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

Comparative Study for Safety and Efficacy of OAGB and SADJB-SG: A Retrospective Study

Purpose

Obesity and related complications are managed by One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) and Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Jejunal Bypass with Sleeve Gastrectomy (SADJB-SG), both of which are adapted from traditional gastric bypass procedures. However, there are no current comparative studies on the safety and efficacy of these two surgical procedures.

Patients and Methods

Preoperative baseline data of patients who had undergone OAGB and SADJB-SG surgeries from June 2019 to June 2021 were retrospectively analyzed at our bariatric facility. Postoperative data, including weight changes, improvement in type 2 diabetes (T2DM), and complication rates were collected over 2 years. This was followed by a comprehensive evaluation of the safety and efficacy of the two surgical procedures.

Results

A total of 63 patients completed the follow-up in this study. At the 24-month follow-up, excess weight loss percentage (EWL%) for the OAGB and SADJB-SG was 73.970±5.005 and 75.652±7.953, respectively (P-value = 0.310); total weight loss percentage (TWL%) was 24.006±8.231 and 23.171±6.600, respectively (P-value = 0.665). The diabetes remission rates for the two groups were 71.429% and 69.048%, respectively (P-value = 0.846). The cost for OAGB was 55088.208±1508.220 yuan, which was significantly lower than the 57538.195±1374.994 yuan for SADJB-SG (P-value< 0.001).

Conclusion

The two surgical procedures are reliable in terms of safety and efficacy, and each has distinct advantages. While OAGB has reduced operational expenses, SADJB-SG offers a broader range of applicability.

Preoperative risk factors for early postoperative bleeding after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Although bariatric surgery is an effective intervention for obesity, it comes with risks such as early postoperative bleeding (EPB). Identifying preoperative risk factors for this complication can help patients' risk stratification and optimization. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to find predictors for early postoperative bleeding after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review, searching PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science until November 2023. We performed a random-effects meta-analysis to explore preoperative risk factors associated with early postoperative bleeding after RYGB. Sources of heterogeneity were explored by leave-one-out analyses.

RESULTS

23 studies were included, comprising 232,488 patients. Male gender (meta-analytical RR = 1.42, 95%CI = 1.21-1.66, I2 = 18%, Q Cochran test p-value = 0.29) and revisional surgery (meta-analytical RR = 1.35, 95%CI = 1.12-1.62, I2 = 22%, Q Cochran test p = 0.21) were associated with higher risk of EPB. On average, patients with EPB were older than the remainder (MD for the mean age = 2.82 years, 95%CI = 0.97-4.67, I2 = 0.00%, Q Cochran test p = 0.46). Except for hypertension (meta-analytical RR = 1.33, 95%CI = 1.02-1.73, I2 = 66%, Q Cochran test p < 0.0001), comorbidities were not associated with a higher risk of EPB.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative risk factors, including age, gender, hypertension, and revisional bariatric surgery, are associated with early postoperative bleeding after RYGB. Further primary studies, with higher methodological quality, are required to detail more risk factors.

Semaglutide and Tirzepatide for the Management of Weight Recurrence After Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is the most effective treatment for obesity and improvement of obesity-associated comorbidities. However, a proportion of these patients may suffer from weight recurrence and recurrence of obesity-associated comorbidities.

METHOD

A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent SG between January 2008 and August 2022 and sought treatment for weight recurrence with semaglutide or tirzepetide from January 2022 onwards.

RESULT

A total of 115 patients were included, of which 70 had SG and treated for weight recurrence with semaglutide and 45 had SG and treated with tirzepatide. The mean age of patients was 38.8 (10.4) and 80.9% of patients were female. The mean pre-treatment weight and BMI was 94.0 (23.8) kg and 35.1 (6.0) kg/m2. Following treatment with semaglutide and tirzepatide, the mean post-treatment weight at 6 months was 81.0 (19.0) kg from 90.1 (19.6) kg and 87.6 (28.3) kg from 100.2 (28.5) kg respectively, corresponding to a clinically significant mean weight loss from baseline to 6 months of 10.3 (5.9)% (p < 0.05) and 15.5 (6.3)% (p < 0.05). Weight loss in tirzepatide patients was significantly greater than the semaglutide patients at 6 months (p < 0.02). There were no reported severe adverse events to the treatment.

CONCLUSION

Short-term outcomes show that semaglutide and tirzepatide can be an effective treatment for managing weight recurrence after SG. Studies with longer follow-up are needed to determine the durability, as weight regain after discontinuation of the medication is highly likely, and the high cost of these medications can limit their use.

