of a modified Delphi consensus study organized by the International Federation for Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO).

METHODS

Fifty-two internationally recognized bariatric experts from 28 countries convened for voting on 90 consensus statements over two rounds to identify those on which consensus could be reached. Inter-voter agreement of ≥ 70% was considered consensus, with voting participation ≥ 80% considered a robust vote.

RESULTS

At least 70% consensus was achieved for 65 of the 90 questions (72.2% of the items), 61 during the first round of voting and an additional four in the second round. Where consensus was reached on a binary agree/disagree or yes/no item, there was agreement with the statement presented in 53 of 56 instances (94.6%). Where consensus was reached on a statement where options favorable versus unfavorable to OAGB-MGB were provided, including statements in which OAGB-MGB was compared to another procedure, the response option favorable to OAGB-MGB was selected in 13 of 23 instances (56.5%).

CONCLUSION

Although there is general agreement that the OAGB-MGB is an effective and usually safe option for the management of patients with obesity or severe obesity, numerous areas of non-consensus remain in its use. Further empirical data are needed.

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as a Revisional Procedure After Failed Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding

BACKGROUND

Recent data demonstrates that laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is found to be associated with high rates of weight loss failure and long-term complications. Therefore, the search for the optimal revisional bariatric procedure is ongoing.

OBJECTIVE

We aim to assess the safety and efficacy of converting a failed LAGB to laparoscopic one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) as a revisional procedure.

SETTING

Large, metropolitan, tertiary, university hospital.

METHODS

Retrospective review of patients who underwent OAGB after LAGB.Demographics, comorbidities, BMI before and after the procedure, complications, and length of stay were documented.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients underwent OAGB after LAGB. For 41 patients, the band was removed, and an OAGB was performed in a single procedure (71.9%), and 96.5% of the cases were completed laparoscopically. Postoperative complications occurred in 9 patients (15.7%), including one mortality. Average BMI decreased from 42.8 ± 7.0 to 31.3 ± 5.2 kg/m² at least 1 year after surgery, representing a mean %EWL of 64.5%. There was no statistical difference in complication rates between the 1-stage and 2-stage approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion of a failed LAGB to OAGB is effective but carries higher complication rates. Randomized controlled studies comparing different procedures are necessary to further clarify the optimal revisional bariatric operation.

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) with fixed bypass of the proximal two meters versus tailored bypass of the proximal one-third of small bowel: short-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is an effective bariatric procedure that confers satisfactory weight loss and improvement in comorbidities. The present study aimed to compare OAGB with fixed bypass of the proximal 200 cm of small bowel and tailored bypass of the proximal 1/3 of bowel.

METHODS

Patients with class II/III obesity underwent OAGB with either fixed bypass of the proximal two meters or tailored bypass of the proximal 1/3 of bowel. The main outcomes of the study were weight loss, improvement in comorbidities, complications, and changes in nutritional parameters after each technique.

RESULTS

The present study included 80 patients (62 female) of a mean age of 41 years and mean body mass index (BMI) of 50.9 kg/m². The tailored bypass group was followed by a significantly lower BMI and significantly higher excess weight loss and total weight loss at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of improvement in comorbidities. The fixed bypass group was associated with a significantly higher complication rate than the tailored bypass group (22.5 vs. 5%, P = 0.04). Both groups were associated with similar changes in the nutritional parameters at 12 months postoperatively, except for the higher serum albumin levels after the tailored bypass than the fixed bypass.

CONCLUSIONS

OAGB with tailored bypass of the proximal one-third of bowel was associated with greater weight loss and comparable improvement in comorbidities as compared to fixed bypass of the proximal two meters of intestine.

Revisional One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass After Restrictive Index Surgery-a Metaanalysis and Comparison with Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

BACKGROUND

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) was established as a recognized bariatric procedure in the 2018 International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) position statement. This study evaluates the outcomes of revisional OAGB (rOAGB) after a restrictive index procedure, and to compare it to revisional RYGB (rRYGB).

