Intragastric Balloon Versus Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty for the Treatment of Obesity: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Efficacy of intragastric botulinum toxin A injection on patients with side effects caused by intragastric balloon placement intolerance: A case series study

RATIONALE

Obesity is a global health concern, with intragastric balloon (IGB) placement serving as a nonsurgical intervention for weight management. However, intolerance due to severe gastrointestinal side effects often leads to premature removal, limiting its effectiveness. Botulinum toxin A (BTX-A) injection has been proposed as a potential strategy to improve IGB tolerance by modulating gastric motility.

PATIENT CONCERNS

This study reports a case series of patients who developed severe intolerance to IGB placement, including persistent nausea, vomiting, fluid intolerance, dehydration, and reduced urine output, necessitating medical intervention.

DIAGNOSES

Patients were diagnosed with IGB intolerance due to obstructive gastric effects, characterized by impaired gastric emptying and intolerance to oral fluids, leading to dehydration and electrolyte imbalances.

INTERVENTIONS

A total of 14 patients with IGB intolerance were treated with 500 U of BTX-A injected around the pyloric canal. Prokinetic drugs were also administered to support gastric motility. Patients were monitored for 6 months following the intervention.

OUTCOMES

Among the 14 patients, 11 (78.57%) showed a significant improvement in fluid tolerance within 12 hours of BTX-A injection and were able to retain the IGB without additional complications. Three patients (21.43%) did not improve and required early IGB removal. No major adverse effects related to BTX-A injection were observed.

LESSONS

BTX-A injection appears to be a promising adjunctive therapy to improve IGB tolerance in patients experiencing severe intolerance. These findings suggest a potential role for BTX-A in reducing the need for premature balloon removal, thereby enhancing weight loss outcomes. However, further randomized controlled trials with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm its efficacy, optimize dosage, and establish standardized treatment protocols.

Comparative effectiveness of balloons, adjustable balloons, and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty: a network meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and pairwise meta-analyses do not compare all commercially available endoscopic bariatric therapies (EBTs) head-to-head. Therefore, the choice among them is currently made by inference or indirect data. We therefore assessed the comparative efficacy and safety of EBTs through a network meta-analysis.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL from inception for intragastric balloons (IGBs) and from 2013 for endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) until May 2023. Only RCTs comparing any of the currently commercially available EBTs with controls were considered eligible. Outcomes included percentage of total weight loss (%TWL), serious adverse events (SAEs), and intolerability.

RESULTS

We identified 821 citations, of which 10 and 8 were eligible for the qualitative and quantitative analysis, respectively. Considering %TWL at the time of IGB removal, all EBTs were associated with statistically higher %TWL than controls. There were no significant differences among EBTs. However, considering the %TWL at the follow-up closest to 12 months, both ESG and the Spatz3 gastric balloon (Spatz Medical, Fort Lauderdale, Fla, USA) were more effective than the Orbera gastric balloon (Apollo Endosurgery, Austin, Tex, USA), with no statistical difference between ESG and Spatz3. For both outcomes, P score and ranking score suggested that ESG was probably associated with a greater weight loss (.889272 and .899469, respectively), followed by Spatz3 (.822894 and .842773, respectively), and Orbera (.536968 and .507165, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

All currently available EBTs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration are more effective than both diet plus lifestyle intervention and sham procedures with an acceptable safety profile. ESG seems the most effective and may be prioritized for patients fit for both ESG and IGBs. Direct controlled trials between EBTs are warranted to confirm these findings.

Current State of Endoscopic Bariatric Therapies

The obesity epidemic poses a significant global health challenge. Despite proven efficacy, accessibility to bariatric surgery is limited. Endoscopic bariatric therapies offer less invasive alternatives. Reversible space-occupying devices like intragastric balloons are suitable for both primary obesity treatment and bridging to surgery. Restrictive therapies that reduce gastric volume like the primary obesity surgery endoluminal and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty have shown promising short-term results. Diverting devices such as intestinal liners/barriers or magnet-assisted anastomoses aim to replicate surgical effects with lower risks, though efficacy varies. Finally, endoscopic revisional procedures like transoral outlet reduction address weight regain post-bariatric surgery.

