Analysis of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Learning Curve and Its Influence on Procedure Safety and Perioperative Complications

[Sleeve gastrectomy for the surgical management of obesity at the Essos Hospital Center (Yaoundé, Cameroon): a retrospective case series study evaluating medium-term weight loss]

While the prevalence of overweight and obesity is rising in Africa, the practice of bariatric surgery remains limited in our country, Cameroon. Weight loss outcomes following sleeve gastrectomy (SG), the most widely used bariatric surgery technique worldwide, have not yet been studied in our context. The medical records of all patients who underwent SG in our surgery department between January 1, 2016, and September 30, 2020, were reviewed retrospectively. The primary outcome studied was medium-term weight loss, one year after surgery. Weight loss was calculated using the postoperative body mass index (BMI) and the percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL). Reinhold criteria were used to assess the %EWL. We collected data from the medical records of 21 patients, of whom 19 (90.5%) were female. The average age of patients was 40.3±10.8 years, with a mean BMI of 44.9±7.4 kg/m2. All patients had at least one obesity-related comorbidity. All procedures were performed laparoscopically, without conversion, with a mean duration of 192.2±52.8 min. One year after surgery, the mean BMI was 32.51±3.7 kg/m2 and the mean %EWL was 63.35±6.5%. According to Reinhold's criteria, the %EWL was considered satisfactory. In our context, SG provides satisfactory results for medium-term weight loss.

Comparing the effects of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy on weight loss and comorbidity resolution: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG) and Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) are the most common bariatric modalities. There is ongoing debate on the two modalities' long-term effects on weight loss and comorbidity resolution.PubMed, EMbase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LRYGB versus LSG were searched by March 2024. Quality assessment was conducted by Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) guidelines, following the procedures outlined in the Cochrane Collaborations tool (RoB 2.0 Assessment Form).In total, 13 datasets were included from 10 RCTs that involved 1106 individuals. Both the percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) and percentage of total weight loss (%TWL) were greater in LRYGB compared to LSG at 3 years (MD: 13.04, 95%CI: 6.95-19.13; P < 0.0001) and 1 year (MD: 5.97, 95%CI: 5.23-6.71; P < 0.00001), respectively. When comparing LRYGB to LSG, the remission percentage for type 2 diabetes mellitus was greater at one (RR: 0.15, 95%CI: 0.03-0.27; P = 0.02) and 3 years (RR: 0.17, 95 % CI: 0.07-0.28; P = 0.001). Moreover, early (RR: 1.72, 95%CI: 1.19-2.46; P = 0.003) and late (RR: 1.40, 95%CI: 1.15-1.71; P = 0.001) adverse events were more common with LRYGB. Regarding remission from obstructive sleep apnea syndrome, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, no significant changes were seen. LRYGB and LSG are both viable bariatric surgery options for resolving long-term comorbidities. While the rate of adverse events is greater with LRYGB than LSG, the former may provide more long-term sustainable weight reduction.Additional research of a higher quality is necessary.

Surgical outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy by a single surgeon: Before and after learning curve in a non-tertiary low-volume bariatric center

BACKGROUND

In Korea, the need for bariatric surgery (BS) is increasing because of the increasing incidence of morbid obesity. There is no special training program for BS, and most BS are conducted in non-tertiary hospitals in capital area. We evaluated the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) before and after the learning curve (LC) to prove that the barrier of entry for LSG is not very high.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients who underwent LSG in a secondary hospital without the supervision of an experienced surgeon between April 2019 and August 2022. We compared the surgical outcomes and changes in body measurements before the LC (BL) and after the LC (AL) after 1 year of follow-up.

RESULTS

The duration of operation for BL and AL were 118.4 and 61.9 min (p = 0.000), respectively. No mortality was observed. There were four and eight cases of morbidity; the weight loss after 1 year was 90.6 and 89.7 kg (p = 0.804); changes in body mass index (BMI) were 10.3 and 10.2 kg/m2 (p = 0.928); excess weight loss after 1 year was 93.0 and 89.3% (p = 0.762); and excess BMI loss after 1 year was 92.7 and 89.5% (p = 0.807) in the BL and AL groups, respectively. %Total weight loss was 26.8 and 23.7 in the BL and AL group. There was no statistical significance of all parameters of body measurements between two groups.