METHODS

A literature search was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines on papers published from inception till February 2020. Original studies involving patients who underwent rOAGB after a primary failed restrictive procedure were included. The primary outcome measured was postrOAGB weight loss. Secondary outcome measures include comorbidity resolution, operative duration, length of stay, morbidity, and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies with 1377 patients were included. Five studies compared rOAGB versus rRYGB. Majority of the patients (76%) were female, with mean age of 43.5 years old. Mean body mass index (BMI) before revisional surgery was 41.6 kg/m². The most common biliopancreatic limb length was 200 cm. Percentage of excess weight loss after rOAGB increases to a maximum of 76.0% at 48 months postsurgery. rOAGB resulted in a pooled prevalence of diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and obstructive sleep apnea resolution of 74.9%, 48.4%, 63.2%, and 75.7% respectively. When compared to rRYGB, rOAGB demonstrated greater weight loss, comparable metabolic syndrome resolution, but with a shorter operating time. Morbidity and mortality rates were low across all studies.

CONCLUSIONS

rOAGB has potential as an alternative revisional surgery, with weight loss profiles and rates of metabolic syndrome resolution that are comparable to rRYGB.

One Anastomosis/Mini-Gastric Bypass (OAGB/MGB) as Revisional Surgery Following Primary Restrictive Bariatric Procedures: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB) has gained popularity in the past decade. International databases were searched for articles published by September 10, 2020, on OAGB/MGB as a revisional procedure after restrictive procedures. Twenty-six studies examining a total of 1771 patients were included. The mean initial BMI was 45.70 kg/m², which decreased to 31.52, 31.40, and 30.54 kg/m² at 1, 3, and 5-year follow-ups, respectively. Remission of type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) following OAGB/MGB at 1-, 3-, and 5-year follow-up was 65.16 ± 24.43, 65.37 ± 36.07, and 78.10 ± 14.19%, respectively. Remission/improvement rate from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Also, 7.4% of the patients developed de novo GERD following OAGB/MGB. Leakage was the most common major complication. OAGB/MGB appears to be feasible and effective as a revisional procedure after failed restrictive bariatric procedures.

Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Versus One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as a Preferred Revisional Bariatric Surgery After a Failed Silastic Ring Vertical Gastroplasty

BACKGROUND

Over the years, the silastic ring vertical gastroplasty (SRVG) has shown poor long-term outcomes with both weight regain and complications. Therefore, most bariatric surgeons have been presented with the need to perform a successful and safe conversion procedure. Yet the preferred and recommended conversion surgery regarding weight loss, comorbidity improvement, and postoperative complications remains under debate.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of conversion from SRVG with either Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) or one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted from our bariatric surgery units' database. We reviewed the files of patients who underwent either a RYGBP or OAGB after a previous SRVG. Demographics, obesity-related comorbidities, BMI before and after the procedure, postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay were analyzed.

RESULTS

Between May 2008 and August 2018, fifty-four patients underwent conversion from a failed SRVG. Twenty-one patients underwent conversion to OAGB (39%), and thirty-three patients underwent conversion to RYGBP (61%). Major complications were reported in 9.5% of the OAGB group and 15.1% of the RYGBP group. At a mean follow-up of 28 months, the OAGB group achieved a 78.5% excess BMI loss compared with 57.6% in the RYGBP group (p = 0.137). One patient (4.7%) of the OGBP group and 5 (15.1%) of the RYGBP group needed reoperations due to complications (p = 0.224).

CONCLUSION

The OGBP is gaining popularity and evidence as an effective and safe procedure. Here we show the successful utilization of the OGBP, when compared with RYGBP, as a revisional procedure after SRVG.

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass for Morbid Obesity: an Updated Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

We aim to review the available literature on morbidly obese patients treated with one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in order to compare the clinical outcomes of the two methods.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included in the qualitative analysis, and 11 studies were included in the quantitative analysis (meta-analysis), incorporating 12,445 patients. OAGB was associated with shorter mean operative time. The length of hospital stay was comparable between the two procedures. The incidence of leaks, marginal ulcer, dumping, bowel obstruction, revisions, and mortality was similar between the two approaches. The incidence of malnutrition was increased in patients treated with OAGB, while the incidence of internal hernia and bowel obstruction was greater in the RYGB group. In addition, the OAGB was associated with greater % excess weight loss (%EWL) at 1, 2, and 5 years postoperatively. The rate of diabetes remission was greater in the OAGB group. Nonetheless, the rate of hypertension and dyslipidemia remission was similar between OAGB and RYGB.