The Battle of Endoscopic Bariatric Therapies for Obesity: Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty Versus Endoscopically Inserted Intragastric Balloon-A Pairwise Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies and a Call for Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) represents the latest primary endoscopic intervention for managing obesity. Both ESG and intragastric balloons (IGBs) have demonstrated effectiveness and safety for weight loss. However, there is a paucity of high-quality evidence supporting the superiority of one over the other, and no pairwise meta-analysis of comparative studies has been published to date. Our aim was to conduct a pairwise meta-analysis of comparative studies directly comparing ESG and IGB.

METHODS

We systematically conducted a literature search on PubMed and Google Scholar following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Our search used specific search terms. The Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) Tool was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Data were analyzed using Review Manager (RevMan) 5.4.1 software with a random-effects model. The statistical method used was the Mantel-Haenszel method. For dichotomous data, the effect size was represented using odds ratio (OR), while mean difference (MD) was utilized as the effect size for continuous data.

RESULTS

After screening 967 records, a total of 9 studies met the inclusion criteria for this meta-analysis (5302 patients). The quality assessment categorized 5 studies as having a moderate risk of bias, while 3 studies were classified as having a low risk of bias. Sufficient information was not available for one study to ascertain its overall quality. A statistically significant increase in total weight loss percentage (TWL%) at 1 and 6 months was observed with ESG compared with IGB. In addition, a statistically insignificant decrease in the incidence of adverse events and readmissions was observed with ESG. Furthermore, a statistically significant decrease in the incidence of reintervention was observed with ESG.

CONCLUSIONS

While this study suggests a higher TWL% associated with ESG compared with IGB, drawing definitive conclusions is challenging due to limitations identified during a comprehensive quality assessment of the available literature. We advocate for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) directly comparing the newer IGB (with a 12-mo placement duration) with ESG. However, this study consistently reveals higher rates of early reintervention (re-endoscopy) within the IGB group, primarily necessitated by the removal or adjustment of the IGB due to intolerance. Given the additional intervention required at 6 or 12 months to remove the temporarily placed IGB, this trend may imply that IGB is less economically viable than ESG. Cost-effectiveness analyses comparing ESG and IGB are warranted to provide valuable scientific insights.

The evolution and current state of bariatric endoscopy in Western countries

With the alarmingly increasing prevalence of obesity in the Western world, it has become necessary to provide more acceptable treatment options for patients with obesity. Minimally invasive endoscopic techniques are continuously evolving. Currently, metabolic and bariatric endoscopies encompass several different techniques that can offer significant weight loss and improvement in comorbidities with a favorable safety profile. Restrictive bariatric procedures include the use of intragastric balloons and gastric remodeling techniques with different suturing devices. Several studies have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of these techniques that are widely used in clinical practice. Small intestine-targeted metabolic endoscopy is an intriguing and rapidly evolving field of research, although it is not widespread in routine practice. These techniques include duodenal-jejunal bypass liners, duodenal mucosal resurfacing, and incisionless anastomoses. The aim of this review article is to provide a detailed update on the currently available bariatric endoscopy techniques in Western countries.

Intragastric Balloons: Practical Considerations

Obesity is escalating, projected to affect 17.5% of adults globally and afflict 400 million children by 2035. Managing this intricate and chronic condition demands personalized, multidisciplinary approaches. While dietary changes, lifestyle modifications, and medications yield short-term results, long-term outcomes are often poor, with bariatric surgery standing out as the most effective option. However, only a small fraction undergoes surgery due to various barriers. Intragastric balloon (IGB) emerges as a minimally invasive alternative, approved by major regulatory bodies. This review adresses the pivotal role of IGB in obesity management, delving into its history and technological evolution.