CONCLUSION

LSG can be safely and effectively performed by novice bariatric surgeons in non-tertiary hospitals if patients are cautiously selected. Surgical outcomes of BL and AL is not different, except for the operation time.

Evaluation of Alternate Laparoscopic Stapling Device for Bariatric Surgery

BACKGROUND

As laparoscopic bariatric surgical techniques have matured, the incidence of complications has decreased over time. Surgical stapling devices are commonly used for resection and anastomosis of gastric tissue during bariatric surgery. The purpose of this study is to assess and compare complication rates and clinical outcomes between patient cohorts using 2 different approved stapling devices.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinical outcomes were retrospectively compared for patients undergoing bariatric surgery between April 2019 and December 2020 using laparoscopic surgical stapling device A (LSSD-A) against outcomes between January 2017 and September 2018 using laparoscopic surgical stapling device B (LSSD-B). Tradenames for LSSD-A and LSSD-B were AEON Endostapler and Endo GIA with Tri-Staple Technology, respectively.

RESULTS

In all, 814 patients underwent laparoscopic bariatric operation using LSSD-A and 1034 using LSSD-B. Laparoscopic surgery included sleeve gastrectomy (n=1359, 73.5%), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (n=425, 23.0%), and single anastomosis duodenoileostomy with gastric sleeve (n=64, 3.5%). Stapler-related complications were evenly distributed over the 20.9-month LSSD-B study period. No stapler-related complications were seen in the last 13 months of the LSSD-A study period, during which time 428 (52.5%) laparoscopic bariatric operations were performed. One staple line leak was observed, occurring in the LSSD-B group. Patients undergoing laparoscopic RYGB with LSSD-A had fewer overall complications, fewer transfusions, and fewer reoperations for staple line bleeding.

CONCLUSIONS

Both LSSD-A and LSSD-B were safe and effective in the performance of laparoscopic bariatric operations with low complication rates and comparable clinical performance in sleeve gastrectomy and single anastomosis duodenoileostomy with gastric sleeve. Statistically significant differences in complication rates were observed in RYGB favoring LSSD-A.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy followed by laparoscopic adrenalectomy for patients with obesity and primary aldosteronism: Report of two patients

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE

Primary aldosteronism (PA) is the most frequent cause of secondary hypertension. Surgical treatment of unilateral PA usually resolves excessive aldosterone secretion. Obesity is an independent factor for postoperative persistent hypertension for patients with unilateral PA. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy has become popular due to its efficacy in resolving obesity. A specific strategy might to be needed for patients with unilateral PA and obesity.

CASE PRESENTATION

Two males with PA and obesity (Body Mass Index: BMIs of 35.9 and 39.0, respectively) were referred for evaluation. Both patients had hypertension caused by PA and obesity. We performed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) prior to adrenalectomy to avoid persistent postoperative hypertension and perioperative obesity related comorbidities. LSG could lead to decreasing of BMIs to 27.7 and 32.1. Comorbidities associated with obesity were also resolved in both patients. Laparoscopic adrenalectomy was then safely performed in these two patients with PA.

CLINICAL DISCUSSIONS

Patients with PA developing resistant hypertension were estimated to be 20 % of those who underwent adrenalectomy. Decreased BMI can be an independent preoperative determinant for successful outcome after adrenalectomy regarding hypertension. We need to review with special care the preoperative BMI and the nature of hypertension before performing surgery on patients with unilateral PA.

CONCLUSIONS

A successful strategy was used to treat two obese patients with unilateral PA who underwent laparoscopic adrenalectomy after LSG to minimize complications associated with obesity-related comorbidities.

Bariatric Surgery Performed at a Tertiary Care Hospital and an Ambulatory Hospital: A 5 Year Comparison of Outcomes, OR Efficiencies and Costs

PURPOSE

To explore change in 30-day post-operative complications, operative times, operating room (OR) efficiencies for bariatric surgery performed at a tertiary care hospital (TH) and an ambulatory hospital with overnight stay (AH) within one hospital network over 5 years; and to compare perioperative costs at the TH and AH.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of existing data from a cohort of consecutive adult patients who underwent primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) between September 2016 and August 2021 at TH and AH.

