Revisional Gastric Bypass for Failed Restrictive Procedures: Comparison of Single-Anastomosis (Mini-) and Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

Decision-making Considerations in Revisional Bariatric Surgery

OBJECTIVE

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

The Interplay between Obesity and Inflammation

Obesity is an important condition affecting the quality of life of numerous patients and increasing their associated risk for multiple diseases, including tumors and immune-mediated disorders. Inflammation appears to play a major role in the development of obesity and represents a central point for the activity of cellular and humoral components in the adipose tissue. Macrophages play a key role as the main cellular component of the adipose tissue regulating the chronic inflammation and modulating the secretion and differentiation of various pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines. Inflammation also involves a series of signaling pathways that might represent the focus for new therapies and interventions. Weight loss is essential in decreasing cardiometabolic risks and the degree of associated inflammation; however, the latter can persist for long after the excess weight is lost, and can involve changes in macrophage phenotypes that can ensure the metabolic adjustment. A clear understanding of the pathophysiological processes in the adipose tissue and the interplay between obesity and chronic inflammation can lead to a better understanding of the development of comorbidities and may ensure future targets for the treatment of obesity.

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

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

American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery position statement on one-anastomosis gastric bypass

The following position statement is issued by the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery in response to inquiries made to the society by patients, physicians, society members, hospitals, health insurance payors, and others regarding one-anastomosis gastric bypass as a treatment for obesity and metabolic disease. This statement is based on current clinical knowledge, expert opinion, and published peer-reviewed scientific evidence available at this time. The statement may be revised in the future as more information becomes available.

Revisional One-Step Bariatric Surgical Techniques After Unsuccessful Laparoscopic Gastric Band: A Retrospective Cohort Study with 2-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has high reported rates of revision due to poor weight loss (WL) and high complication rates. Yet, there is yet to be a consensus on the best revisional procedure after unsuccessful LAGB, and studies comparing different revisional procedures after LAGB are still needed.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study that compared the outcomes of one-step revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (rRYGB), one-anastomosis gastric bypass (rOAGB), or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (rLSG) after LAGB. WL, complications, resolution of associated medical conditions, and food tolerance were assessed with a post hoc pairwise comparison one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) throughout a 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 102 (rRYGB), 80 (rOAGB), and 70 (rLSG) patients. After 2 years, an equal percentage of excess weight loss was observed in rOAGB and rRYGB (both >90%; p=0.998), significantly higher than that in rLSG (83.6%; p<0.001). In our study, no leaks were observed. rRYGB had higher complication rates according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (10.8% vs. 3.75% and 5.7% in rOAGB and rLSG, respectively, p=0.754), and re-operations were not statistically significant. Food tolerance was comparable between rOAGB and rRYGB (p = 0.987), and both had significantly better food tolerance than rLSG (p<0.001). The study cohorts had comparable resolution rates for associated medical problems (p>0.60).

CONCLUSION

rOAGB and rRYGB had better outcomes after LAGB than rLSG regarding WL, feasibility, food tolerance, and safety. rOAGB had significantly higher rates of nutritional deficiencies.

Effect of Primary Versus Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) on Fatty Acid Profile

INTRODUCTION

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is one option of a revisional procedure for failed sleeve gastrectomy. Moreover, it can be used as a primary bariatric procedure, and is an effective surgery resulting in significant weight loss and the resolution or improvement of obesity-associated medical problems, accompanied by low perioperative complications. However, as with any therapy, OAGB has its limitations, including micronutrient deficiency or malnutrition. In our study, we compared the fatty acid (FA) profile in serum of patients after both primary OAGB (pOAGB) and revisional OAGB (rOAGB) to identify potential postsurgical FA alterations.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study on patients with obesity who underwent OAGB procedures (pOAGB n=68; rOAGB n=17), conducted from 2016 to 2018. In blood, we analyzed a series of biochemical parameters, and in the serum, the FA profile was determined using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