Obesity in adults

Obesity has increased in prevalence worldwide and WHO has declared it a global epidemic. Population-level preventive interventions have been insufficient to slow down this trajectory. Obesity is a complex, heterogeneous, chronic, and progressive disease, which substantially affects health, quality of life, and mortality. Lifestyle and behavioural interventions are key components of obesity management; however, when used alone, they provide substantial and durable response in a minority of people. Bariatric (metabolic) surgery remains the most effective and durable treatment, with proven benefits beyond weight loss, including for cardiovascular and renal health, and decreased rates of obesity-related cancers and mortality. Considerable progress has been made in the development of pharmacological agents that approach the weight loss efficacy of metabolic surgery, and relevant outcome data related to these agents' use are accumulating. However, all treatment approaches to obesity have been vastly underutilised.

Emerging Therapies for Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis (NASH): A Comprehensive Review of Pharmacological and Non-Pharmacological Approaches

Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) has emerged as a significant global health concern, closely linked to the obesity epidemic and metabolic syndrome. This review explores emerging therapies for NASH that go beyond traditional lifestyle modifications. The complex pathophysiology of NASH, involving insulin resistance, lipotoxicity, oxidative stress, and chronic inflammation, offers multiple targets for therapeutic intervention. While lifestyle changes remain fundamental, their limitations in achieving sustained improvements highlight the need for effective pharmacological and interventional therapies. This review discusses novel pharmacological approaches, including farnesoid X receptor (FXR) agonists, peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) agonists, and agents addressing metabolic dysfunction, inflammation, and fibrosis. Promising candidates such as obeticholic acid, lanifibranor, and semaglutide are highlighted, along with combination therapies targeting multiple pathways simultaneously. Non-pharmacological interventions, including bariatric surgery, endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies, and innovative exercise regimens, are also examined for their potential in NASH management. Despite significant advancements, NASH drug development faces challenges due to the disease's complexity, patient heterogeneity, and stringent regulatory requirements. This review also addresses these limitations and explores future directions, including personalized medicine approaches, non-invasive diagnostic tools, and the potential of microbiome modulation and regenerative therapies. The evolving landscape of NASH research emphasizes the need for multidisciplinary approaches integrating advances in diagnostics, therapeutics, and digital health technologies. As the field progresses, the focus remains on developing more effective, personalized, and accessible strategies for preventing, diagnosing, and treating NASH, with the ultimate goal of improving outcomes for patients affected by this increasingly prevalent liver disease.

Stopgap Measures for Obesity Prior to Surgery

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The data on preventive measures for managing obesity prior to surgery is limited. This review highlights the role of stopgap measures for managing obesity before surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Body weight regulation to achieve sustainable weight loss is a gradual process. Regular aerobic exercises, transformative yoga and restrained eating can contribute to a calorie deficit. Behavioural strategies aim to raise awareness, set goals, manage stress, and support adherence to healthier lifestyles. Pharmacotherapy can be adjunctive in inducing weight loss but could be better at maintaining weight. Intragastric balloon and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty are restrictive procedures for patients before surgery. Obesity is a multifaceted chronic disease with adverse health consequences. There is a need to identify contributors to weight gain and treatment should target the cause of obesity. Utilize stop-gap measures and monitor progress for step-up or more intensive treatment. Structured weight loss needs lifelong commitment.

From Early to Mid-Term Results of Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty: A Retrospective Analysis of a Bariatric Center

PURPOSE

Global obesity rates have surged, necessitating effective interventions beyond traditional bariatric and metabolic surgery (BMS). Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty (ESG) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative, addressing limitations of eligibility criteria and patient reluctance associated with BMS. This study aims to present a 3-year experience with ESG, focusing on its mid-term efficacy in weight loss.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective, single-center study included 143 consecutive ESG patients (BMI > 30 kg/m2 or > 25 kg/m2 with obesity associated-diseases) from February 2019 to March 2023. Data on demographics, comorbidities, operative details, and follow-up outcomes were collected. The primary outcome was %TWL ≥ 15% at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were an optimal clinical response (OCR) at 24 and 36 months defined by %TWL ≥ 10% or %EWL ≥ 25%.