RESULTS

A total of 805 patients (762 LRYGB, 43 LSG) had surgery at AH, while 109 (92 LRYGB, 17 LSG) at TH. OR times for LRYGB and LSG performed at AH were significantly shorter versus TH (150 ± 24 vs 178 ± 51 min; p < 0.01) and (123 ± 24 vs 147 ± 34 min; p = 0.01). OR turnovers (19.2 ± 6.0 min vs 28.1 ± 6.1 min; p < 0.01) and Post Anesthetic Care Unit (PACU) times (2.4 ± 0.6 h vs 3.1 ± 1.5 h; p < 0.01) were significantly faster at AH versus TH. Proportion of patients requiring transfer for a complication from AH to TH remained constant over time (range 1.5-6.2%/year; p = 0.14). 30-day complication rates were similar between AH and TH (5.5-11% vs 0-15%; p = 0.12). LRYGB and LSG costs were similar between AH and TH (8,855 ± 1,328CAD vs 8,799 ± 2,729CAD; p = 0.91 and 8,763 ± 1,449CAD vs 7,857 ± 1,825CAD; p = 0.41).

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in 30-day post-operative complications for LRYGB and LSG performed at AH and TH. Performing bariatric surgery at AH has the benefit of improved OR efficiency without a significant difference in total perioperative costs.

Initial experience with laparoscopic revisional single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI-S) after failed sleeve gastrectomy

Introduction

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is currently the most commonly performed bariatric operation, but re-do surgery may be necessary in up to half of the patients. Single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI-S) is quickly gaining recognition as a revisional procedure after failed SG.

Aim

To discuss the surgical technique and analyze initial outcomes after introduction of SADI-S after SG with 1-year follow-up.

Material and methods

This is a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent re-do bariatric surgery - revisional SADI-S - in 2021 at a secondary referral public hospital. All patients' follow-up was completed 1 year after.

Results

14 consecutive patients, 6 (43%) males and 8 females, were included. Median maximal body mass index (BMI) was 52.29 (47.96-77.16) kg/m2, BMI before SADI-S was 43.09 (41.64-48.99) kg/m2. No perioperative morbidity was recorded. Four (28%) patients reported recurrent abdominal crampy pain and diarrhea that required dietary advisement and pharmacological therapy in the postoperative period. No reoperations, mortality or readmissions were recorded during 1-year follow-up. SADI-S was associated with further weight loss, resulting in median BMI of 37.55 (36.29-39.43) kg/m2 1 year after SADI-S. Observed additional percentage total weight loss (%TWL) 1 year after SADI-S was 18.65% (17.25-21.89%), while additional percentage excess body mass index loss (%EBMIL) was 35.88% (29.18-41.92%). There was 1 case of diabetes mellitus type 2 remission and improvement in glycemic control in 1 patient. 4/6 patients (66.67%) had improvement in control of hypertension.

Conclusions

SADI-S is promising re-do surgery after SG with low postoperative morbidity. Additional %TWL 1 year after SADI-S is ~19%, while additional %EBMIL is ~36%, with significant improvement of obesity-related comorbidities.

Sleeve gastrectomy in the surgical management of obesity in Cameroon (a sub-Saharan country): A single-institute retrospective review of 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality

BACKGROUND

METHODS

RESULTS

CONCLUSION

•

Sleeve gastrectomy is a safe procedure in a sub-Saharan African low setting.

•

Bleeding is the only intraoperative complication encountered in 14.3% of cases.

•

The prevalence of 30-day postoperative morbidity of sleeve gastrectomy is 38.1%.

•

Postoperative 30-day complications after sleeve gastrectomy are minor.

•

The 30-day postoperative mortality after sleeve gastrectomy is nil.

Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Versus Sleeve Gastrectomy in Young Adults: a Dutch Registry Study

BACKGROUND

The most commonly performed bariatric procedures worldwide are Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG), yet outcomes following these procedures in young adults are limited. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare weight loss outcomes between RYGB and SG in young adults.

METHODS

This is a nationwide retrospective cohort study of young adults, aged 18-25 years, who underwent RYGB or SG between 2015 and 2019, with data from the Dutch Audit Treatment of Obesity (DATO). The primary outcome was weight loss expressed as percentage total weight loss (%TWL) in a period of 3 years after surgery. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of complications (< 30 days) and progression of obesity-related comorbidities.

