Experience with an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Program for Bariatric Surgery: Comparison of MGB and LSG in 374 Patients

Safety of Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs as Part of Enhanced Recovery After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is an effective bariatric surgery option for managing extreme obesity in most patients. While non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) promise postoperative pain management after bariatric surgeries, their safety in LSG remains unexplored. In this systematic review, we studied the safety of NSAIDs following LSG reported by six studies involving 588 patients. Our study demonstrated that NSAIDs effectively alleviated the postoperative pain after LSG without major safety concerns. Most reported (>20% incidence) adverse events included postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV, 21%). For patients undergoing LSG, NSAIDs offer a valuable option for pain management and improved care, potentially reducing opioid consumption. However, additional research is required to optimize NSAID usage and ensure safety, especially concerning renal and gastrointestinal issues.

Shifting paradigms: protocol implementation to reduce length of stay for bariatric surgery following the pandemic at a high volume bariatric center

BACKGROUND

With the Covid-19 pandemic reducing the capacity to perform elective bariatric surgical cases, a multidisciplinary approach to reducing length of stay has been essential to continue providing this service. In conjunction with the use of our local ERAS protocols, same day discharge (SDD) and early next day discharge (NDD) for bariatric surgery is becoming more of a reality.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of our new protocols targeted at reducing length of stay (LOS) for our bariatric surgery patients during the pandemic. Secondary outcomes included comparisons of readmission and complications compared to baseline data.

METHODS

The MBSAQIP data set was analyzed identifying patients who underwent laparoscopic roux-en- Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) from April to November 2021. Mean LOS and complication rates including re-admission in this baseline group were documented. This was compared to a cohort who underwent the surgeries between December 2021 and February 2022 under our new protocols for early discharge.

RESULTS

195 patients underwent bariatric surgery in the baseline group and 87 patients in the early discharge cohort were included. There was a statistically significant decrease in mean LOS comparing baseline group (34.5 h) and next day PACU discharges (25 h) with P = 0.004. No increase in complication rate from the early discharge cohort against the baseline group. (P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

SDD and NDD in carefully selected bariatric surgery patients is feasible with good outcomes. With ERAS protocols as a foundation and a multidisciplinary approach, this can be achieved in spite of pressures placed on bariatric units by the pandemic.

Single-Dose enoxaparin for portomesenteric venous thrombosis prophylaxis after sleeve gastrectomy

Introduction

Portomesenteric venous thrombosis (PMVT) may complicate sleeve gastrectomy. We believe that single dose of enoxaparin postoperatively can reduce the risk of PMVT.

Objective

The objective was to study the outcomes of enoxaparin single dose compared to other perioperative prophylactic doses in preventing PMVT.

Methods

Participants included 590 patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). These retrospective cohort data were collected from patient medical charts after bariatric surgery. Patients were followed up in the close postoperative period and at 1, 3, 6, 12, and 18 months. Descriptive statistical analysis was carried out. The objective was to estimate the incidence of PMVT with postoperative single 40 mg subcutaneous enoxaparin prophylactic regimen.

Results

From January 2017 to December 2021, 590 patients with obesity underwent LSG. Five patients developed PMVT with an estimate incidence of 0.85%. Three patients had unexplained tachycardia and three patients had postoperative bleeding.

Conclusions

Single-dose enoxaparin 40 mg is an effective thrombosis prophylaxis without increasing risk of bleeding.

Portomesenteric Vein Thrombosis in Patients Undergoing Sleeve Gastrectomy: an Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 101,914 Patients

INTRODUCTION

Portomesenteric vein thrombosis (PMVT) is a rare but potentially fatal complication of sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The rising prevalence of SG has led to a surge in the occurrence of PMVT, while the associated risk factors have not been fully elucidated. This study aims to determine the incidence and risk factors of PMVT in patients undergoing SG.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE databases. Proportion and regression meta-analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

In a total of 76 studies including 101,914 patients undergoing SG, we identified 357 patients with PMVT. Mean follow-up was 14.4 (SD: 16.3) months. The incidence of PMVT was found to be 0.50% (95%CI: 0.40-0.61%). The majority of the population presented with abdominal pain (91.8%) at an average of 22.4 days postoperatively and PMVT was mainly diagnosed with computed tomography (CT) (96.0%). Hematologic abnormalities predisposing to thrombophilia were identified in 34.9% of the population. Advanced age (p=0.02) and low center volume (p <0.0001) were significantly associated with PMVT, while gender, BMI, hematologic abnormality, prior history of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, type of prophylactic anticoagulation, and duration of prophylactic anticoagulation were not associated with the incidence of PMVT in meta-regression analyses. Treatment included therapeutic anticoagulation in 93.4% and the mortality rate was 4/357 (1.1%).