The percentage of excess BMI loss (% EBMIL) after pOAGB was 73.5 ± 2.47% in comparison to 45.9 ± 4.15% in the rOAGB group (p<0.001). In contrast to the lack of effect of rOAGB on most polyunsaturated FAs, in the pOAGB group, there was a decrease in eicosapentaenoic acid, and eicosatetraenoic and docosahexaenoic acid levels (p<0.001). We also found a decrease in very long-chain FAs (VLCFAs) and an increase in branched-chain FAs (BCFAs) after both types of OAGB procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Both OAGB procedures improved the profile of most FAs, leading to a decrease in VLCFAs, which are considered harmful, and an improvement in BCFAs, which are considered to be beneficial. There is a need to further investigate the possibility of n-3 polyunsaturated FA supplementation after pOAGB, due to the large decrease in these FAs after pOAGB.

Initial experience with laparoscopic gastric bypass in an Australian general foregut surgery unit

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic gastric bypass (LGB) is an increasingly utilized approach to bariatric surgery in Australia. A high proportion of those procedures are revisional due to Australia's legacy of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB), which is not the case internationally. The aim of this study was to compare post-operative outcomes in an Australian general foregut surgery unit against benchmarks published in the literature.

METHODS

This is retrospective cohort study of morbidly obese patients undergoing primary or revisional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or laparoscopic one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) with the two senior authors between 5 May 2015 and 27 June 2019. Perioperative data for the unit's first 100 cases were collected prospectively, stored on a unit database and analysed. Post-operative complications at 30 days, 90 days, mortality, length of hospital stay, and Defined Adverse Events were chosen as indicators of the perioperative outcome (as defined in the Monash Bariatric Surgery Registry).

RESULTS

In this cohort, 35% of procedures were RYGB and 65% were OAGB. The majority (58%) were revisional procedures. Most patients (74%) were female. The median age was 50. The comorbidity profile of the population was similar to those published internationally. The median hospital stay was 4 days. There was no mortality. Early complications occurred in 9% of patients, with 3% occurring late.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes of our first 100 cases are comparable with those recorded in the literature, notwithstanding a much higher proportion of revisional cases. LGB can be safely introduced in Australian general foregut surgery units by experienced laparoscopic surgeons.

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.

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass for Revision of Restrictive Procedures: Mid-Term Outcomes and Analysis of Possible Outcome Predictors

PURPOSE

Revisional one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) for insufficient weight reduction following primary restrictive procedures is still investigated. We report mid-term outcomes and possible outcome predictors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Single-center retrospective comparative study of revisional OAGB outcomes (2015-2018) following laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG); silastic ring vertical gastroplasty (SRVG) is separately discussed.

RESULTS

In all, 203 patients underwent revisional OAGB following LAGB (n = 125), SG (n = 64), and SRVG (n = 14). Comparing LAGB and SG, body mass index (BMI) at revision were 41.3 ± 6.6 and 42 ± 11.2 kg/m² (p = 0.64), reduced to 31.3 ± 8.3 and 31.9 ± 8.3 (p = 0.64) at mid-term follow-up, respectively. Excess weight loss (EWL) > 50% was achieved in ~ 50%, with EWL of 79.4 ± 20.4% (corresponding total weight loss 38.5 ± 10.4%). SRVG patients had comparable outcomes. Resolution rates of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and hypertension (HTN) were 93.3% and 84.6% in LAGB compared with 100% and 100% in SG patients (p = 0.47 and p = 0.46), respectively. In univariable analysis, EWL > 50% was associated with male gender (p < 0.001), higher weight (p < 0.001), and BMI (p = 0.007) at primary surgery, and higher BMI at revisional OAGB (p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, independent predictors for EWL > 50% were male gender (OR = 2.8, 95% CI 1.27-6.18; p = 0.01) and higher BMI at revisional OAGB (OR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.03-1.19; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Revisional OAGB for insufficient restrictive procedures results in excellent weight reduction in nearly 50% of patients, with resolution of T2D and HTN at mid-term follow-up. Male gender and higher BMI at revision were associated with EWL > 50% following revisional OAGB. Identification of more predictors could aid judicious patient selection.