RESULTS

In total, 2313 patients were included, 1246 in the RYGB group and 1067 in the SG group. Percentage TWL was significantly higher in the RYGB group compared to the SG group at 1, 2, and 3 years after surgery (respectively 2.4%, 2.9%, and 3.3% higher, p < 0.001). RYGB was associated with an on-average 2.75 higher %TWL compared to SG in females (p < 0.001), although this was not seen in males (β = 0.63, p = 0.514). No differences were found in the incidence of complications, nor the progression of obesity-related comorbidities except for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). There was more improvement or resolution of GERD in the RYGB group (95.2% vs. 56.3%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Similar numbers of RYGB and SG were performed in young adults, whereas RYGB was associated with greater weight loss in the short- and midterm, particularly in females.

Early Clinical Outcomes of the Morbidly Obese Patients Who Underwent Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy by Gastric Cancer Surgeons: the Analysis of Fifty Consecutive Cases

Purpose

The number of bariatric surgeries performed at our tertiary hospital has gradually increased since the national health insurance began to cover their expenses in January of 2019. This study examined the early surgical outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) performed by experienced gastric cancer surgeons.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively reviewed and analyzed data from 50 patients who underwent LSG between November of 2018 and April of 2020 at the Asan Medical Center by 1 of 5 experienced surgeons each of whom performed approximately 100-300 cases of gastrectomy annually. The age, body mass index (BMI), weight, presence of comorbidities, operation time, hospital stay after surgery, postoperative complications, postoperative excess weight loss (EWL), and resolution of comorbidities were examined.

Results

The mean age, BMI, and weight were 37.29±9.77 years, 37.12 kg/m², and 102.00 kg, respectively. The mean operation time and postoperative length of hospital stay were 109.59±35.88 and 5.06±1.20 days, respectively. Two patients (4.00%) had early postoperative complications and postoperative leakage; bleeding and stenosis were not reported. The EWL after 1 and 6 months of operation was 26.55% and 60.34%, respectively. The resolution of diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia after 6 months of operation was 88.89%, 54.54%, and 50.00%, respectively.

Conclusion

LSG is safe and effective when performed by an experienced gastric cancer surgeon; however, a long-term follow-up of patients is required.

Video-Rated Performance Assessment of Simulated Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Validation of a Sleeve Gastrectomy Rating Scale

PURPOSE

The global rise in obesity has been accompanied by widespread uptake of the procedure of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Despite this, the key components for performance assessment have not been standardized for this procedure. The aim of this study was to develop and demonstrate the validity of a Sleeve Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill (SOSATS) scale for learning the procedure of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The SOSATS evaluation tool was based upon critical steps of the LSG procedure. Both the SOSATS and the Global Rating Scale (GRS) component of the Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skill (OSATS) tools were utilized in a prospective single-blinded observational study design of 26 video recordings of surgeons performing sleeve gastrectomies using a novel simulation. The surgeons were allocated into "novice" or "experienced" groups dependent on case-volume criteria. Surgical performance was assessed using both the GRS and SOSATS scales by blinded assessors of the video recordings.

RESULTS

Face and content validity were demonstrated for key components of the simulated model. An overall positive correlation was established inferring concurrent validity between the accepted OSATS Global Rating Scale against the SOSATS procedural scale. Construct validity was established for a number of areas of the SOSATS scale.

CONCLUSION

The SOSATS scale is shown to exhibit construct and concurrent validity in the simulated setting for the procedure of sleeve gastrectomy. Utilizing this scale to review surgical performance is potentially feasible and reliable but would require further research prior to use in high-stakes assessment processes such as credentialing.

Utility of Inflammatory Markers in Detection of Perioperative Morbidity After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy, Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass, and One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass-Multicenter Study

Background

The most commonly performed bariatric operations are laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and bypass surgeries (laparoscopic one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB)), and predicting perioperative morbidity is crucial for early, safe patient discharge. We aimed to determine whether C-reactive protein (CRP) and white blood count (WBC) measured on the first postoperative day predicts perioperative morbidity in the first 30-days after LSG and bypass surgeries.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed data for 1400 patients who underwent bariatric surgery in seven bariatric centers from 2014 to 2018. Patients were divided into a complicated group (patients with postoperative complications) and a non-complicated group. We also performed separate analyses for LSG and bypass surgeries.