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis is the best currently available evidence on the topic and demonstrates the superiority of OAGB compared with RYGB, in terms of weight loss and diabetes remission. However, the OAGB was associated with a significantly higher incidence of malnutrition, thus indicating the significant malabsorptive traits of this operation.

The effect of stoma size on the mid-term weight loss outcome of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB): a single-blinded prospective randomized trial

BACKGROUND

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is gaining wide spread acceptance among bariatric surgeons all over the world because of its technical simplicity and documented efficacy. However, the relation between stoma size in OAGB and magnitude of weight loss has not been addressed.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effect of stoma size on the mid-term weight loss outcome for patients with obesity after OAGB.

SETTING

University Hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a single-blinded prospectively randomized trial. From March 2014 to September 2016, 83 patients, eligible for bariatric surgery, were included in the study. OAGB was carried out with the same technical steps, except for the size of the gastrojejunostomy (GJ). Patients were randomly allocated into two equal groups; narrow GJ group (30 mm) and wide GJ group (45 mm). The percentage of total weight loss (%TWL) and the percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) were recorded at 6, 12 and 24 months after procedure.

RESULTS

At 6 months follow-up, patients with 30 mm GJ had better %EWL (53.3) and %TWL (23.4) than other patients with 45 mm GJ (42.6 and 18.2 respectively). However, at 12 and 24 months the %TWL and %EWL difference between the two groups have disappeared.

CONCLUSION

Patients with narrower stoma size (30 mm) of OAGB tend initially to lose more weight than patients with wider stoma (45 mm). However, this difference disappears at mid-term follow-up after 2 years.

Tailored One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass: 3-Year Outcomes of 94 Patients

BACKGROUND

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) claims its place among bariatric operations, proving itself a safe and effective procedure.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data regarding 94 patients who underwent surgery in a single surgical unit. Tailoring of the biliopancreatic limb length decided upon preoperative BMI was applied. Patients' excess weight loss and resolution of comorbidities were evaluated. Data on patients' nutritional status is also presented.

RESULTS

Mean BMI reduction at 36 months postoperatively was 21.7 ± 6.3 kg/m². Mean excess weight loss (%EWL) was 83.6%, 91.8%, and 92.5% at 12, 24, and 36 months postoperatively, respectively. When controlling for preoperative BMI, a 36-month %EWL of 89.1% for the 2-m subgroup, a 95.3% for the 2.5-m subgroup, and a 104.7% for the 3-m subgroup were found. Operation's success, defined as %EWL greater than 50%, was 97.9% 36 months postoperatively. All patients suffering from hypertension, diabetes, and dyslipidemia achieved full remission. Furthermore, the percentage of patients with obstructive sleep apnea and gastroesophageal reflux disease, achieving full remission was 91.7% and 86.7%, respectively. An incidence of 5.3% new onset regurgitation was noted. Iron deficiency presented in 26 (27.7%) patients postoperatively, vitamin B₁₂ deficiency in 13 (13.8%), folic acid deficiency in 18 (19.1%), and mild hypoalbuminemia in 7 (7.4%). Major early postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3) were reported in 1.7% of our patients. One (1.1%) patient developed marginal ulcer and two (2.2) patients had late dumping.

CONCLUSIONS

OAGB is a safe and efficient technique; however, careful selection of patients and postoperative surveillance with respect to weight regain and nutritional deficiencies are mandatory for optimal results.

Mini Gastric Bypass-One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (MGB-OAGB)-IFSO Position Statement

PREAMBLE

The International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) has played an integral role in educating both the metabolic surgical and the medical community at large about the role of innovative and new surgical and/or endoscopic interventions in treating adiposity-based chronic diseases.The mini gastric bypass is also known as the one anastomosis gastric bypass. The IFSO has agreed that the standard nomenclature should be the mini gastric bypass-one anastomosis gastric bypass (MGB-OAGB). The IFSO commissioned a task force (Appendix 1) to determine if MGB-OAGB is an effective and safe procedure and if it should be considered a surgical option for the treatment of obesity and metabolic diseases.The following position statement is issued by the IFSO MGB-OAGB task force and approved by the IFSO Scientific Committee and Executive Board. This statement is based on current clinical knowledge, expert opinion, and published peer-reviewed scientific evidence. It will be reviewed in 2 years.