Effect of different bariatric surgery methods on metabolic syndrome in patients with severe obesity

Bariatric surgery (BS) has been as a currently developed treatment of choice for metabolic syndrome (MetS). Which, in turn, is well-known as serious public health concern. Therefore, this study assessed the outcomes of different procedures of BS and possible predictors for improving MetS. This single-center retrospective cohort analysis included bariatric candidates between 2009 and 2017. The operational approach was chosen based on the patient's condition, as well as the patient's metabolic profile and the surgeon's experience. All desired information was evaluated at baseline and 6, 12, and 24 months after the operation. Of the 1111 patients included, 918 (82.6%) were female. There was no considerable trend in the improvement of MetS over the follow-up period of each surgery group. After 6 to 24 months of follow-up, waist circumference reduction was significant in all three types of surgery, and sleeve gastrectomy resulted in the best (but not significant) improvement rates after 24 months (P = 0.079). One anastomosis gastric bypass had highest decrease in percentage of excess weight loss than other procedures (P < 0.001). Each year increase in age was associated with a 4% decrease in MetS remission. In addition, the male gender, was correlated with MetS improvement positively (P = 0.049). Each one-unit increase in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) reduced the MetS remission rate by 40%. All three methods of BS were similarly effective in MetS. Consider the predictive value of age, gender, and HbA1c before determining the optimum procedure for each patient is recommended.

ReSleeve or revisional one anastomosis gastric bypass for failed primary sleeve gastrectomy with dilated gastric tube: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) has been increasingly performed due to weight loss failure (WLF). Many revisional procedures have been proposed after primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (pLSG) failure, including ReSleeve gastrectomy (ReLSG), and laparoscopic one anastomosis gastric bypass (LOAGB). Choosing the RBS post-pLSG failure represents a challenge. WLF without gastric tube (GT) dilation is undoubtedly converted to a malabsorptive procedure, but the presence of GT dilation makes it more difficult to select a RBS. This study aimed to compare two relatively simple revisional procedures after pLSG failure with dilated GT to help decision making on which procedure better done to which patient.

METHODS

Data of 52 patients who completed one year follow-up (FU) after their RBS (ReLSG: 27 or LOAGB: 25) for their failed pLSG were collected, assessed, correlated to weight loss (WL) and compared.

RESULTS

Mean operative time was 97 ± 18.4 min. with revisional LOAGB (RLOAGB) and 62 ± 11 min. with ReLSG. Six patients (11.5%) had seven postoperative procedure-specific complications. Significant hemorrhage occurred in three patients. Two cases of leakage were encountered with each procedure. LOAGB Patients had lower mean final weight (76.2 ± 10.5 vs 85.3 ± 13), lower mean Final BMI (26.4 ± 2.5 vs 29.7 ± 2.9) and higher mean percentage of excess weight loss (EWL%) (83.6 ± 13.5% vs 60.29 ± 14.6%). All RLOAGB patients and 77.8% of ReLSG patients had EWL% > 50%. RLOAGB patients had higher EWL% compared to ReLSG (p < 0.001). Insufficient WL (IWL) patients had higher EWL% compared to weight regain (WR) patients (p = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

Both procedures (RLOAGB and ReLSG) were relatively safe and effective in terms of WL. RLOAGB led to higher WL compared to ReLSG in all types of patients despite higher Caloric intake. IWL patients had more WL compared to WR patients. WL was not related to GT dilation type. Large-scale longer-FU studies are still needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PACTR202310644487566 (retrospectively registered).

Efficacy of endoscopic resuturing versus pharmacotherapy to treat weight recidivism after endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A subset of patients experience weight recidivism after primary endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (P-ESG). Available options for management of weight regain include initiation of antiobesity medications (AOMs) or redo ESG (R-ESG). The comparative effectiveness of these options is not clear.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of patients undergoing ESG. From 2013 to 2021, 79 patients who were started on AOM or underwent R-ESG for management of weight recidivism after P-ESG were included. The primary outcome of this study was final total body weight loss (TBWL) at the end of follow-up.

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients were started on AOM and 24 patients underwent R-ESG. Age, gender distribution, and baseline body mass index did not differ significantly between groups. The proportion of noncompliant patients (defined as patients who missed their first post-ESG follow-up visit) was significantly higher in the AOM group compared with the R-ESG group (67% vs 35%, P = .012). The additional TBWL after R-ESG was significantly (both clinically and statistically) better than after initiation of AOM (9.5% ± 7.2% vs 2.1% ± 8.6%, respectively; P = .001). Final TBWL clearly favored R-ESG over AOM for treatment of weight recidivism (19.9% ± 10.4% vs 13.6% ± 9.2%, P = .028).

CONCLUSIONS

R-ESG is an effective treatment to induce weight loss after experiencing weight recidivism. These results highlight an important advantage of ESG as a repeatable minimally invasive procedure.

Weight Reduction Percentile Charts: 2-Year Follow-up Results of OAGB and RYGB Post Bariatric Surgery

PURPOSE

Using a single percentile chart provides us with high standards for the evaluation and accurate investigation of sufficient weight loss after bariatric surgery, counseling, and treating patients in an evidence-based way. Creating percentile charts of weight loss for gastric bypass is the aim of this study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study was based on data from patients who underwent RYGB or OAGB from February 2008 to February 2020. The lambda-mu-sigma (LMS) method was used to estimate the reduction in body mass index (BMI) and six other metrics measured throughout post-operative follow-up. Percentile charts for various metrics have been presented for the first 2 years' post-surgery. We applied a bootstrap sampling method to evaluate percentile validity.