CONCLUSION

PMVT is a rare complication of sleeve gastrectomy with an incidence rate <1% that is associated with low center volume and advanced age but is not affected by the duration or type of thromboprophylaxis administered postoperatively.

Remote patient monitoring to facilitate same-day discharge after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a pilot evaluation

BACKGROUND

Limited hospital inpatient capacity, exacerbated by SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) and associated staffing shortages, has driven interest in converting surgeries historically done as inpatient procedures to same-day surgeries (SDS). Remote patient monitoring (RPM) has the potential to increase safety and confidence in SDS but has had mixed success in a bariatric population.

OBJECTIVES

Assess the feasibility of and adherence to a protocol offering patients same-day laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) supported by RPM with an updated wearable device. Secondary outcomes were readmissions, costs, adherence, and clinical alarm rates.

SETTING

Academic, military tertiary referral center (United States).

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective case control study of patients undergoing SG, comparing SDS with RPM to patients admitted to the hospital for SG during this time. Patients for SDS were selected by set inclusion/exclusion criteria and patient/surgeon preference, and perioperative management was standardized.

RESULTS

Twenty patients were enrolled in the SDS group, then compared with 53 inpatients. Inpatients were older (46 versus 39, P = .006), but with no significant differences in sex, preoperative body mass index, or co-morbidities. RPM wearable and blood pressure adherence was found to be 97% and 80%, respectively. Readmission rates were similar (10% versus 7.5%, P > .05). RPM alarm rates were .5 (0-1.3) per patient for each 24-hour home monitoring period. SDS patients also demonstrated the potential for cost savings over inpatient SG, depending on the number of patients monitored per day as well as the healthcare setting.

CONCLUSIONS

SG as SDS with RPM was a feasible approach. It should be evaluated in other surgical procedures and higher-risk patient populations.

Comparison of the Effects of Special Care Enhanced Recovery and Conventional Recovery Methods after Mini Omega Gastric Bypass

Background

Bariatric surgery is a surgical procedure for patients with extreme obesity. Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) is a method that provides special peri- and post-operation care. Here, we aimed to compare the effects of ERAS and standard recovery cares.

Materials and Methods

This is a randomized clinical trial that was performed in 2020-2021 in Isfahan on 108 candidates for mini gastric bypass. Patients were then randomly divided into two equal groups receiving ERAS and standard recovery protocols. Patients were examined and visited after one month regarding the average number of hospitalization days, the average days required to return to normal activity or work, occurrence of pulmonary thromboemboli (PTE) and the rate of readmission.

Results

Patients that received ERAS had significantly lower frequencies of nausea and vomiting (P = 0.032). Patients that received ERAS had significantly lower hospitalization duration (P < 0.001) compared to controls. No other significant differences were observed between two groups regarding surgery complication, re-admission rate and occurrence of PTE (P > 0.99 for all).

Conclusion

Patients that received ERAS protocol after gastric bypass had significantly lower hospitalization duration and lower incidence of nausea and vomiting. They also had similar post-operative outcomes compared to the standard protocol.

Combined opioid free and loco-regional anaesthesia enhances the quality of recovery in sleeve gastrectomy done under ERAS protocol: a randomized controlled trial

Background

It is debatable whether opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) is better suited than multimodal analgesia (MMA) to achieve the goals of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

Methods

In all patients, anaesthesia was conducted with an i.v. induction with propofol (2 mg. kg-1), myorelaxation with cisatracurium (0.15 mg.kg-1), in addition to an ultrasound-guided bilateral oblique subcostal transverse abdominis plane block. In addition, patients in the OFA group (n = 51) received i.v. dexmedetomidine 0.1 μg.kg-1 and ketamine (0.5 mg. kg-1) at induction, then dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg. kg-1.h-1, ketamine 0.5 mg.kg-1.h-1, and lidocaine 1 mg. kg-1.h-1 for maintenance, while patients in the MMA group (n = 52) had only i.v. fentanyl (1 μg. kg-1) at induction. The primary outcome was the quality of recovery assessed by QoR-40, at the 6th and the 24th postoperative hour. Secondary outcomes were postoperative opioid consumption, time to ambulate, time to tolerate oral fluid, and time to readiness for discharge.