Bariatric Surgery Conversions in MBSAQIP Centers: Current Indications and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The demand for revisional bariatric surgery has increased, and bariatric conversions (BC) to a different procedure represent most of the revisional cases. The 2020 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditfnation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database was expanded to include additional variables on BC. This study aims to analyze the indications and outcomes of BC.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the 2020 MBSAQIP database was performed. Patients who underwent BC were included in the analysis. Index procedures, rates, and indications for BC of the different bariatric operations were described. Outcomes of the most frequent BC were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 168,548 bariatric surgeries were done; 20,387 (12.1%) were revisional, and from those 15,031 (73.7%) were BC. The most converted index operations were sleeve gastrectomy (SG) (49.3%) and adjustable gastric banding (AGB) (45.9%). The most frequent conversions were SG to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (40.3%) for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (54.2%) and weight loss failure (WLF) (35.8%), AGB to SG (27%) or RYGB (16.2%) for WLF (67% and 61.3%, respectively), and SG to biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (3.2%) or single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (2%) for WLF (91.2% and 92.4%, respectively). Postoperative overall morbidity, serious morbidity, reoperation, and mortality rates ranged from 5.3 to 20.8%, 2.3 to 19.2%, 1.5 to 10%, and 0 to 0.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

BC represents the most frequent revisional bariatric procedure. GERD and WLF are the main causes for BC. Further research is needed to define the ideal BC according to the index procedure and indication.

Postoperative morbidity and weight loss after revisional bariatric surgery for primary failed restrictive procedure: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

revisional bariatric surgery is gaining increasing interest as long term follow-up studies demonstrate an elevated failure rate of primary surgery due to insufficient weight loss, weight regain or complications. This particularly concerns restrictive bariatric surgery which has been widely adopted from the '80s till present through different procedures, notably vertical banded gastroplasty, laparoscopic adjusted gastric banding and sleeve gastrectomy. The aim of this study is to define which revisional bariatric procedure performs the best after failure of primary restrictive surgery.

METHODS

a systematic review and network meta-analysis of 39 studies was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines and the Cochrane protocol.

RESULTS

biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch guarantees the best results in terms of weight loss (1 and 3-years %TWL MD: 12.38 and 28.42) followed by single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass (9.24 and 19.13), one-anastomosis gastric bypass (7.16 and 13.1), and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (4.68 and 7.3) compared to re-sleeve gastrectomy. Duodenal switch and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass are associated to an increased risk of late major morbidity (OR: 3.07 and 2.11 respectively) compared to re-sleeve gastrectomy while no significant difference was highlighted for the other procedures. Re-sleeve gastrectomy is the revisional intervention most frequently burdened by weight recidivism; compared to it, patients undergoing single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass have the lowest risk of weight regain (OR: 0.07).

CONCLUSION

considering the analyzed outcomes altogether, single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass and one-anastomosis gastric bypass are the most performing revisional procedures after failure of restrictive surgery due to satisfying short and mid-term weight loss and low early and late morbidity. Moreover, single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass has low risk of weight recidivism.

Patient Selection and 30-Day Outcomes of SADI-S Compared to RYGB: a Retrospective Cohort Study of 47,375 Patients

PURPOSE

Single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) offers a novel bariatric procedure with few comparative studies evaluating patient selection or perioperative outcomes. We aim to compare SADI-S to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The 2020 Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) registry was analyzed, comparing SADI-S to RYGB. Bivariate analysis was performed to determine intergroup differences. Multivariable logistic regression determined factors associated with serious complications and mortality.