RESULTS

We recruited 2579 and 1943 patients who underwent OAGB (75% female) and RYGB (84% female) and were between the ages of 18 and 70 years. The preoperative BMI of patients in the OAGB group was higher than in the RYGB group. Concerning RYGB weight reduction results, the maximum percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) occurs 18 months after surgery and is steady at 24 months. Far above 50%, EWL is achieved after 6 months. OAGB weight loss follows the same trend as RYGB; at 6 months, the %EWL values are slightly higher than RYGB.

CONCLUSIONS

We present the first bariatric weight loss percentile chart for OAGB. It allows evaluation of sufficient and insufficient weight loss at any post-operative point in a visual aspect. Furthermore, it predicts prospective outcomes and guides patient monitoring.

Does One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Expose Patients to Gastroesophageal Reflux: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the incidence of new-onset gastroesophageal reflux, reflux change, esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, and revision due to reflux, gastritis, and marginal ulcer after one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). We performed subgroup analyses based on primary and revisional OAGB and time of follow-up. Meta-analysis of 87 studies with 27,775 patients showed a 6% rate of new-onset reflux after OAGB. Preoperative reflux status did not change significantly after OAGB. The rate of esophagitis and Barrett's esophagus was 15% and 1%, respectively. The new-onset reflux rate after OAGB was significantly higher than gastric bypass but not different with sleeve gastrectomy. The current study showed a relatively low rate of reflux and its complications after OAGB, but it was significantly higher than Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

Revisional surgery after restrictive surgery: midterm outcomes of a tertiary center

INTRODUCTION

Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) is a challenging type of procedure for the surgeons due to its specific morbidity and efficiency. The RBS has a higher prevalence nowadays and this study may help to improve scarce data upon this specific topic.

METHODS

Data from 252 patients undergoing RBS after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) between 2005 and 2019, were analyzed at 2 years of follow up. A subgroup analysis of third procedure was also performed.

RESULTS

Overall morbidity occurred in 35 patients (37%) in the LSG group and 40 patients (25%) in the LAGB group (p = 0.045). At 2 years of RBS, mean weight was 92.8 ± 26.7 kg, BMI was 33.1 ± 8.56 kg/m2 for patients who had RBS after LSG. When RBS was performed after LAGB, mean weight at 2 years was 90.1 ± 20.7 kg and BMI was 32.5 ± 6.45 kg/m2. TWL for RBS performed after LSG was 12.7 ± 16.4% versus 25.5 ± 10.3% after LAGB (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

RBS after LSG seems to lead to higher overall morbidity whereas RBS after LAGB lead to more perioperative issues.

The Effect of Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass After Sleeve Gastrectomy on Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease, Compared with Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Symptoms and Quality of Life Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is common after sleeve gastrectomy (SG). We aimed to evaluate the effect of revisional one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) on GERD, compared with revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) METHODS: A retrospective single-center study of a prospectively maintained patient registry (2018-2022). All patients with GERD undergoing OAGB and RYGB after SG were retrieved and included in the study.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight SG patients had conversion to OAGB (n=31) and RYGB (n=47). Baseline characteristics were similar except age (43.8±11.5 vs. 50.3±13.4 years; p=0.03), body mass index (39.9±8.8 vs. 30.6±6 kg/m2; p<0.001), time interval (8±2.7 vs. 6.4±3.4 years; p=0.01), and sleep apnea (29% vs 8.5%; p=0.01), respectively. There was no significant difference between groups in number of patients consuming proton pump inhibitors (70.1% vs. 72.3%; p=0.66), GERD-health-related quality of life (HRQL) score (9.6±7.2 vs. 13.1±8; p=0.06), and pathological endoscopic findings (48.4% vs. 46.8%; p=0.89). Major complication rates were 0% vs. 8.5% (p=0.09). At 32.4 months follow-up, total weight loss was 22%±12.9 and 4.4%±14.6 (p<0.001), GERD resolution 77.4% and 91.9% (p=0.03), HRQL scoring improved to 1.7±4.5 and 1.7±2.7; p=0.94 for OAGB and RYGB, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SG conversion to RYGB provides better chances for definitive treatment of GERD. OAGB results in good symptom resolution and improved quality of life and may be considered for post-SG GERD treatment. The most appropriate solution should be individualized to each patient.

Combined laparoscopic pouch and loop resizing as a revisional procedure for weight regain after primary laparoscopic one-anastomosis gastric bypass

Introduction

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) presents a satisfactory long-term outcome in terms of weight loss, amelioration of comorbidities and low morbidity. However, some patients may present insufficient weight loss or weight regain. In this study, we tackle a case series evaluating the efficiency of the combined laparoscopic pouch and loop resizing (LPLR) as a revisional procedure for insufficient weight loss or weight regain after primary laparoscopic OAGB.

Materials and Methods

We included eight patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 with a history of weight regain or insufficient weight loss after laparoscopic OAGB, who underwent revisional laparoscopic intervention by LPLR between January 2018 and October 2020 at our institution. We conducted a 2 years' follow-up. Statistics were performed using International Business Machines Corporation® SPSS® software for Windows version 21.