EARLY WEIGHT LOSS OUTCOMES AND GLUCOSE METABOLISM PARAMETERS AFTER BANDED VERSUS NON-BANDED ONE ANASTOMOSIS GASTRIC BYPASS: A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED TRIAL

BACKGROUND

The influence of the placement of a band on the outcomes of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) has not been appropriately studied yet.

OBJECTIVE

To compare early weight loss and glucose metabolism parameters following banded versus non-banded OAGB.

METHODS

A prospective randomized study, which evaluated 20 morbidly obese individuals who underwent banded and non-banded OAGB and were followed-up for three months. Weight loss (percentage of excess weight loss - %EWL and percentage of body mass index loss - %BMIL) and glucose metabolism outcomes (glucose, insulin and homeostasis model assessment - HOMA) were compared.

RESULTS

The banded group presented a significantly higher %EWL at one month (29.6±5.5% vs 17.2±3.4%; P<0.0001) and two months post-surgery (46±7% vs 34.2±9%; P=0.004544), as well as a significantly higher %BMIL at one month (9.7±1.1% vs 5.8±0.8%; P<0.0001), two months (15±1.4% vs 11.5±2.1; P=0.000248), and three months (18.8±1.8% vs 15.7±3.2%; P=0.016637). At three months, banded OAGB led to significant decreases of insulin (14.4±4.3 vs 7.6±1.9; P=0.00044) and HOMA (3.1±1.1 vs 1.5±0.4; P=0.00044), whereas non-banded OAGB also led to significant decreases of insulin (14.8±7.6 vs 7.8±3.1; P=0.006) and HOMA (3.2±1.9 vs 1.6±0.8; P=0.0041). The percent variation of HOMA did not significantly differ between banded and non-banded OAGB (P=0.62414); overall, the percent variation of HOMA was not correlated with %EWL (P=0.96988) or %BMIL (P=0.82299).

CONCLUSION

Banded OAGB led to a higher early weight loss than the standard technique. Banded and non-banded OAGB led to improvements in insulin resistance regardless of weight loss.

Nutritional status following One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass

BACKGROUND & AIMS

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) has been accepted as an effective treatment for morbid obesity. However, data are scarce regarding nutritional implications of this procedure. Thus, our aim was to describe the health and nutritional status 12-20 months following OAGB surgery.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study on patients who underwent OAGB surgery from January 2016 to May 2017 in a large, multi-disciplinary, bariatric clinic. Pre-surgery data including demographic details, anthropometrics, co-morbidities, blood tests and lifestyle habits were obtained from the patients' medical records. Follow-up evaluations were performed 12-20 months post-surgery and data collected included anthropometrics, blood tests, eating and lifestyle parameters, adherence to follow-up regime and gastrointestinal (GI) related side effects. In addition, patients were asked to rate their overall state of health (OSH) from 0 to 100 using a visual analogue scale (VAS).

RESULTS

Eighty-six OAGB patients (72.1% women) were tested 14.7 ± 2.0 months post-operatively. Their mean age and BMI preoperatively were 46.1 ± 11.4 years and 42.0 ± 4.9 kg/m², respectively. The mean % excess weight loss at 12-20 months postoperatively was 88.4 ± 19.3%. Lipid and glucose profiles were significantly improved at 12-20 months postoperatively compared to baseline (P < 0.001 for all). Relatively high proportions of nutritional deficiencies were found pre-operatively and postoperatively for iron (33.9% vs. 23.7%, P = 0.238), folate (30.9% vs. 11.8%, P = 0.004), vitamin D (56.6% vs. 17.0%, P < 0.001) and hemoglobin (16.7% vs. 42.9%, P < 0.001). Postoperatively, most participants reported taking multivitamin, calcium, vitamin D and vitamin B12 supplementation (≥62.8%), having participated in at least 6 meetings with a dietitian (51.8%) and presently doing physical activity (69.4%). The mean postoperative OSH VAS score was 88.2 ± 12.3, but most participants reported on flatulence (67.4%) and some reported on diarrhea (25.6%) as GI side effects of the surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial improvements in health and anthropometric parameters are found in the short-term follow-up after OAGB, with a satisfactory reported quality of life and adherence to recommendations. However, a high prevalence of some GI side effects, nutritional deficiencies and specially anemia is a matter of concern.