Results

At the 6th hour, the QoR-40 was higher in the OFA than in the MMA group (respective median [IQR] values: 180 [173–195] vs. 185 [173–191], p < 0.0001), but no longer difference was found at the 24th hour (median values = 191 in both groups). OFA also significantly reduced postoperative pain and morphine consumption (20 mg [1–21] vs. 10 mg [1–11], p = 0.005), as well as time to oral fluid tolerance (238 [151–346] vs. 175 min [98–275], p = 0.022), and readiness for discharge (505 [439–626] vs. 444 min [356–529], p = 0.001), but did not influence time to ambulate.

Conclusion

While regional anaesthesia achieved most of the intraoperative analgesia, avoiding intraoperative opioids with the help of this OFA protocol was able to improve several sensible parameters of postoperative functional recovery, thus improving our knowledge on the OFA effects.

Clinical trial number

Registration number NCT04285255.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care in Bariatric Surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations: A 2021 Update

Background

This is the second updated Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society guideline, presenting a consensus for optimal perioperative care in bariatric surgery and providing recommendations for each ERAS item within the ERAS® protocol.

Methods

A principal literature search was performed utilizing the Pubmed, EMBASE, Cochrane databases and ClinicalTrials.gov through December 2020, with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials and large prospective cohort studies. Selected studies were examined, reviewed and graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. After critical appraisal of these studies, the group of authors reached consensus regarding recommendations.

Results

The quality of evidence for many ERAS interventions remains relatively low in a bariatric setting and evidence-based practices may need to be extrapolated from other surgeries.

Conclusion

A comprehensive, updated evidence-based consensus was reached and is presented in this review by the ERAS® Society.

Thrombotic and hemorrhagic risk in bariatric surgery with multimodal rehabilitation programs comparing 2 reduced guidelines for pharmacological prophylaxis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the thrombotic and hemorrhagic risk in bariatric surgery with multimodal rehabilitation programs, comparing two guidelines of pharmacological prophylaxis recommended in the Guide to the Spanish Society for Obesity Surgery and the Obesity Section of the AEC.

METHODS

Cohorts retrospective study from January-2010 to December-2019. Cases of vertical gastrectomy or gastric bypass were recorded, systematically applying multimodal rehabilitation protocols. Two reduced chemoprophylaxis regimens were analyzed, starting after surgery and maintained for 10 days; one with fondaparinux (Arixtra®) at a fixed dose of 2.5mg/day and the other with enoxaparin (Clexane®) with a single daily dose adjusted to BMI: 40mg/day for BMI of 35-40 and 60mg/day for BMI 40-60.

RESULTS

675 patients were included; 354 with Fondaparinux-Arixtra® during the period 2010-2015 and 321 with Enoxaparin-Clexane® during the period 2016-2019. There were no cases of DVT or clinical PE. However, the incidence of hemorrhage requiring reoperation, transfusion, or a decrease of more than 3g/dL hemoglobin was 4.7%, with no difference between groups. Mortality was nil. The average stay was 2.8 days and the outpatient follow-up was 100% during the first 6 months and 95% at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of multimodal rehabilitation programs and mechanical and pharmacological thromboprophylaxis by experienced teams, reduces the risk of thromboembolic events and could justify reduced chemoprophylaxis regimens to decrease the risk of postoperative bleeding.

Comparison of Short-term Safety of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy in the United States: 341 cases from MBSAQIP-accredited Centers

BACKGROUND

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is the third most common (4%) primary bariatric procedure worldwide but is seldom performed in the United States and is currently under consideration for endorsement by the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. Evidence from the United States on safety of OAGB compared to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is limited.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the short-term safety outcomes of the three primary bariatric procedures.

SETTING

Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP)-accredited hospitals in the United States and Canada.