RESULTS

We evaluated 47,375 patients, with 501 (1.1%) receiving SADI-S. Patients undergoing SADI-S had higher body mass index (51.4 ± 9.7 kg/m² SADI-S vs. 44.6 ± 7.9 kg/m² RYGB; p < 0.001), and more metabolic comorbidities including non-insulin dependent diabetes (21.7% SADI-S vs 19.0% RYGB; p = 0.011), insulin dependent diabetes (12.0% SADI-S vs. 8.6% RYGB; p = 0.011), and hypertension (54.9% SADI-S vs 47.6% RYGB; p < 0.001). Patients undergoing SADI-S experienced more anastomotic leaks (2.2% vs. 0.5%; p < 0.001), reoperations (5.0% vs 2.6%; p < 0.001), pneumonias (1.6% vs 0.5%; p < 0.001), had sepsis more frequently (1.4% vs 0.3%; p < 0.001), and required more unplanned reintubations (1.2% vs 0.3%; p = 0.004). SADI-S was independently associated with serious complications (OR 1.45, CI 1.09-1.95, p < 0.001) but was not a predictor of mortality (OR 3.29, p = 0.060).

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison to RYGB, patients undergoing SADI-S were found to have more metabolic comorbidities. Compared to RYGB, SADI-S has worse perioperative outcomes and is independently associated with serious complications. It remains unclear whether this represents a learning curve or true findings and prospective studies analyzing the risk-benefit ratio following SADI-S are needed.

Lactobacillus paracasei 24 Attenuates Lipid Accumulation in High-Fat Diet-Induced Obese Mice by Regulating the Gut Microbiota

Obesity has become a worldwide public health problem. Lactic acid bacteria have attracted extensive attention for alleviating obesity and fat accumulation. This study aimed to evaluate the alleviating effects of Lactobacillus paracasei 24 (LP24) on lipid accumulation in an obese mouse model induced by a high-fat diet (HFD). The results showed that LP24 treatment significantly reduced body weight and fat deposition in HFD mice, improved blood lipid levels and liver steatosis, reduced liver oxidative stress injury and the inflammatory response, and regulated fat metabolism-related factors. Moreover, LP24 regulated the abundance and diversity of the gut microbiota, reduced the abundance of Firmicutes and the ratio of Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes (F/B), and increased the abundance of Akkermansia. In summary, LP24 regulates lipid metabolism by activating the expression level of related genes and regulating the gut microbiota through the gut-liver axis to attenuate the development of obesity. This study provides a theoretical basis for probiotics to regulate gut microbiota to reduce lipid accumulation.

Evaluation of Metabolic Outcomes Following SADI-S: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) offers a novel bariatric procedure. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates observational and comparative studies evaluating SADI-S, with meta-analysis comparing outcomes to other malabsorptive procedures (MPs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted in March 2021. The study followed PRISMA guidelines. Studies evaluating SADI-S with n > 5 were included. Primary outcome was diabetes (DM) remission, and secondary outcomes included perioperative outcomes, comorbidity resolution, and weight loss.

RESULTS

We reviewed 2285 studies with 16 included evaluating 3319 patients and 1704 (51.3%) undergoing SADI-S. SADI-S patients had increased BMI (49.6 kg/m² vs 48.8 kg/m²) and weight (139.7 kg vs 137.1 kg), were more likely to have DM (46.3% vs 42.1%), and dyslipidemia (36.6% SADI-S vs 32.7%). SADI-S had a shorter operative duration than MPs (MD - 36.74, p < 0.001), 0.85-day shorter post-operative stay (p < 0.001), and trended towards fewer complications (OR 0.69, p = 0.06). Rate of reoperation (OR 0.83, p = 0.59) was similar and DM remission was similar (OR 0.07, p = 0.1). Subgroup analysis suggested greater DM remission than Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (OR 4.42, p = 0.04). SADI-S had fewer malabsorptive complications, though follow-up was shorter. Weight loss was 37.3% compared to 35.6% total weight loss after SADI-S and MPs, respectively.

CONCLUSION

SADI-S demonstrates improved metabolic and weight loss outcomes with lower perioperative risks. SADI-S represents a promising bariatric procedure but long-term outcomes are needed to guide future uptake.

Roux-en-Y Versus One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as Redo-Operations Following Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Aim of this study was to improve knowledge about the best conversional bariatric procedure following sleeve gastrectomy (SG).