Association Between Circular Stapler Diameter and Stricture Rates Following Gastrointestinal Anastomosis: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Stricture is a common complication of gastrointestinal (GI) anastomoses, associated with impaired quality of life, risk of malnutrition, and further interventions. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine the association between circular stapler diameter and anastomotic stricture rates throughout the GI tract.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of EMBASE, MEDLINE and Cochrane Library was performed. The primary outcome was the rate of radiologically or endoscopically confirmed anastomotic stricture. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were calculated using random-effects models to determine the effect of circular stapler diameter on stricture rates in different regions of the GI tract.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were identified: seven oesophageal, twelve gastric, and three lower GI. Smaller stapler sizes were strongly associated with higher anastomotic stricture rates throughout the GI tract. The oesophageal anastomosis studies showed; 21 versus 25 mm circular stapler: OR 4.39 ([95% CI 2.12, 9.07]; P < 0.0001); 25 versus 28/29 mm circular stapler: OR 1.71 ([95% CI 1.15, 2.53]; P < 0.008). Gastric studies showed; 21 versus 25 mm circular stapler: OR 3.12 ([95% CI 2.23, 4.36]; P < 0.00001); 25 versus 28/29 mm circular stapler: OR 7.67 ([95% CI 1.86, 31.57]; P < 0.005). Few lower GI studies were identified, though a similar trend was found: 25 versus 28/29 mm circular stapler: pooled OR 2.61 ([95% CI 0.82, 8.29]; P = 0.100).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of larger circular stapler sizes is strongly associated with reduced risk of anastomotic stricture in the upper GI tract, though data from lower GI joins are limited.

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in one-anastomosis gastric bypass surgery: a matched-cohort study

BACKGROUND

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is considered new from the bariatric standpoint.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of the enhanced recovery after surgery protocol compared with the conventional approach in perioperative care of OAGB patients.

SETTING

Turkey.

METHODS

The prospectively collected data of 92 patients managed with standard care (group 1) were compared with 216 patients managed by the enhanced recovery after surgery pathway (group 2). All patients underwent OAGB by the same surgeon. The groups were compared in terms of mean postoperative length of stay; costs for surgery and recovery; and rates of complications, emergency room visits, and readmissions.

RESULTS

Length of stay was always 5 days in group 1 and had a mean of 1.2 ± 1.3 days in group 2 (P < .001). The mean total cost for surgery and recovery was 858.6 ± 33.1 USD in group 1 and 625.2 ± 289.1 USD in group 2 (P < .001). Specific complications (Clavien-Dindo IIIa) occurred in 1 patient (1.1%) in group 1 and in 3 patients (1.4 %) in group 2 (P = 1.000). Fifty-seven patients (61.9%) in group 1 and 45 (20.9%) in group 2 visited the emergency room within 1 month of being discharged (P < .001). Two patients (.9%) in group 2 needed hospital readmission; there was no need for rehospitalization in group 1 (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The enhanced recovery after surgery pathway significantly reduces length of stay and cost after OAGB, with no significant difference in terms of surgical outcomes. It also reduces postdischarge resource utilization.

One anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity: a meta-analysis

We aim to review the available literature on morbidly obese patients treated with one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in order to compare the clinical outcomes of the two methods. A literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane library and Scopus, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria (7452 patients). OAGB was associated with shorter mean operative time. The length of hospital stay was comparable between the two procedures. The incidence of leaks, marginal ulcer, dumping, bowel obstruction, revisions and mortality was similar between the two approaches. The incidence of malnutrition was increased in patients treated with OAGB, while the incidence of internal hernia and bowel obstruction was greater in the RYGB group. In addition, the percentage excess weight loss at 1, 2 and 5 years post-operatively was greater for the OAGB group. The rate of type 2 diabetes remission was greater in the OAGB group. The rate of hypertension and dyslipidemia remission was also similar between OAGB and RYGB. Randomized controlled trials, comparing RYGB to OAGB, are necessary to further assess their clinical outcomes.