Results

Patients were 929 women (66%) and 471 men (34%) with a median age of 42 years (range, 35–51 years); 1192 patients underwent LSG (85%), 120 underwent LRYGB (9%), and 80 underwent OAGB (6%). We performed ROC analyses to set cut-off points, followed by multivariate logistic regressions. CRP > 33.32 mg/L increased the odds ratio (OR) of perioperative complications after LSG 2.27 times, while WBC > 12.15 × 10³/μL on postoperative day 1 was associated with a 3.34-times greater or of developing complications. WBC > 13.78 × 10³/μL was associated with a 13.34-times higher or of perioperative morbidity in patients undergoing bypass surgeries.

Conclusion

Even slightly elevated CRP and WBC on postoperative day 1 should alert surgeons to the potential risk of perioperative morbidity.

Learning Curves of Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy in Bariatric Surgery: a Systematic Review and Introduction of a Standardization

BACKGROUND

The most commonly performed bariatric procedures are laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Impact of learning curves on operative outcome has been well shown, but the necessary learning curves have not been clearly defined. This study provides a systematic review of the literature and proposes a standardization of phases of learning curves for RYGB and LSG.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL databases. All studies specifying a number or range of approaches to characterize the learning curve for RYGB and LSG were selected.

RESULTS

A total of 28 publications related to learning curves for 27,770 performed bariatric surgeries were included. Parameters used to determine the learning curve were operative time, complications, conversions, length of stay, and blood loss. Learning curve range was 30-500 (RYGB) and 30-200 operations (LSG) according to different definitions and respective phases of learning curves. Learning phases described the number of procedures necessary to achieve predefined skill levels, such as competency, proficiency, and mastery.

CONCLUSIONS

Definitions of learning curves for bariatric surgery are heterogeneous. Introduction of the three skill phases competency, proficiency, and mastery is proposed to provide a standardized definition using multiple outcome variables to enable better comparison in the future. These levels are reached after 30-70, 70-150, and up to 500 RYGB, and after 30-50, 60-100, and 100-200 LSG. Training curricula, previous laparoscopic experience, and high procedure volume are hallmarks for successful outcomes during the learning curve.

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

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

Fellowship training influences learning curves for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is the most commonly performed bariatric surgical procedure. Little is known about how surgeon training background influences the learning curve of this procedure. We examined operating times (OT), weight loss outcomes, and 30-day complications between surgeons with and without fellowship training in LSG. We hypothesize that post-residency training specific to LSG influences learning curves.

METHODS

Surgeons from a single institution were split into two groups: those who had not completed fellowship training in LSG (NF, n = 3), and those who had completed LSG specific training in fellowship (SGF, n = 3). OTs, BMI changes at 1 year, and 30-day readmissions, reoperations, and complications were extracted for the first 100 LSG cases of each surgeon. Data were analyzed in bins of 20 cases. Comparisons were made between cohorts within a bin and between adjacent bins of the same surgeon cohort. Logistic regression analyses were performed of OT and weight loss outcomes.

RESULTS

SGF surgeons showed no difference in OTs over their first 100 cases. NF surgeons had statistically significant increased OTs compared to SGF surgeons during their first 60 cases and progressively shortened OTs during that interval (109 min to 78 min, p < 0.001 for NF surgeons vs. 73 min to 69 min, SGF surgeons). NF surgeons had a significantly steeper slope for improvement in OT over case number. There was no correlation between case number and weight loss outcomes in either group, and no differences in 30-day outcomes between groups.

CONCLUSION

Surgeons who trained to perform LSG in fellowship demonstrate faster and consistent OR times on their initial independent LSG cases compared to surgeons who did not, with no correlation between case number and weight loss outcomes or safety profiles for either group. This suggests that learning curves for LSG are achieved during formal case-specific fellowship training.

Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Weight Loss, Comorbidities, and Biochemical Outcomes From Randomized Controlled Trials

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare weight loss, obesity-related comorbidities, and biochemical outcomes of LSG versus LRYGB through a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

LSG and LRYGB are the 2 most commonly performed bariatric surgeries for the treatment of obesity. The comparative outcomes of the 2 surgeries is a topic of ongoing debate and medium-term outcomes remain uncertain.