Results

The majority of the eight patients were males (62.5%), with a mean age of 35.25 at the time of the primary OAGB. The average length of the biliopancreatic limb created during the OAGB and LPLR were 168 ± 27 and 267 ± 27 cm, respectively. The mean weight and BMI were 150.25 ± 40.73 kg and 48.68 ± 11.74 kg/m2 at the time of OAGB. After OAGB, patients were able to reach an average lowest weight, BMI and per cent of excess weight loss (%EWL) of 89.5 ± 28.85 kg, 28.78 ± 7.47 kg/m2 and 75.07 ± 21.62%, respectively. At the time of LPLR, patients had a mean weight, BMI and %EWL of 116.12 ± 29.03 kg, 37.63 ± 8.27 kg/m2 and 41.57 ± 12.99%, respectively. Two years after the revisional intervention, the mean weight, BMI and %EWL were 88.25 ± 21.89 kg, 28.44 ± 4.82 kg/m2 and 74.51 ± 16.54%, respectively.

Conclusion

Combined pouch and loop resizing is a valid option for revisional surgery following weight regain after primary OAGB, leading to adequate weight loss through enhancement of the restrictive and malabsorptive effect of OAGB.

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.

The effect of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass compared with omega-loop gastric bypass on weight loss, perioperative surgical events, and comorbidities

BACKGROUND

In comparison to conservative therapy, bariatric surgery has shown many reasonable results. The current study investigates whether Omega-loop-gastric-bypass (OAGB) or Roux-en-Y gastric-bypass (RYGB) improves weight loss, comorbidities, and perioperative complications.

METHODS

The study included 28,683 patients after RYGB and OAGB. Outcome criteria were perioperative morbidity, perioperative complications, and remission of comorbidities after one year of follow-up.

RESULTS

Of them 14,253 patients had completed a one-year follow-up (13,483 patients by RYGB and 770 by OAGB). BMI reduction was a significant difference in favor of OAGB (17.5±5.6 kg/m² for OAGB vs. 15.2±5.0 for RYGB; P<0.001). The %EWL was not significantly different between the two groups (P=0.073). There was also no significant difference in perioperative complications between the two groups (overall P>5%). Significant differences in favor of OAGB were observed in remission of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) (P<0.001), and sleep apnea (P=0.002). Remission of reflux was more observed in RYGB than OAGB (P<0.001). Operating time was significantly higher in RYGB than OAGB (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with RYGB, OAGB showed significant advantages in many respects. In particular, remission of comorbidities was significantly better after OAGB than in patients after RYGB during the one-year follow-up period. Nevertheless, many other factors such as medical history, long-term expected goals of bariatric surgery, and preexisting comorbidities should be taken into account when determining indications between the two procedures. Further studies with longer follow-up periods should be conducted to determine the efficacy of the two methods more accurately.

Efficacy and Safety of Sleeve Gastrectomy or One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Conversion Following Adjustable Gastric Banding

BACKGROUND

Given revision or conversion surgery is required in up to 60% of patients who had adjustable gastric band (LAGB), we compared safety and efficacy of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) as conversion surgical procedures in patients with suboptimal response or weight recurrence following LAGB.

METHODS

Conversion surgery was performed in 335 patients between 2016 and 2020. Weight loss, early and late-stage complications, and comorbidity outcomes were reviewed and analyzed.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-three patients underwent cSG (BMI: 38.3 ± 8.3 kg/m²), and 172 patients underwent cOAGB (BMI: 45.2 ± 9.3 kg/m²). Percent total body weight loss (%TWL) was 28.7 ± 9.9% at 12 months, 30.3 ± 12.8% at 2 years, 31.0 ± 14.5% at 3 years, and 31.1 ± 14.7% at 4 years following OAGB, which was significantly higher than SG; 18.4 ± 8.7%, 18.8 ± 9.8%, 19.3 ± 11.1%, and 16.9 ± 10.9%, respectively (p < 0.0001). Remission of comorbidities, regardless of conversion procedure type, was 20.8% for hypertension (HT), 52% for dyslipidemia (DLD), 60% for type 2 diabetes (DM), 64% for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), and 76% for insulin resistance (IR).There were no leaks or deaths following SG or OAGB. A twofold greater frequency of complications was seen in the OAGB group vs SG group (15.1% and 6.7%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Significant weight loss, acceptable complication rates, and similar remission of comorbidities were seen regardless of the type of conversion procedure. Prospective randomized clinical trials are recommended for further elucidation of long-term outcomes.

Comparing Patient Selection and 30-day Outcomes Between Single Anastomosis Gastric Bypass and Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Retrospective Cohort Study of 47,384 Patients

PURPOSE

Single anastomosis gastric bypass (SAGB) offers a novel bariatric procedure with increasing popularity. However, its adoption, patient selection, and short-term safety remain poorly characterized.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The 2020 Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) was analyzed comparing SAGB to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Bivariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression models compared difference between groups and factors associated with 30-day serious complications and mortality.