RESULTS

ESG demonstrated a mean %TWL of 14.37% at 12 months, aligning with previous studies. Early postoperative complications were minimal (2.1%), with no mortality. Follow-up revealed a peak in weight loss at 9 months, but mid-term OCR was achieved in 41.2% at 3 years. The learning curve showed efficiency improvements after 26 procedures.

CONCLUSION

ESG proves effective at one year, with a %TWL of 14.37%. However, mid-term efficacy beyond 12 months remains challenging, raising questions about the durability of weight loss. Despite a low complication rate, strategies for maintaining a long-term OCR, including potential repeat ESG, warrant further investigation.

How to establish an endoscopic bariatric practice

Obesity is a chronic, progressive, and relapsing disease of excess adiposity that contributes to more than two hundred medical conditions and is projected to affect more than half the adult population of the United States by the year 2030. Given the limited penetrance of traditional bariatric surgery, as well as the cost and adherence barriers to anti-obesity medications, there is growing interest in the rapidly evolving field of endoscopic bariatric therapies (EBTs). EBTs are minimally invasive, same-day, per-oral endoscopic procedures and include endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty, intragastric balloons, and endoscopic bariatric revisional procedures. This field represents an exciting and innovative subspecialty within gastroenterology. However, building a successful endoscopic bariatric practice requires intentional, coordinated, and sustained efforts to overcome the numerous obstacles to entry. Common barriers include acquisition of the technical and cognitive skillset, practice limitations including the availability of nutrition counseling, facility capabilities, direct-to-consumer marketing, and financial pressures such as facility and anesthesia fees. As the highest-volume center for metabolic and bariatric endoscopy in the United States, we provide insights into successfully establishing an endoscopic bariatric program.

Early safety and efficacy comparison of endoscopic bariatric interventions

BACKGROUND

Intragastric balloon (IGB) placement and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) are the 2 primary endoscopic bariatric therapies currently performed in the United States. Procedural selection is often based primarily on patient preference. There is a paucity of comparative data between these interventions.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to compare the short-term safety and efficacy of IGB to ESG in the largest, direct comparative analysis to date.

SETTING

Accredited bariatric centers across the United States and Canada.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent IGB or ESG from 2016 to 2020 from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database. IGB patients were propensity matched (1:1) to ESG patients. We compared readmissions, reinterventions, serious adverse events (SAE), weight loss, procedure time, and length of stay between the 2 interventions. All outcomes were measured within 30 days of the initial procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 1998 pairs of patients who underwent IGB and ESG were propensity matched with no difference in baseline characteristics. Patients who underwent ESG had more readmissions within 30 days. Patients who underwent IGB had more outpatient treatments for dehydration and re-interventions, with 3.7% of patients undergoing early balloon removal less than 30 days from implantation. Both procedures had similarly low rates of SAE (P > .05). ESG led to greater total body weight loss at 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

ESG and IGB are both safe procedures with comparably low rates of SAE. Higher rates of dehydration and re-interventions after IGB suggest that ESG is perhaps better tolerated.

Metabolic and Bariatric Endoscopy: A Mini-Review

We are currently in a worldwide obesity pandemic, which is one of the most significant health problems of the 21st century. As the prevalence of obesity continues to rise, new and innovate treatments are becoming available. Metabolic and bariatric endoscopic procedures are exciting new areas of gastroenterology that have been developed as a direct response to the obesity crisis. These novel interventions offer a potentially reversible, less invasive, safer, and more cost-effective method of tackling obesity compared to traditional bariatric surgery. Minimally invasive endoscopic treatments are not entirely novel, but as technology has rapidly improved, many of the procedures have been proven to be extremely effective for weight loss and metabolic health, based on high-quality clinical trial data. This mini-review examines the existing evidence for the most prominent metabolic and bariatric procedures, followed by a discussion on the future trajectory of this emerging subspecialty.