METHODS

Data of conversional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) after SG were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. Weight loss parameters, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and comorbidities outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

Total of 123 patients (90 female, mean age 44 ± 0.9 years, mean body mass index (BMI) 42 ± 0.8 kg/m²) had either RYGB (n = 68) or OAGB (n = 55). Perioperative mortality was zero. Mean surgery time was significantly shorter for OAGB (168 ± 7.2 vs. 201 ± 6.8 min). Perioperative complication rates were not significantly (ns) different between RYGB and OAGB. Total body weight loss (TBWL) in RYGB and OAGB was 18 ± 2.2% and 18 ± 1.9% (12 months) and 18 ± 3.0% and 23 ± 2.6% (24 months; ns), respectively. Length of (individualized) biliopancreatic limb (BPL) correlated significantly with weight loss. Remission rates after 12 months of RYGB and OAGB for arterial hypertension (aHt) were 89% and 92%, for obstructive sleep apnea (OSAS) 56% and 82%, for Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) 100% and 92%, for osteoarthritis 64% and 85% and for GERD 89% versus 87% (ns), respectively. Nutritional deficiencies were comparable in RYGB (n = 11) and OAGB (n = 14) group (ns).

CONCLUSION

Both RYGB and OAGB are effective conversional procedures after SG, leading to comparable TBWL, BMI-loss and high remission rates of comorbidities including GERD. Significantly shorter operation times were in favor of OAGB. BPL, which was longer in OAGB was significantly related to higher %TBWL and %BMI-loss compared to RYGB.

Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass with a 150-cm Biliopancreatic Limb After Failure of Adjustable Gastric Banding: Mid-Term Outcomes and Comparison Between One- and Two-Stage Approaches

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) was a common procedure worldwide but associated with a high rate of long-term failure. This study aims to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of conversion to one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) after failed LAGB.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We undertook a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database in a tertiary referral center for bariatric surgery. All cases of revisional OAGB with a biliopancreatic limb (BPL) of 150 cm after failed LAGB performed between 2010 and 2016 were analyzed.

RESULTS

Overall, 215 patients underwent conversion from LAGB to OAGB. Indication for surgery was primary weight loss (WL) failure in 30.7% of cases and long-term complications in the remaining patients, with or without associated weight regain. At the time of OAGB, the mean age was 43.2 ± 10.5 years and the mean BMI was 42 ± 6.9. Overall postoperative morbidity was 13.5%. The postoperative abscess ± leak rate was 5.9% in the overall population. Two years after OAGB, 9.7% of patients were lost to follow-up, % excess weight loss (EWL) was 88.2 ± 23.9, and % total weight loss (TWL) was 38.7 ± 9.3. At 5 years, 16.6% of patients were lost to follow-up, %EWL was 82.4 ± 25, and %TWL was 36.1 ± 10. There was no statistical difference in complication rates or WL results between the one-stage and two-stage approaches.

CONCLUSION

OAGB with a 150-cm BPL represents a safe and effective option after failed LAGB. Both synchronous OAGB and two-step revisional OAGB guarantee satisfying results in terms of postoperative morbidity and WL outcomes.

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.

One anastomosis gastric bypass vs. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, remedy for insufficient weight loss and weight regain after failed restrictive bariatric surgery

Background

Failure occurs in up to 60% of the patients that were treated with primary restrictive bariatric operations such as Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding (LAGB), or restrictive/metabolic operations like Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG). Insufficient weight loss and weight regain are the most commonly reported reasons of failure. The aim of this retrospective multicenter study was to compare One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) as a revisional procedure in terms of weight loss, procedure time, complication rate and morbidity.

Methods

491 patients operated on between 2012 and 2017 for failed restrictive surgery were included in this study (OAGB (n=185) or RYGB (n=306)). Failure was defined as total weight loss (TWL) less than 25%, excess weight loss (EWL) less than 50% and/or a remaining body mass index (BMI) larger than 40 kg/m2 at two years of follow up. Primary outcome measures were %TWL and % excess BMI loss (EBMIL) at 12, 24 and 36 months of follow-up. Secondary outcomes were procedure time, reduction of comorbidity, early and late complication rate, and mortality.