METHODS

A search for RCTs comparing LRYGB versus LSG was conducted. Pooled outcomes between 2 procedures were compared using pairwise random-effects meta-analysis at 1, 3, and 5-year follow-up time points. Grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation was used to assess certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies involving 2475 patients were included. LRYGB resulted in greater loss of body mass index compared to LSG at 1 year [mean difference -1.25 kg/m2, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.01 to -0.49, P = 0.001; moderate certainty of evidence] which persisted at 3 years, but there was insufficient evidence at 5 years. Resolution of dyslipidemia was higher for LRYGB than LSG at 1 year (risk ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.46-0.73, P < 0.001; moderate certainty of evidence) and 5 years (risk ratio 0.68, 95%CI 0.46-0.99, P = 0.04; low certainty of evidence). There was no difference between LRYGB and LSG for remission of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and hemoglobin A1c, fasting insulin, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance, high-density lipoprotein, and the rate of 30-day major and minor complications.

CONCLUSIONS

There are insufficient data from RCTs to draw any conclusions regarding the long-term comparative effectiveness beyond 3 years between LRYGB and LSG.

Integrative genomics reveal a role for MCPIP1 in adipogenesis and adipocyte metabolism

Obesity is considered a serious chronic disease, associated with an increased risk of developing cardiovascular diseases, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and type 2 diabetes. Monocyte chemoattractant protein-1-induced protein-1 (MCPIP1) is an RNase decreasing stability of transcripts coding for inflammation-related proteins. In addition, MCPIP1 plays an important role in the regulation of adipogenesis in vitro by reducing the expression of key transcription factors, including C/EBPβ. To elucidate the role of MCPIP1 in adipocyte biology, we performed RNA-Seq and proteome analysis in 3T3-L1 adipocytes overexpressing wild-type (WTMCPIP1) and the mutant form of MCPIP1 protein (D141NMCPIP1). Our RNA-Seq analysis followed by confirmatory Q-RT-PCR revealed that elevated MCPIP1 levels in 3T3-L1 adipocytes upregulated transcripts encoding proteins involved in signal transmission and cellular remodeling and downregulated transcripts of factors involved in metabolism. These data are consistent with our proteomic analysis, which showed that MCPIP1 expressing adipocytes exhibit upregulation of proteins involved in cellular organization and movement and decreased levels of proteins involved in lipid and carbohydrate metabolism. Moreover, MCPIP1 adipocytes are characterized by decreased level of insulin receptor, reduced insulin-induced Akt phosphorylation, as well as depleted Glut4 level and impaired glucose uptake. Overexpression of Glut4 in 3T3-L1 cells expressed WTMCPIP1 rescued adipogenesis. Interestingly, we found decreased level of MCPIP1 along with an increase in body mass index in subcutaneous adipose tissue. The presented data show a novel role of MCPIP1 in modulating insulin sensitivity in adipocytes. Overall, our findings demonstrate that MCPIP1 is an important regulator of adipogenesis and adipocyte metabolism.

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.

Reducing complication rates and hospital readmissions while revising the enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery (ERABS) protocol

BACKGROUND

To optimize the postoperative phase following bariatric surgery, the enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery pathway (ERABS) has been developed. The aim of ERABS is to create a care path that is as safe, efficient and patient-friendly as possible. Continuous evaluation and optimization of ERABS are important to ensure a safe treatment path and may result in better outcomes. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing bariatric surgery over 2014-2017, during which the ERABS protocol was continuously evaluated and optimized.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study. Data were collected from patients undergoing a primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy between January 2014 and December 2017. Outcomes were early complications, unplanned hospital revisits, readmissions, duration of surgery and length of hospital stay.

RESULTS

2889 patients underwent a primary bariatric procedure in a single center. There was a significant decrease in minor complications over the years from 7.0 to 1.9% (p < 0.001). Hospital revisit rates decreased after 2015 (p < 0.001). Readmission rates decreased over time (p < 0.001). The mean duration of surgery decreased from 52 (in 2014) to 41 (in 2017) minutes (p < 0.001). Median length of hospital stay decreased from 1.8 to 1.5 days in 2015 (p = 0.002) and remained stable since.

CONCLUSION

An improvement of the ERABS protocol was associated with a decrease in minor complication rates, number of unplanned hospital revisits and readmission rates after primary bariatric procedures.

The Influence of Surgical Experience on Postoperative Recovery in Fast-Track Bariatric Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Short duration of surgery is an important aspect in fast-track protocols. Peroperative training of surgical residents could influence the duration of surgery, possibly affecting patient outcome. This study evaluates the influence of the operator's level of experience on patient outcome in fast-track bariatric surgery.