Bariatric and metabolic surgery in patients with low body mass index: an online survey of 543 bariatric and metabolic surgeons

BACKGROUND

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) in patients with low body mass index patients is a topic of debate. This study aimed to address all aspects of controversies in these patients by using a worldwide survey.

METHODS

An online 35-item questionnaire survey based on existing controversies surrounding MBS in class 1 obesity was created by 17 bariatric surgeons from 10 different countries. Responses were collected and analysed by authors.

RESULTS

A total of 543 bariatric surgeons from 65 countries participated in this survey. 52.29% of participants agreed with the statement that MBS should be offered to class-1 obese patients without any obesity related comorbidities. Most of the respondents (68.43%) believed that MBS surgery should not be offered to patients under the age of 18 with class I obesity. 81.01% of respondents agreed with the statement that surgical interventions should be considered after failure of non-surgical treatments.

CONCLUSION

This survey demonstrated worldwide variations in metabolic/bariatric surgery in patients with class 1 obesity. Precise analysis of these results is useful for identifying different aspects for future research and consensus building.

Impact of Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty in Non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common cause of liver disease worldwide. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) has proven to be feasible, safe, and effective in the management of obesity. We performed the first systematic review and meta-analysis evaluating NAFLD and other metabolic parameters 12 months post-ESG. Four observational studies with a total of 175 patients were included. The results showed a significant (p < 0.05) reduction of 4.85 in hepatic steatosis index (95% CI - 6.02, - 3.67), 0.5 in NAFLD fibrosis score (95% CI - 0.80, - 0.19), 6.32 U/l in ALT (95% CI - 9.52, - 3.11), 17.28% in TWL (95% CI - 18.24, - 16.31), 6.31 kg/m2 in BMI (95% CI - 8.11, - 4.52), 47.97% in EWL (95% CI - 49.10, - 46.84), and 0.51% in HbA1c (95% CI - 0.90, - 0.12). ESG improves liver parameters, provides weight loss, and reduces HbA1c levels in patients suffering from NAFLD.

Effect of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty on gastric emptying, motility and hormones: a comparative prospective study

OBJECTIVE

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) has gained global adoption but our understanding of its mechanism(s) of action and durability of efficacy is limited. We sought to determine changes in gastric emptying (GE), gastric motility (GM), hormones and eating behaviours after ESG.

DESIGN

A priori-designed single-centre substudy of a large US randomised clinical trial, adults with obesity were randomised to ESG or lifestyle interventions (LS) alone. We measured GE, hormones and weight loss and assessed eating behaviours. In a subset of ESG patients, we assessed GM. The primary outcome was the change in T1/2 (min) at 3 months, and secondary outcomes were changes in weight, GE, GM, hormones and eating behaviours. We used t-test analyses and regression to determine the association between GE and weight loss.

RESULTS

36 (ESG=18; LS=18) participated in this substudy. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. At 3 months, T1/2 was delayed in the ESG group (n=17) compared with the LS group (n=17) (152.3±47.3 vs 89.1±27.9; p<0.001). At 12 months, T1/2 remained delayed in the ESG group (n=16) vs control group (n=14) (137±37.4 vs 90.1±23.4; p<0.001). Greater delays in GE at 3 months were associated with greater weight loss. GM was preserved and fasting ghrelin, glucagon-like peptide 1 and polypeptide YY significantly increased 18 months after ESG.

CONCLUSION

ESG promotes weight loss through several key mechanistic pathways involving GE and hormones while preserving GM. These findings further support clinical adoption of this technique for the management of obesity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03406975.