Results

%TWL was significantly larger in the OAGB group at 12 months (mean 24.1±9.8 vs. 21.9±9.7, p = 0.023) and 24 months (mean 23.9±11.7 vs. 20.5±11.2, p = 0.023) of follow-up. %EBMIL was significantly larger in the OAGB group at 12 months (mean 69.0±44.6 vs. 60.0±30.1, p = 0.014) and 24 months (mean 68.6±51.6 vs. 56.4±35.4, p = 0.025) of follow-up. Intra-abdominal complications (leakage, bleeding, intra-abdominal abscess and perforation) occurred less frequently after revisional OAGB (1.1% vs. 4.9%, p = 0.025). Surgical intervention for biliary reflux (5.4% vs. 0.3%, p < 0.001) was more prevalent in the OAGB group. Surgical intervention for internal herniation (0.0% vs. 4.9%, p = 0.002) was more prevalent in the RYGB group.

Conclusions

This study suggests that OAGB is superior to RYGB as a remedy for insufficient weight loss and weight regain after failed restrictive surgery with more weight loss and a lower early complication rate. To substantiate these findings, further research from prospective randomized controlled trials is 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.

Efficacy and safety of bariatric revisions in patients older than 65 years old

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery in advanced age patients (>65-years-old) has been proven safe and effective. Revisional bariatric surgery is infrequently required for cases of refractory obesity. However, there is a paucity of data regarding revisional surgery for the elderly. We hypothesize that revisional bariatric surgery is viable and safe in elderly patients.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review of all bariatric revisions performed at two high-volume bariatric centers of excellence between 2011 and 2018. Perioperative and long-term outcomes were compared between patients >65 and those <65-years-old.

RESULTS

145 bariatric revisions were performed for weight loss. 10% (N = 15) were >65 years old. There were no differences in mortality between the two groups There was a longer median length of stay in the younger cohort (2 vs 1 day, p = 0.001). Percent excess weight loss was similar at 12-months, as was resolution of comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric revisions in elderly patients appears to be safe and effective. Revisional surgery in this population was not shown to have increased morbidity or mortality with similar excess body weight loss when compared to a younger cohort.

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus one anastomosis-mini gastric bypass as a rescue procedure following failed restrictive bariatric surgery. A systematic review of literature with metanalysis

BACKGROUND

Although different procedures have been proposed as revisional surgery for patients who had previously undergone a failed primary restrictive procedure, the ideal revisional procedure is still a matter of debate.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed in all electronic databases to find studies comparing one anastomosis-mini gastric bypass (OAGB-MGB) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional bariatric surgery for weight regain or intolerance/complications of a primary restrictive procedure. The data regarding sample size, patients' gender, age, primary surgery type, number of perioperative complications, operative time, pre- and post-revisional body mass index (BMI), and excess weight loss % (EWL%) at 1-year follow-up were extracted. Five studies were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

The primary bariatric procedures were represented by vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG), laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). About perioperative complications, both RYGB and OAGB-MGB showed a similar rate of leaks but OAGB-MGB had a lower rate of bleedings; considering the progression from pre- to post-revisional BMI, OAGB-MGB reveals a better outcome as well as a shorter operative time.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis has shown OAGB-MGB, used as revisional intervention after failed restrictive surgery, achieves outcomes comparable to RYGB in terms of perioperative complications providing a simpler and more effective technique.

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.

Robotic-assisted approaches to GERD following sleeve gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common bariatric operation in the United States but increases the incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of our study was to describe our experience with robotic-assisted management of intractable GERD after SG.

METHODS

A systematic review of a prospectively maintained database was performed of consecutive patients undergoing robotic-assisted magnetic sphincter augmentation placement after sleeve gastrectomy (MSA-S group) or conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB group) for GERD from 2015 to 2019 at our tertiary- care bariatric center. These were compared to a consecutive group of patients undergoing robotic-assisted magnetic sphincter augmentation placement (MSA group) for GERD without a history of bariatric surgery from 2016 to 2019. The primary outcome was perioperative morbidity. Secondary outcomes were operative time (OT), 90-day re-intervention rate, length of stay, symptom resolution and weight change.