RESULTS

Overall, 47,384 patients were evaluated, with 1344 (2.8%) undergoing SAGB. SAGB patients had a higher BMI (45.2 ± 7.6 kg/m² vs 44.6 ± 7.9 kg/m², p = 0.006) and younger age (44.3 ± 12.1 years vs. 45.4 ± 11.5 years, p = 0.0008) than RYGB patients respectively. SAGB patients were less likely to have GERD (42.6% SAGB vs. 45.7% RYGB, p = 0.02), sleep apnea (37.8% SAGB vs. 41.1% RYGB, p = 0.02), and chronic steroid use (1.3% SAGB vs. 2.2% RYGB, p = 0.04). There were no significant difference in diabetes, hypertension, or dyslipidemia rates. Operative length for SAGB was significantly less than for RYGB (101 ± 53.7 min SAGB vs. 131.5 ± 63.3 min RYGB, p < 0.0001). SAGB was independently associated with decreased serious complications (4.7% vs. 8.4%, p < 0.0001) within 30 days compared to RYGB. Additionally, SAGB patients were less likely to experience reoperation (1.6% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.03), and readmission (2.2 vs. 5.8%, p < 0.0001) compared to RYGB respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to RYGB, patients undergoing SAGB were younger with marginally higher BMI. After adjusting for comorbidities, SAGB was associated with decreased odds of serious complications. Ongoing prospective studies analyzing long-term outcomes following SAGB remain needed.

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.

Patient Selection in One Anastomosis/Mini Gastric Bypass-an Expert Modified Delphi Consensus

PURPOSE

One anastomosis/mini gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB) is up to date the third most performed obesity and metabolic procedure worldwide, which recently has been endorsed by ASMBS. The main criticisms are the risk of bile reflux, esophageal cancer, and malnutrition. Although IFSO has recognized this procedure, guidance is needed regarding selection criteria. To give clinicians a daily support in performing the right patient selection in OAGB/MGB, the aim of this paper is to generate clinical guidelines based on an expert modified Delphi consensus.

METHODS

A committee of 57 recognized bariatric surgeons from 24 countries created 69 statements. Modified Delphi consensus voting was performed in two rounds. An agreement/disagreement among ≥ 70.0% of the experts was considered to indicate a consensus.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved for 56 statements. Remarkably, ≥ 90.0% of the experts felt that OAGB/MGB is an acceptable and suitable option "in patients with Body mass index (BMI) > 70, BMI > 60, BMI > 50 kg/m² as a one-stage procedure," "as the second stage of a two-stage bariatric surgery after Sleeve Gastrectomy for BMI > 50 kg/m² (instead of BPD/DS)," and "in patients with weight regain after restrictive procedures. No consensus was reached on the statement that OAGB/MGB is a suitable option in case of resistant Helicobacter pylori. This is likely as there is a concern that this procedure is associated with reflux and its related long-term complications including risk of cancer in the esophagus or stomach. Also no consensus reached on OAGB/MGB as conversional surgery in patients with GERD after restrictive procedures. Consensus for disagreement was predominantly achieved "in case of intestinal metaplasia of the stomach" (74.55%), "in patients with severe Gastro Esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)(C,D)" (75.44%), "in patients with Barrett's metaplasia" (89.29%), and "in documented insulinoma" (89.47%).

CONCLUSION

Patient selection in OAGB/MGB is still a point of discussion among experts. There was consensus that OAGB/MGB is a suitable option in elderly patients, patients with low BMI (30-35 kg/m²) with associated metabolic problems, and patients with BMIs more than 50 kg/m² as one-stage procedure. OAGB/MGB can also be a safe procedure in vegetarian and vegan patients. Although OAGB/MGB can be a suitable procedure in patients with large hiatal hernia with concurrent hiatal hernia, it should not be offered to patients with grade C or D esophagitis or Barrett's metaplasia.

Single-Anastomosis Sleeve Jejunal (SAS-J) Bypass as Revisional Surgery After Primary Restrictive Bariatric Procedures

Purpose

Single-anastomosis sleeve jejunal (SAS-J) bypass is the modification of a single-anastomosis sleeve ileal (SASI) bypass with a short biliary limb. SAS-J bypass is reported to be a good primary bariatric procedure. This study aimed to evaluate the results of SAS-J bypass as a revisional surgery after failed primary restrictive bariatric procedures.

Material and Methods

This was a prospective cohort study including 43 patients who underwent SAS-J bypass as a revisional surgery for weight regain after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB), or laparoscopic gastric plication.

Results

Of the total patients, 35 (81.4%) were female, and 8 (18.6%) were male. The mean BMI was 46.3 kg/m². The mean age was 41 years. Thirty-two patients (74.4%) had a failed sleeve, 9 (20.9%) had a failed LAGB, and 2 (4.7%) had a failed gastric plication. The mean operative time was 104 min. Intra-abdominal bleeding occurred in 1 case (2.3%), and intraluminal bleeding occurred in 3 cases (7%). No case (0%) developed a leak. The percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) reached 76.5% after 1 year. Type 2 diabetes mellitus remission occurred in all diabetic patients, hypertension remitted in 80%, hyperlipidemia remitted in 83.3%, and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome improved in all cases. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms were improved in 86.7% of patients. Significant biliary gastritis occurred in 4 patients (9.3%). Dumping syndrome was reported in 4 patients (9.3%).