Progress in the study of intragastric occupancy device for weight reduction

Obesity is a global public health problem that imposes a heavy economic burden on society. The current main strategies for treating obesity include lifestyle interventions, pharmacological treatments, endoscopic treatments and metabolic surgery. With the development of medical technology, weight reduction by intragastric occupancy devices represented by intragastric balloons and intragastric capsules are gradually emerging. Intragastric balloons are used to reduce weight by occupying the volume of the stomach with balloons filled with different volumes of gas or liquid, among which ReShape, Orbera, Obalon, Elipse and Spatz balloons are gradually used in patients with mild to moderate obesity due to their non-invasive, high safety and reusable advantages. Intragastric capsules are recommended in overweight and obese patients for weight loss through hydrogels with transient superabsorbent swelling properties and completely noninvasive. Both approaches achieve weight loss by limiting gastric volume, increasing satiety and reducing food intake. Despite the presence of adverse gastrointestinal events associated with nausea, vomiting, and abdominal distention, they offer new ideas for the non-invasive clinical treatment of obesity.

Contemporary medical, device, and surgical therapies for obesity in adults

The goal of obesity management is to improve health. Sustained weight loss of more than 10% overall bodyweight improves many of the complications associated with obesity (eg, prevention and control of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, fatty liver disease, and obstructive sleep apnoea), as well as quality of life. Maintenance of weight loss is the major challenge of obesity management. Like all chronic diseases, managing obesity requires a long-term, multimodal approach, taking into account each individual's treatment goals, and the benefit and risk of different therapies. In conjunction with lifestyle interventions, anti-obesity medications and bariatric surgery improve the maintenance of weight loss and associated health gains. Most available anti-obesity medications act on central appetite pathways to reduce hunger and food reward. In the past 5 years, therapeutic advances have seen the development of targeted treatments for monogenic obesities and a new generation of anti-obesity medications. These highly effective anti-obesity medications are associated with weight losses of more than 10% of overall bodyweight in more than two-thirds of clinical trial participants. Long-term data on safety, efficacy, and cardiovascular outcomes are awaited. Long-term studies have shown that bariatric surgical procedures typically lead to a durable weight loss of 25% and rapid, sustained improvements in complications of obesity, although they have not yet been compared with new-generation highly effective anti-obesity medications. Further work is required to determine optimal patient-specific treatment strategies, including combinations of lifestyle interventions, anti-obesity medications, endoscopic and bariatric surgical procedures, and to ensure equitable access to effective treatments.

A Comprehensive Review on Bariatric Endoscopy: Where We Are Now and Where We Are Going

Background: Obesity is a chronic disease that impairs quality of life and leads to several comorbidities. When conservative therapies fail, bariatric surgical options such as Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) are the most effective therapies to induce persistent weight loss. Over the last two decades, bariatric endoscopy has become a valid alternative to surgery in specific settings. Primary bariatric endoscopic therapies: Restrictive gastric procedures, such as intragastric balloons (IGBs) and endoscopic gastroplasty, have been shown to be effective in inducing weight loss compared to diet modifications alone. Endoscopic gastroplasty is usually superior to IGBs in maintaining weight loss in the long-term period, whereas IGBs have an established role as a bridge-to-surgery approach in severely obese patients. IGBs in a minority of patients could be poorly tolerated and require early removal. More recently, novel endoscopic systems have been developed with the combined purpose of inducing weight loss and improving metabolic conditions. Duodenal mucosal resurfacing demonstrated efficacy in this field in its early trials: significant reduction from baseline of HbA1c values and a modest reduction of body weight were observed. Other endoscopic malabsorptive have been developed but need more evidence. For example, a pivotal trial on duodenojejunal bypasses was stopped due to the high rate of severe adverse events (hepatic abscesses). Optimization of these more recent malabsorptive endoscopic procedures could expand the plethora of bariatric patients that could be treated with the intention of improving their metabolic conditions. Revisional bariatric therapies: Weight regain may occur in up to one third of patients after bariatric surgery. Different endoscopic procedures are currently performed after both RYGB and SG in order to modulate post-surgical anatomy. The application of argon plasma coagulation associated with endoscopic full-thickness suturing systems (APC-TORe) and Re-EndoSleeve have shown to be the most effective endoscopic treatments after RYGB and SG, respectively. Both procedures are usually well tolerated and have a very low risk of stricture. However, APC-TORe may sometimes require more than one session to obtain adequate final results. The aim of this review is to explore all the currently available primary and revisional endoscopic bariatric therapies focusing on their efficacy and safety and their potential application in clinical practice.