RESULTS

There were 51 patients included in this study; 18 patients in the MSA group, 13 patients in the MSA-S group, and 20 patients in the RYGB group. There was no significant difference in age, gender, ASA score, preoperative endoscopic findings, or DeMeester scores (P > 0.05). BMI was significantly higher in patients undergoing RYGB compared to MSA or MSA-S (P < 0.0001). There were significant differences in OT between the MSA and RYGB groups (P < 0.0001) and MSA-S and RYGB groups (P = 0.009), but not MSA group to MSA-S group (P = 0.51). There was no significant difference in intraoperative and postoperative morbidity (P = 1.0 and P = 0.60, respectively). 30-day morbidity: 5.6% (MSA), 15.4% (MSA-S) and 15% (RYGB). There was no difference on PPI discontinuation among groups, with more than 80% success rate in all.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the robotic platform in the different approaches available for treatment of GERD after SG appears to be a feasible option with low morbidity and high success rate. Further data is needed to support our findings.

Probiotic Mixture of Lactobacillus plantarum Strains Improves Lipid Metabolism and Gut Microbiota Structure in High Fat Diet-Fed Mice

The global prevalence of obesity is rising year by year, which has become a public health problem worldwide. In recent years, animal studies and clinical studies have shown that some lactic acid bacteria possess an anti-obesity effect. In our previous study, mixed lactobacilli (Lactobacillus plantarum KLDS1.0344 and Lactobacillus plantarum KLDS1.0386) exhibited anti-obesity effects in vivo by significantly reducing body weight gain, Lee's index and body fat rate; however, its underlying mechanisms of action remain unclear. Therefore, the present study aims to explore the possible mechanisms for the inhibitory effect of mixed lactobacilli on obesity. C57BL/6J mice were randomly divided into three groups including control group (Control), high fat diet group (HFD) and mixed lactobacilli group (MX), and fed daily for eight consecutive weeks. The results showed that mixed lactobacilli supplementation significantly improved blood lipid levels and liver function, and alleviated liver oxidative stress. Moreover, the mixed lactobacilli supplementation significantly inhibited lipid accumulation in the liver and regulated lipid metabolism in epididymal fat pads. Notably, the mixed lactobacilli treatment modulated the gut microbiota, resulting in a significant increase in acetic acid and butyric acid. Additionally, Spearman's correlation analysis found that several specific genera were significantly correlated with obesity-related indicators. These results indicated that the mixed lactobacilli supplementation could manipulate the gut microbiota and its metabolites (acetic acid and butyric acid), resulting in reduced liver lipid accumulation and improved lipid metabolism of adipose tissue, which inhibited obesity.

Retrospective cohort study of 925 OAGB procedures. The UK MGB/OAGB collaborative group

BACKGROUND

Mini-One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass is a new operation that provides comparable outcomes to the common bariatric procedures. Revisional surgery is still needed after a number of MGB-OAGB procedures. The aim of this study is to report the causes and management of these revisions.

METHODS

From 2010 to 2018, 925 MGB-OAGB operations were performed at 7 bariatric units across the United Kingdom and included in this retrospective cohort study. The data was retrospectively collected and analysed. The primary end point was the identification of the causes and management of revisions. Follow up ranged from 6 months to 3 years.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients [2.3%] required revisional surgery after MGB-OAGB. Five patients [0.5%] developed severe diarrhoea managed by shortening the bilio-pancreatic limb to 150 cm. Four patients [0.4%] developed afferent loop syndrome and bile reflux was reported in another 3 [0.3%] cases; all were managed by either conversion to Roux en Y Gastric Bypass or a Braun anastomosis. Postoperative bleeding was controlled laparoscopically in 3 patients [0.3%]. Liver decompensation that was reported in 2 patients [0.2%] was treated by shortening the BPL in one patient and a reversal to normal anatomy in another. The liver failure resolved in both patients. Other indications for revision included two gastro-jejunal stenosis [0.2%], one perforated ulcer [0.1%], one patient [0.1%] with excessive weight loss and one case [0.1%] of protein malnutrition. None of the 22 patients undergoing revisional surgery after MGB-OAGB died. Lost to follow up rate was 0.2%.