METHODS

Using the 2015-2019 MBSAQIP database, we compared the safety outcomes of adult patients who underwent primary laparoscopic OAGB, RYGB, and SG. Exclusion criteria included age over 80 years, emergency operation, conversion, and incomplete follow-up. The primary outcome was 30-day overall complication. Secondary outcomes were 30-day surgical and medical complications and hospitalization length.

RESULTS

A total of 341 patients underwent primary OAGB. Using propensity scores, we matched the OAGB cohort 1:1 with two cohorts of similar baseline characteristics who underwent RYGB and SG, respectively. The OAGB cohort had a lower overall complication rate than the RYGB cohort (6.7% versus12.3%, P = .02) and a similar rate to the SG cohort (5.0%, P = .43). The OAGB cohort had a similar rate of surgical complication to the RYGB cohort (5.0% versus 8.5%, P = .1) and a higher rate than the SG group (1.2%, P = .009). The OAGB cohort had a shorter median hospitalization than the RYGB cohort (1 d [interquartile range (IQR) 1-2 d] versus 2 d [IQR 1-2 d], P < .001) and a similar hospitalization length to the SG cohort ([1-2 d], P = .46).

CONCLUSION

Using the largest and the most current U.S. data, this study demonstrated that the short-term safety profile of primary OAGB is acceptable, but future studies should determine the long-term safety.

Neurosurgery perception of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols are widespread in several fields, particularly general surgery, and attempt to deliver surgical care at a lower cost while also improving patient outcomes. However, few institutions have implemented ERAS protocols in neurosurgery. As such, a survey of neurosurgeons on the current state of ERAS in neurosurgery was conducted to provide insight on scaling the practice nationally. A 15-question survey was designed to assess the implementation of andsatisfaction with ERAS protocols at individual institutions. A total of 39 responses were collected from 38 unique institutions. 58.9%(N = 23) reported implementation of neurosurgical ERAS protocols. 52.1% (N = 12) of the responses were neurosurgeons at academic institutions withneurosurgical residency programs. Most neurosurgeons used ERAS protocolsfor spine cases (N = 23), with only 17.3% (N = 4) employing ERAS protocolsfor cranial cases. 69.5% (N = 16) of survey participants reported that thedesign and implementation of ERAS was a multidisciplinary effort acrossmany departments, including neurosurgery, anesthesia, and pharmacy.Decreased costs and intensive care unit (ICU) admission were reported tobe unanticipated benefits of ERAS implementation. Unanticipated challenges to implementation of new protocols included difficulties withelectronic medical record (EMR) integration, agreement of protocoldetails amongst stakeholders, uniform implementation of protocols by allneurosurgeons, and lack of adaptability by multidisciplinary staff. Meandepartment satisfaction with ERAS protocol implementation was 4.00 +/- 0.81 (N = 22) on a 5-point Likert scale.

Portal venous system thrombosis after bariatric surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Portal venous system thrombosis can develop after bariatric surgery. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the incidence of portal venous system thrombosis after bariatric surgery and clarify the role of anticoagulation for the prevention of portal venous system thrombosis after bariatric surgery.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched. The incidence of portal venous system thrombosis after bariatric surgery was pooled by a random-effect model. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore the incidence of portal venous system thrombosis according to the average duration of prophylactic anticoagulation (extended versus short-term). Meta-regression and sensitivity analyses were performed to explore the source of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Among 2,714 papers initially screened, 68 studies were included. Among 100,964 patients undergoing bariatric surgery, 300 developed portal venous system thrombosis. The pooled overall incidence of portal venous system thrombosis after bariatric surgery was 0.419% (95% confidence interval: 0.341%-0.505%). The pooled incidence of portal venous system thrombosis after bariatric surgery was numerically lower in patients who received extended prophylactic anticoagulation protocol after bariatric surgery than those who received short-term prophylactic anticoagulation protocol (0.184% vs 0.459%). Meta-regression analyses demonstrated that sample size (P = .006), type of surgery (P < .001), and average duration of prophylactic anticoagulation (P = .024) might be sources of heterogeneity, but not region, publication year, history of bariatric surgery, follow-up duration, or use of prophylactic anticoagulation. Sensitivity analyses could not identify any source of heterogeneity. The estimated mortality of portal venous system thrombosis after bariatric surgery was 1.33%.

CONCLUSION

Portal venous system thrombosis after bariatric surgery is rare, but potentially lethal. Extended prophylactic anticoagulation protocol may be considered in patients at a high risk of developing portal venous system thrombosis after bariatric surgery.