One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Sleeve Gastrectomy for Morbid Obesity: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

We aim to review the available literature on obese patients treated with one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), in order to compare the clinical outcomes and intraoperative parameters of the two methods. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria incorporating 6761 patients. This study reveals increased weight loss, remission of comorbidities, shorter mean hospital stay, and lower mortality in the OAGB group. The incidence of leaks and intra-abdominal bleeding was similar between the two approaches. Well-designed, randomized controlled studies, comparing LSG to OAGB, are necessary to further assess their clinical outcomes.

Diabetes resolution after one anastomosis gastric bypass

BACKGROUND

Diabetes and other obesity-related diseases are a worldwide pandemic that transcends geographic borders as well as socioeconomic levels. Currently, it is well known that medical treatment alone is insufficient to ensure adequate and sustainable weight loss and co-morbidity resolution. It has been well proven that bariatric surgery can produce almost immediate resolution of diabetes and other co-morbidities as well as long-term weight loss.

OBJECTIVES

Here, we present our experience with the one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) in terms of weight loss and diabetes resolution with 1 year of follow-up.

SETTING

Large, metropolitan, tertiary, university hospital.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent OAGB between March 2015 and March 2016 was performed. Patient demographic characteristics, co-morbidities, operative and postoperative data, as well as first year outcomes were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 407 patients who underwent OAGB (254 females, average age 41.8 ± 12.05 yr, body mass index = 41.7 ± 5.77 kg/m²). Of patients, 102 (25.1%) had diabetes with average glycosylated hemoglobin of 8.64 ± 1.94 g%, 93 (22.8%) had hypertension, 123 (28.8%) had hyperlipidemia, and 35 patients (8.6%) had obstructive sleep apnea. The average length of hospital stay was 2.2 ± .84 days (range, 2-10 d). The average excess weight loss 1 year after surgery was 88.9 ± 27.3. After 1 year, follow-up data were available for more than 85% of the study's general population. Of 102 diabetic patients, only 8 (7.8%) were still considered diabetic and taking antidiabetic medication, with an average glycosylated hemoglobin of 5.4 ± 0.6.

CONCLUSIONS

OAGB may be performed safely and with promising efficacy as both a primary and a revisional bariatric surgery, and it offers excellent resolution of diabetes.

Complications of staple line and anastomoses following laparoscopic bariatric surgery

With over 600 million people being obese, and given the scientific demonstration of the advantages of surgical treatment, bariatric surgery is on the rise. The promising long-term results in terms of weight loss, and particularly in relation to comorbidities and the control/cure rate, mean that the number of procedures performed in all countries remains high. However, the risk of potentially complex or fatal complications, though small, is present and is related to the procedures per se. This review is a guide for bariatric and/or general surgeons, offering a complete overview of the pathogenesis of anastomosis and staple line following the most common laparoscopic bariatric procedures: sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass, and mini-gastric bypass. The review is divided according to the procedure and the complications (leak, bleeding and stenosis), and evaluates all the factors that can potentially improve or worsen the complication rate, representing a “unicum” in the present literature on bariatric surgery.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for diabetics - 5-year outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Although the laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is increasingly performed for morbid obesity, gastric bypass is still considered by many to be the gold standard procedure for obese diabetic patients. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term results of SG in morbidly obese patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Diabetic patients who underwent SG at a single center between 2009 and 2011 were included. Outcomes assessed included postoperative complications, weight loss, and resolution or improvement in co-morbidities with an emphasis on diabetes, including glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) and medication status.

RESULTS

Fifty-one diabetic patients underwent SG, 35 females and 16 males, with a collective mean age of 49 years and a mean body mass index of 43.2 kg/m². On average, patients had had diabetes for 5.4 ± 7.3 years before surgery. Mean HbA1C and fasting glucose levels were 7.9 ± 1.6% and 166.9 ± 63 mg/dL, respectively. Eleven patients (22%) were insulin dependent at the time of surgery. Average body mass index at a mean follow-up of 5 years after surgery was 34.4 ± 5.8 kg/m², with an average HbA1C of 6.6 ± 1% and an average fasting glucose of 123 ± 60 mg/dL. Only 3 patients remained insulin dependent.

CONCLUSION

SG offers retainable weight loss results, accompanied by longstanding resolution or improvement of diabetes. Prospective, randomized controlled studies are warranted to better compare long-term outcomes between SG and gastric bypass.