Conclusions

SAS-J bypass was effective as a salvage surgery after failed restrictive bariatric procedures, but long-term follow-up is needed.

Graphical abstract

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.

Outcomes and Effects of 250-cm Biliopancreatic Limb One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass in Patients with BMI > 50 kg/m2 with Total Bowel Length > 6 m: a 2-Year Follow-up

Background

There is a controversy on the suitable bariatric procedure for patients with BMI > 50 kg/m². Many surgeons prefer the Roux en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) while others resort to long biliopancreatic limb (BPL) one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB).

Methods

This study included patients with BMI > 50 kg/m² who underwent 250-cm BPL OAGB with total bowel length (TBL) > 6 m and completed 24-month follow-up from July 2015 to November 2021. Demographic data with preoperative weight, BMI, hypertension (HTN), DM (HbA1C), Hb, iron, calcium, albumin, vitamin D, and parathormone levels (PTH) were recorded. Operative time, total bowel length (TBL), residual length (RBL), complications and postoperative weight, BMI, % of total weight loss (%TWL), HTN, DM, and alkaline reflux as well as Hb, iron, calcium, albumin, vitamin D, and PTH levels were recorded at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months.

Results

OAGB had a significant decrease in weight, BMI (25.6 ± 3.4 kg/m² at 24 months) with %TWL of 48 ± 5% at 24 months. TBL and RBL were 6.7 ± 0.65 and 4.2 ± 0.65 m respectively. %BL (RBL/TBL*100) was 62.4 ± 3.3%. The HbA1C, HTN, and alkaline reflux incidence were 5.5 ± 0.29 gm%, 1.4%, and 3.7% respectively at 24 months. Hb, iron, calcium, albumin, and vitamin D showed a significant decrease but still within normal range, and PTH showed a significant increase at 24 months.

Conclusion

Long BP (250 cm) OAGB in patients with BMI > 50 kg/m² with TWL > 6 m had good results in the achievement of weight loss and weight maintenance goals with remission of associated comorbidities as HTN and DM.

Graphical abstract

Severe malnutrition after single anastomosis sleeve jejunal bypass (SASJ) surgery due to a rare surgical complication: Report of the case

Introduction

Bariatric procedures rates are increased due to the epidemic in obesity. Up to 50% of patients operated with vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) procedures experience failure or complications in the mid- and long-term and present for revision bariatric surgery. Despite the increase in revisions, their safety and efficacy remain controversial.

Case presentation

A 44-year-old female patient with severe malnutrition after single anastomosis sleeve jejunal bypass (SASJ) surgery was referred to this center. SASJ was the chosen bariatric procedure for her after the first failed VBG. She was unable to swallow anything. Upper GI endoscopy was done and the laparoscopic prolene mesh used in the first bariatric surgery (VBG) was seen inside the gastric lumen. Total parental nutrition was initiated and continued for 12 days in this medical center and then she was candidate for exploratory laparoscopy.

Clinical discussion

Using prophylactic preperitoneal Prolene mesh during wound closure in bariatric surgery is safe and effective in preventing incisional hernia development. During the revision bariatric surgeries, surgeons should be careful about the used mesh in the first bariatric surgery.

Conclusion

Surgeons should be aware of the management of rare surgical complications that might lead to malnutrition which is insidious.

Level of evidence

V

•

Bariatric surgeries have increased life expectancy and reduced the complications of obesity.

•

Up to 50% of patients operated with vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) procedures experience failure or complications and present for revision bariatric surgery.

•

During the revision bariatric surgeries, surgeons should be careful about the used mesh in the first bariatric surgery.

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.

Quality of Life After Bariatric Surgery-a Systematic Review with Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Comprehensive analysis and comparison of HRQoL following different bariatric interventions through systematic review with network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

Different types of bariatric surgeries have been developed throughout the years. Apart from weight loss and comorbidities remission, improvement of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is an important outcome of metabolic surgery.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus databases have been searched up to April 2020. Inclusion criteria to the analysis were (1) study with at least 2 arms comparing bariatric surgeries; (2) reporting of HRQoL with a validated tool; (3) follow-up period of 1, 2, 3, or 5 years. Network meta-analysis was conducted using Bayesian statistics. The primary outcome was HRQoL.

RESULTS

Forty-seven studies were included in the analysis involving 26,629 patients and 11 different surgeries such as sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), gastric bypass (LRYGB), one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), and other. At 1 year, there was significant difference in HRQoL in favor of LSG, LRYGB, and OAG compared with lifestyle intervention (SMD: 0.44; 95% CrI 0.2 to 0.68 for LSG, SMD: 0.56; 95% CrI 0.31 to 0.8 for LRYGB; and SMD: 0.43; 95% CrI 0.06 to 0.8 for OAGB). At 5 years, LSG, LRYGB, and OAGB showed better HRQoL compared to control (SMD: 0.92; 95% CrI 0.58 to 1.26, SMD: 1.27; 95% CrI 0.94 to 1.61, and SMD: 1.01; 95% CrI 0.63 to 1.4, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

LSG and LRYGB may lead to better HRQoL across most follow-up time points. Long-term analysis shows that bariatric intervention results in better HRQoL than non-surgical interventions.