Feasibility of Same-Day Discharge After Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Using Remote Monitoring

BACKGROUND

Shortening of hospital stay to 1 night has not affected the short-term safety of patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Whether the RYGB is feasible in an ambulatory setting (same-day discharge) without overnight hospital stay remains to be answered. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility of same-day discharge after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) using additional live video consultation and remote monitoring. Same-day discharge (SDD) was defined as surgery without postoperative overnight hospital stay.

METHODS

This was a single-center prospective feasibility study in a selected group of patients undergoing a RYGB. Fifty patients undergoing a primary RYGB were selected and potentially treated following the SDD protocol. After SDD discharge patients were remotely monitored after surgery for 48 h using a medical device measuring vital signs three times a day. Video consultations were performed by a doctor twice a day for 2 postoperative days. Primary outcome was the success rate (%) of SDD. Secondary outcomes were emergency room presentations, readmissions, early complications (<30 days), and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients were selected for the SDD treatment protocol between June 2020 and November 2020. An SDD success rate of 88 % (44/50 patients) was achieved. Five patients (10%) presented at the emergency room, 2 of whom (4%) were readmitted because of a complication within 30 days after surgery. Overall, patients who followed the SDD protocol reported high satisfaction scores.

CONCLUSION

A RYGB with SDD can be considered feasible using remote monitoring for a selected group of patients.

Thrombotic and hemorrhagic risk in bariatric surgery with multimodal rehabilitation programs comparing 2 reduced guidelines for pharmacological prophylaxis

OBJECTIVE

to determine the thrombotic and hemorrhagic risk in bariatric surgery with multimodal rehabilitation programs, comparing 2guidelines of pharmacological prophylaxis recommended in the Guide to the Spanish Society for Obesity Surgery and the Obesity Section of the AEC.

METHODS

Cohorts retrospective study from January-2010 to December-2019. Cases of vertical gastrectomy or gastric bypass were recorded, systematically applying multimodal rehabilitation protocols. Two reduced chemoprophylaxis regimens were analyzed, starting after surgery and maintained for 10 days; one with fondaparinux (Arixtra®) at a fixed dose of 2.5mg / day and the other with enoxaparin (Clexane®) with a single daily dose adjusted to BMI: 40mg / day for BMI of 35-40 and 60mg/day for BMI 40-60.

RESULTS

675 patients were included; 354 with Fondaparinux-Arixtra® during the period 2010-2015 and 321 with Enoxaparin-Clexane® during the period 2016-2019. There were no cases of DVT or clinical PE. However, the incidence of hemorrhage requiring reoperation, transfusion, or a decrease of more than 3g / dL hemoglobin was 4.7%, with no difference between groups. Mortality was nil. The average stay was 2.8 days and the outpatient follow-up was 100% during the first 6 months and 95% at 12 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of multimodal rehabilitation programs and mechanical and pharmacological thromboprophylaxis by experienced teams, reduces the risk of thromboembolic events and could justify reduced chemoprophylaxis regimens to decrease the risk of postoperative bleeding.

Connected Surveillance for Detection of Complications After Early Discharge from Bariatric Surgery

As part of a bariatric enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program, at-home follow-up using a novel Internet application was used to detect early complications. The study aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of this "connected surveillance" protocol over a 10-day follow-up. Patients were monitored 24/7 by a trained nursing team with daily surgeon review of patient self-reports. Morbidly obese patients (n = 281) underwent OAGB (126, 47.70%) or sleeve gastrectomy (138, 52.3%). Of 264 who completed the study (mean age 40 years [20-66]), 3 (1.1%) underwent revision for early complications; there were 6 (2.1%) readmissions and 22 (8.3%) consultations. In a bariatric surgery ERAS program, "Internet-connected surveillance" proved safe and effective in detecting 100% of early complications, and most patients were satisfied with their care.

Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Affects Coagulation System of Obese Patients

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is nowadays the most popular bariatric procedure for obesity. However, whether LSG increases the risk of thrombosis remains unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate potential effects of LSG on coagulation system.