METHODS

Data was analyzed of all patients who underwent a primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) between January 2004 and July 2018. Residents were trained according to a stepwise training program. For each operator, learning curves of both procedures were created by dividing the procedures in time-subsequent groups (TSGs). Data was also analyzed by comparing "beginners" with "experienced operators," with a cut-off point at 100 procedures. Primary outcome measure was duration of surgery. Secondary outcome measures were length of hospital stay (LOS), complications, and readmission rate within 30 days postoperatively.

RESULTS

There were 4901 primary procedures (53.1% LSG) performed by seven surgeons or surgical residents. We found no difference between beginning and experienced operators in complications or readmissions rates. The experience of the operator did not influence LOS (p = 0.201). Comparing each new operator with previous operator(s), the starting point in terms of duration of surgery was shorter, and the learning curve was steeper. The duration of surgery was significantly longer for supervised beginning operators as compared with experienced operators.

CONCLUSION

Within the stepwise training program for residents, there is a slight increase in duration of surgery in the beginning of the learning curve, without affecting the patient outcome.

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.

Training in Bariatric Surgery: a National Survey of German Bariatric Surgeons

INTRODUCTION

Skill in bariatric surgery has been associated with postoperative outcome. Appropriate surgical training is of paramount importance. In order to continuously improve training strategies, it is necessary to assess current practices.

AIM

To determine how German bariatric surgeons have been trained and to assess current training strategies.

METHODS

Between February 2017 and March 2017, an online census of surgeons registered as members of the German Society for Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery was conducted. A total of three reminders were sent out. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Data was reported as median (interquartile range); percentages were adjusted for completed answers only.

RESULTS

A response rate of 51% (n = 214) was achieved. Surgeons reported a median of 14.5 (8-20) years of surgical experience after initial training, with a specific bariatric experience of 7 (4-13) years. The total cumulative bariatric case volume was 240 (80-500) cases, with an annual case volume of 50 (25-80). The most commonly applied approaches to bariatric skills acquisition were "learning by doing" (71%), "course participation" (70%) and "observerships" (70%). Fellowships and the use of operating videos were less frequently applied strategies (19%/ 47%). Interestingly, observerships (94%) and course participation (89%) were rated as very important/important, whereas "learning by doing" (62%), watching operation videos (59%), and fellowships (48%) were less frequently perceived as important/very important training strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of surgeons performing bariatric cases were senior surgeons with more than 10 years of post-training experience; nevertheless, the survey revealed a lack of structured approaches to bariatric specialization training.

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.

Upper extremity surface electromyography signal changes after laparoscopic training

Introduction

Objective measures of laparoscopic skill in training are lacking.

Aim

To evaluate the changes in the surface electromyography (sEMG) signal during laparoscopic training, and to link them to intracorporeal knot tying.

Material and methods

Ten right-handed medical students (6 female), aged 25 ±0.98, without training in laparoscopy, were enrolled in the study. With no additional training, they tied intracorporeal single knots for 15 min. Then underwent laparoscopic training and redid the knot tying exercise. During both events, sEMG was recorded from 8 measurement points on the upper extremities and neck bilaterally. We analyzed changes in sEMG resulting from training and tried to find sEMG predictive parameters for higher technical competence defined by the number of knots tied after the training.

Results

The average number of knots increased after the training. Significant decreases in activity after the training were visible for the non-dominant hand deltoid and trapezius muscles. Dominant and non-dominant hands had different activation patterns. Differences largely disappeared after the training. All muscles, except for the dominant forearm and non-dominant thenar, produced a negative correlation between their activities and the number of tied knots. The strongest anticorrelation occurred for the non-dominant deltoid (r = –0.863, p < 0.05). Relatively strong relationships were identified in the case of the non-dominant trapezius and forearm muscles (r = –0.587, r = –0.504).

Conclusions

At least for some muscle groups there is a change in activation patterns after laparoscopic training. Proximal muscle groups tend to become more relaxed and the distal ones become more active. Changes in the non-dominant hand are more pronounced than in the dominant hand.

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

Background

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

Aim

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

•

Low complication rates with both procedures.

•

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

•

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

•

Bariatric fellowships play an important role in ensuring optimal outcomes.