Weight-loss thresholds after bariatric surgery and cardiovascular outcomes: more is better

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Whether the extent of weight loss (WL) modulates bariatric surgery (BS) cardiovascular benefits has scarcely been assessed. Several WL thresholds have been commonly used to classify BS patients as good or poor responders without a proven clinical relevance. We examined the relationship between the magnitude of WL after BS and post-surgery major adverse cardiovascular-event (MACE) incidence. We also compared the performance of three different insufficient weight-loss (IWL) criteria for their association with MACE.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

All individuals who underwent a primary Roux-en Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in our institution at least six years before data analysis (12/2020) were included in the study. Data on MACE were available in 1638 of 1700 participants (96.4%). Proportional-hazard Cox analyses were performed to ascertain the association between MACE, WL, and the three IWL criteria. IWL was defined as: <50% excess weight loss (<50% EWL), <20% total body-weight loss (<20% TBWL), and -1 standard deviation of alterable weight-loss percentage (<1 SD% AWL).

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 10.2 ± 2.8 years, 86 participants experienced a first post-surgery MACE. Higher WL at one year (HR: 0.77 (95% CI: 0.61-0.98)) and 5 years (HR: 0.63 (95% CI: 0.42-0.92)) was related to a lower incidence of MACE. All short-term criteria for defining IWL were similarly associated with MACE, yet <1 SD% AWL identified more at-risk subjects. Five-year TBWL < 20% and 5-year <1 SD-AWL% were significantly associated with a higher risk for CV events. TBWL < 20% identified more subjects at risk.

CONCLUSIONS

The extent of WL is closely related to long-term MACE incidence. Patients who lost -1SD% AWL at one year or <20% TBWL at five years may be considered poor responders.

Laparoscopic One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Effects on Pre-existing Mild-to-Moderate Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in Patients with Obesity: a Randomized Controlled Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with obesity having GERD usually undergo Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as the procedure of choice. However, the emergence of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) as a less time-consuming operation with fewer complications offers a potential option for these patients.

STUDY DESIGN

This randomized controlled trial included 80 patients (out of 457 screened) with mild-to-moderate GERD that were equally divided into two groups for OAGB and RYGB. GERD was diagnosed by 20-item questionnaire, upper endoscopy, 24-h pH monitoring, and manometry. Follow-up at 6 and 12 months was done.

RESULTS

No significant differences were found between the two groups regarding demographic data, comorbidities, and weight loss. OAGB had less operative time and fewer complications. Both procedures had comparable favorable effects in reducing the GERD symptoms evidenced by upper endoscopy, 24-h pH monitoring, and manometry.

CONCLUSION

OAGB is a promising bariatric procedure in weight loss for patients with obesity having mild-to-moderate GERD (up to grade B esophagitis by Los Angeles score). Furthermore, wide-scale studies and on more severe degrees of GERD are required to fully understand its benefits in GERD patients with obesity.

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) in patients with BMI < 30 kg/m2 and diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2)

INTRODUCTION

type-2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) is a major health problem, as it leads to increased morbidity and mortality. Metabolic surgery has shown good results in glycemic control; however, its use has not become popular.

OBJECTIVES

to evaluate DM2 remission, as well as changes in body mass index (BMI), in overweight diabetic patients after undergoing metabolic surgery.

METHODS

a retrospective review was carried out of all patients with DM2 and BMI between 25 and 29.9 kg/m2 who underwent laparoscopic one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) as metabolic procedure between 2016 and 2019.

RESULTS

a total of 15 patients were included with a mean age of 46.6 ± 11.25 years. Mean BMI was 28.41 ± 0.94 kg/m2. Average duration was 5.4 ± 2.79 years, and presurgical fasting glucose was 288.53 ± 65.22 mg/dL. Preoperative glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) was 9.58 ± 1.66 %. Two years after surgery HbA1c was 5.21 ± 0.26 %. The remission rate of DM2 was 100 %. All patients maintained a normal BMI range.

CONCLUSIONS

OAGB is a valid alternative for complete DM2 remission no matter if it is not accompanied by some degree of obesity, since in this case the length of the biliopancreatic limb and common channel is modified to make a less malabsorptive procedure.

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.

Intrathoracic Migration of Gastric Sleeve Affects Weight Loss as well as GERD-an Analysis of Remnant Gastric Morphology for 100 Patients at One Year After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is now frequently performed as a definitive bariatric procedure. The aim of the study was to evaluate the detailed morphology of remnant stomachs after SG with respect to volume and sleeve migration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a review of prospectively collected data on patients that completed a 12-month postop examination, which included CT volumetry of the sleeve, and a questionnaire that addressed postop food tolerance. CT volumetry study included total sleeve volume (TSV), tube volume (TV), antral volume (AV), tube/antral volume ratio (TAVR), and the presence of intrathoracic sleeve migration (ITSM).