METHODS

Fifty-five obese patients underwent LSG between 2016 and 2018. The LSG was performed with pneumoperitoneum pressure maintained at 13 mmHg. Venous blood specimens were collected from each patient before surgery, at the end of pneumoperitoneum (i.e., 0 h after surgery), and at 24 h after surgery to determine prothrombin time (PT), activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT), fibrinogen (FIB), platelet count (PLT), D-dimer (D-D), red blood cell count (RBC), hematocrit (HCT), plateletcrit (PCT), cholesterol (CHOL), triglyceride (TRIG), and serum calcium (Ca). All patients were examined on the veins of the lower limbs by color Duplex sonography (CDS) before surgery and at 24 h after surgery, respectively.

RESULTS

All patients successfully underwent LSG. No severe surgery-related complications were observed during 1-month follow-up after operation. Preoperative BMI was 43.6 ± 8.3 kg/m². The levels of coagulation factors were within the normal range before surgery, except a relatively higher PLT. The PT and D-D were increased at 0 h and 24 h after surgery (P < 0.05), whereas APTT was decreased (P < 0.05). The postoperative FIB remained similar to the preoperative one (P > 0.05). The CDS identified no thrombus in the veins of the lower limbs, either before surgery or at 24 h after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

LSG may cause postoperative hypercoagulability of patients with obesity.

Enhanced Recovery after Bariatric Surgery: 202 Consecutive Patients in an Italian Bariatric Center

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways have been shown to improve postoperative outcomes. However, its application in bariatric surgery is still limited. The aim of the study was to define the safety of ERAS in bariatric patients with regard to postoperative complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), and readmission rates within 30 days from surgery.

METHODS

The effectiveness and safety of an ERAS protocol was prospectively investigated in morbidly obese patients who underwent bariatric surgery in a single-institute experience over a 2-year period.

RESULTS

Between June 2016 and September 2018, a total of 89 laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG), 105 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and 8 one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) were performed. Twenty patients (9.9%) were revisional cases. Mean (standard deviation, SD) BMI and age at time of surgery were 43.2 (± 6.2) kg/m² and 46 (± 11.3) years, respectively. Median (range) surgical time was 118 (45-255) minutes. Overall postoperative complication rate was 7.4%, with 6 (3.0%) patients developing grade III-IV complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Median (range) LOS was 2 (1-50) days, with mean (SD) LOS of 2.3 (± 3.6) days. Overall, 36.6% of patients were discharged by first postoperative day and 77.7% by second postoperative day. Readmission rate was 4.5%. No mortality was observed during the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results of the present study, ERAS in primary and revisional bariatric surgery is safe and feasible, with short LOS, low morbidity and readmission rates, and no mortality. A significant reduction of mean LOS was progressively noted over the study period.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Perioperative Nutrition, Metabolic, and Nonsurgical Support of Patients Undergoing Bariatric Procedures - 2019 Update: Cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

OBJECTIVE

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists.

METHODS

Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts.

RESULTS

New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest).

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

Trial protocol: preoperative administration of tranexamic acid in sleeve gastrectomy (PATAS) to reduce haemorrhage rates. A randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Fast-track protocols often include short-term thromboprophylaxis and short length of hospital stay. These treatment strategies may negatively affect the occurrence and diagnosis of postoperative haemorrhage. Over the years, the rates of venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) have decreased, while there seems to be an increase in the occurrence of postoperative haemorrhage. Tranexamic acid (TXA) can potentially lower the incidence of postoperative haemorrhage. This trial aims to investigate whether preoperative administration of TXA reduces the preoperative and postoperative haemorrhage rates in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a single centre double-blind randomised placebo-controlled trial. Patients undergoing an LSG are included after obtaining informed consent. Patients are randomised between two groups: (1) administration of placebo infusion and (2) administration of 1500 mg TXA. In both groups, the infusions will be administered during the induction phase of the procedure. Primary outcome measures are preoperative use of haemostatic clips, postoperative haemoglobin decrease and postoperative haemorrhage. Secondary outcome measure is the rates of VTE.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol version 3 was approved by the medical ethical committee Medical Research Ethics Committees United (MEC-U), Nieuwegein, on 29 July 2019. The trial results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and at conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The Netherlands Trial Registry (NL8029); Pre-results.

Clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative nutrition, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of patients undergoing bariatric procedures - 2019 update: cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

OBJECTIVE

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPG) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The Obesity Society, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the Obesity Medicine Association, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists boards of directors in adherence to the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPG, algorithms, and checklists.