CONCLUSION

Complications requiring revisional surgery after MGB-OAGB are uncommon [2.3%] and the majority can be managed by bilio-pancreatic limb shortening, the addition of a Braun side-to-side anastomosis or conversion to RYGB. Bilio-pancreatic limb length of 200 cm or more resulted in serious complications of liver failure, protein malnutrition, excessive weight loss and diarrhoea.

Conversion from laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) to one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB): preliminary data from a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is the most commonly performed bariatric procedure, while laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has been for a decade one of the most popular interventions for weight loss. After LSG and LAGB, some patients may require a second surgery due to weight regain or late complications. One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a promising bariatric procedure, which provides effective long-term weight loss and has a favorable effect on type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVES

To retrospectively analyze data from 10 Italian centers on conversion from LAGB and LSG to OAGB.

SETTING

High-volume centers for bariatric surgery.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data from 10 high-volume centers were retrospectively reviewed. Body mass index (BMI), percentage of excess BMI loss, reasons for redo, remission from co-morbidities (hypertension, diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux, and dyslipidemia), and major complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Three hundred patients were included in the study; 196 patients underwent conversion from LAGB to OAGB and 104 were converted from LSG. BMI was 45.1 ± 7 kg/m² at the time of first intervention, 41.8 ± 6.3 kg/m² at redo time, and 30.5 ± 5.5 kg/m² at last follow-up appointment. Mean percentage of excess BMI loss was 13.2 ± 28.2 at conversion and 73.4 ± 27.5 after OAGB. Remission rates from hypertension, diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux, and dyslipidemia were 40%, 62.5%, 58.7% and 52%, respectively. Mean follow-up was 20.8 (range, 6-156) months and overall complications rate was 8.6%.

CONCLUSION

Our data show that OAGB is a safe and effective revisional procedure after failed restrictive bariatric surgery.

Single-anastomosis duodeno-ileal - new revision procedure in a patient with insufficient weight loss after sleeve gastrectomy

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is one of the most popular and effective bariatric surgical procedures worldwide. The effect of LSG is mostly dependent on the restrictive mechanism, which makes it more vulnerable to failure. Failing of bariatric procedure is not uncommon and occurs in 6% to 23%. In case of weight loss failure, there are no hard recommendations on the choice of the redo procedure. One of the most novel options, introduced in 2007, relatively simple to perform following LSG is single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass. Herein we describe surgical technique and history of a patient with inadequate weight loss after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, who underwent single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass.

Resectional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass/Mini Gastric Bypass as a Novel Option for Revision of Restrictive Procedures: Preliminary Results

BACKGROUND

Revisional surgery is becoming a common and challenging practice in bariatric centers. The aim of this study was to evaluate resectional one anastomosis gastric bypass/mini gastric bypass (R-OAGB/MGB) as a revisional procedure.

METHODS

From January 2016 to February 2017, data on 21 consecutive patients undergoing R-OAGB/MGB for weight loss failure after primary restrictive procedures were prospectively collected and analysed.

RESULTS

Mean age was 39 ± 12 years (18-65), and 11 (52.3%) were women. The mean operative time was 96.4 ± 20.9 min (range, 122-80), and the mean postoperative stay was 47.8 ± 7.4 hours (range, 36-73). There were no deaths and no procedure-related complications. The mean body mass index (BMI) decreased from 42.9 ± 6.5 at the time of R-OAGB/MGB to 28.5 ± 4 at the 12-month follow-up. At that time point, the mean percentage of BMI loss (%EBL) and the mean percentage of total body weight loss (%TWL) reached 81.6 ± 0.17% and 35 ± 0.01%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

R-OAGB/MGB was technically straightforward, effective, and safe in this at-surgical risk population. R-OAGB/MGB should be added to the armamentarium of revisional bariatric procedures considering its technical aspects and the potential advantage on weight loss.