RESULTS

One hundred patients were included in this study. Mean %TWL (total weight loss) at 12 months postop was 31.1% (14.3~55.5), and mean TSV, TV, AV, and TAVR were 188.3 ± 67.3 ml, 81.3 ± 38.5 ml. 107.0 ± 45.1 ml, and 0.846 ± 0.514 respectively. TSV was not correlated significantly with %TWL at 12 months postop (r=-0.140, p=0.164). Thirty patients (30/100, 30%) showed ITSM. Patients with ITSM had a significantly lower mean GER score (5.9 ± 2.3 vs. 7.5±1.9, p=0.001), and a higher proportion showed suboptimal weight loss (43.3% vs. 15.7%, p=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Mean TSV was not found to be significantly correlated with %TWL at 12 months postop. The presence of ITSM indicated more frequent GER symptoms and a higher probability of suboptimal weight loss.

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.

Morphologic Study of Gastric Sleeves by CT Volumetry at One Year after Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is now frequently performed as a definitive bariatric procedure. The aim of the study was to evaluate the detailed morphology of remnant stomachs after SG with respect to volume and sleeve migration.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of prospectively collected data on patients that completed a 12-month postop examination, which included CT volumetry of sleeve, and a questionnaire that addressed postop food tolerance. CT volumetry study included total sleeve volume (TSV), tube volume (TV), antral volume (AV), tube/antral volume ratio (TAVR), and the presence of intrathoracic sleeve migration (ITSM).

RESULTS

Fifty-five patients were included in this retrospective study. Mean %TWL (% total weight loss) at 12 months postop was 32.8% (14.3-55.5), and mean TSV, TV, AV, and TAVR were 166.6±63.3 ml, 68.9±35.4 ml, 97.7±42.9 ml, and 0.8±0.6 respectively. TSV was not correlated significantly with %TWL at 12 months postop (r=-0.069, P=0.619). Fourteen patients (14/55, 25.5%) showed ITSM by CT. Patients with ITSM had a significantly lower mean GER score (5.1±2.0 vs. 7.3±2.0, P=0.001), a lower total food tolerance score (21.6±3.8 vs. 24.4±4.6, P=0.048), and a higher proportion showed suboptimal weight loss (35.7% vs. 9.8%, P=0.023).

CONCLUSION

Mean TSV was not found to be significantly correlated with %TWL at 12 months postop. Patients with suboptimal weight loss had higher mean TAVR, and the presence of ITSM indicated more frequent GER symptoms, lower food tolerance, and a higher probability of suboptimal weight loss.

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.

Standardized reporting of co-morbidity outcome after bariatric surgery: low compliance with the ASMBS outcome reporting standards despite ease of use

BACKGROUND

Despite the publication of the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) Outcome Reporting Standards in 2015, there is still a great variety in definitions used for reporting remission of co-morbidities after bariatric surgery. This hampers meaningful comparison of results.

OBJECTIVE

To assess compliance with the ASMBS standards in current literature, and to evaluate use of the standards by applying them in a report on the outcomes of 5 co-morbidities after bariatric surgery.

SETTING

Two clinics of the Dutch Obesity Clinic, location Den Haag and Velp, and three affiliated hospitals: Haaglanden Medical Center in Den Haag, Groene Hart Hospital in Gouda, and Vitalys Clinic in Velp.

METHODS

A systematic search in PubMed was conducted to identify studies using the ASMBS standards. Besides, the standards were applied to a cohort of patients who underwent a primary bariatric procedure between November 2016 and June 2017. Outcomes of co-morbidities were determined at 6 and 12 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Ten previous studies applying ASMBS definitions were identified by the search, including 6 studies using portions of the definitions, and 4 using complete definitions for 3 co-morbidities or in a small population. In this study, the standards were applied to 1064 patients, of whom 796 patients (75%) underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and 268 patients (25%) underwent sleeve gastrectomy. At 12 months, complete remission of diabetes (glycosylated hemoglobin <6%, off medication) was reached in 63%, partial remission (glycosylated hemoglobin 6%-6.4%, off medication) in 7%, and improvement in 28% of patients (n = 232/248, 94%). Complete remission of hypertension (normotensive, off medication) was noted in 8%, partial remission (prehypertensive, off medication) in 23% and improvement in 63% (n = 397/412, 96%). Remission rate for dyslipidemia (normal nonhigh-density lipoprotein, off medication) was 57% and improvement rate was 19% (n = 129/133, 97%). Resolution of gastroesophageal reflux disease (no symptoms, off medication) was observed in 54% (n = 265/265). Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome improved in 90% (n = 157/169, 93%).

CONCLUSIONS

Compliance with the ASMBS standards is low, despite ease of use. Standardized definitions provided by the ASMBS guideline could be used in future research to enable comparison of outcomes of different studies and surgical procedures.