METHODS

Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts.

RESULTS

New or updated topics in this CPG include contextualization in an adiposity-based, chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based, and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current healthcare arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest).

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence-based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

Four-Year Evolution of a Thrombophylaxis Protocol in an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Program: Recent Results in 485 Patients

“Enhanced recovery after surgery” (ERAS) protocols may reduce morbidity, length of hospital stay (LOS), and costs. During the 4-year evolution of a bariatric ERAS protocol, we found that administration of thrombophylaxis selectively to high-risk morbidly obese patients (assessed postoperatively by Caprini score ≥ 3) undergoing omega loop gastric bypass (“mini” gastric bypass) or sleeve gastrectomy resulted in safe outcomes. Both procedures proved equally effective with this protocol. The vast majority of rapidly mobilized, low-risk patients did not appear to require antithrombotic heparin. Similar to other reported ERAS outcomes, our recent year’s results in 485 patients included a mean LOS of 1.08 ± 0.64 days (range 1–14), with 460 (95.0%) discharged on day 1 and 99.6% by day 2. There were 13 30-day complications (2.7%), two reinterventions (0.4%), and no hemorrhages.

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.

Role of abdominal drainage in bariatric surgery: Report of six cases

BACKGROUND

Abdominal drainage allows for timely detection of hemorrhage, but it cannot prevent hemorrhage. Whether routine abdominal drainage is needed during bariatric procedures remains controversial. Few reports describe the role of abdominal drainage in the diagnosis and treatment of abdominal hemorrhage in bariatric surgery.

CASE SUMMARY

Six cases of hemorrhage after bariatric surgery were described, including three cases with and three without abdominal drainage during the first surgery. The hemorrhage in five of the six cases was controlled by conservative treatment. Abdominal hemorrhage was found through the drainage tube on the day of the operation in the three patients with abdominal drainage during the first surgery. Emergency treatment was initiated, and their conditions gradually stabilized within 48 h. No patients required a reoperation. Abdominal hemorrhage was found later in the patients without abdominal drainage. Although the hemorrhage was controlled by conservative treatment in two cases (1 and 2), reoperation and percutaneous drainage were performed for abdominal infection and pelvic hemorrhage. An obsolete encapsulated effusion that may require treatment in the future was left in the abdominal cavity of a patient (Case 1).

CONCLUSION

The possibility of controlling abdominal hemorrhage after bariatric/metabolic surgery by conservative treatment is high. When hemorrhage occurs, abdominal drainage can reduce the probability of reoperation by reducing the formation of blood clots behind the stomach.

What Makes Bariatric Operations Difficult-Results of a National Survey

Background and objective: The most commonly performed bariatric procedures include laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), and one anastomosis gastric bypass-mini gastric bypass (OAGB-MGB). A study comparing the degree of difficulty among those procedures could serve as a guide for decision making in bariatric surgery and further improve training programs for general surgery trainees. The aim of this study was to compare the subjective level of technical difficulty of LSG, LRYGB, and OAGB-MGB as perceived by surgeons and surgical residents. Materials and Methods: An anonymous internet-based survey was designed to evaluate the subjective opinions of surgeons and surgical residents in training in Poland. It covered baseline characteristics of the participants, difficulty of LSG, OAGB-MGB, LRYGB and particular stages of each operation assessed on a 1-5 scale. Results: Overall, 70 surgeons and residents participated in our survey. The mean difficulty degree of LSG was 2.34 ± 0.89. The reinforcing staple line with sutures was considered most difficult stage of this operation (3.17 ± 1.19). The LRYGB operation had an average difficulty level of 3.87 ± 1.04. Creation of the gastrojejunostomy was considered the most difficult stage of LRYGB with a mean difficulty level (3.68 ± 1.16). Responders to our survey assessed the mean degree of difficulty of OAGB-MGB as 2.34 ± 0.97. According to participating surgeons, creating the gastrojejunostomy is the most difficult phase of this operation (3.68 ± 1.16). Conclusion: The LSG is perceived by surgeons as a relatively easy operation. The LRYGB was considered to be the most technically challenging procedure in our survey. Operative stages, which require intra-abdominal suturing with laparoscopic instruments, seem to be the most difficult phases of each operation.

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.