The Efficacy Comparison of Endoscopic Bariatric Therapies: 6-Month Versus 12-Month Intragastric Balloon Versus Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Intragastric balloon (IGB) insertion and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) are known to be effective and safe in achieving weight loss. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of a 6-month IGB therapy, a 12-month IGB therapy, and ESG.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the weight loss at IGB (Orbera) removal after 6 months (124 patients), at IGB (Orbera365) removal after 12 months (61 patients) and at 6 and 12 months after ESG (42 and 34 patients, respectively). Postprocedural care, including medication and diet, was the same for all procedures.

RESULTS

Mean TBWL in patients undergoing IGB placement for 6 and 12 months and ESG after 6 and 12 months were 15.2, 15.8, 26.5, and 28.7 kg, respectively. There was no significant difference in the mean %TBWL in patients undergoing IGB placement for 6 or for 12 months (15.3% vs. 14.7%, P = 0.7). ESG patients showed a significantly higher mean %TBWL than IGB patients after 6 months (15.3 vs. 19.8, P = 0.005) and 12 months (14.7 vs. 22.5, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

All three studied methods were effective for achieving weight loss. However, there was no significant difference between 6-month and 12-month IGB therapies outcomes. ESG appeared to be a more effective obesity treatment modality than IGB.

From surgery to endoscopy: the evolution of the bariatric discipline

ABSTRACT

Obesity, with its increasing morbidity and prevalence, is now a worldwide public health problem. Obesity and its related comorbidities impose a heavy burden on societal health and the economy. The practice of bariatric surgery has evolved from its early surgical procedures, many of which are no longer routine operations. With clinical practice, research, and experience, bariatric surgery has gradually become an important last resort for the control of weight and obesity-related metabolic diseases in moderately and severely obese patients. However, there is still room for further improvements in bariatric surgical procedures, especially with regard to long-term issues and complications. Endoscopic weight loss technology has developed rapidly in recent years. The advantages of this technology include minimal invasiveness, an obvious weight loss effect, and few complications, thus filling the gap between medications and lifestyle adjustments and surgical treatment of obesity. Endoscopic weight loss technology may even replace surgical bariatric procedures. This review summarized the current status of bariatric metabolic surgery and newly developed bariatric endoscopic procedures.

Future of Metabolic Endoscopy

Obesity has been escalating as one of the worst public health epidemics. Conservative therapies including lifestyle modifications and weight loss medications have limited efficacy and long-term sustainability. Bariatric surgeries, although effective, remain underutilized due to their cost, safety concerns, and patient acceptance. In the past two decades, endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) have emerged as safe, effective, and less invasive options for the treatment of obesity and its comorbidities, with recent studies reporting favorable outcomes in terms of weight loss and metabolic parameters. This article reviews the major and newly developed EBMTs, with emphasis on their metabolic effects and potential use in the management of metabolic conditions.

Implementing precision medicine in endoscopy practice

In contrast to the "one-size-fits-all" approach, precision medicine focuses on providing health care tailored to individual variabilities. Implementing precision medicine in endoscopy practice involves selecting the appropriate procedures among the endoscopic armamentarium in the diagnosis and management of patients in a logical sequence, jointly considering the pretest probabilities of possible diagnoses, patients' comorbidities and preference, and risk-benefit ratio of the individual procedures given the clinical scenario. The aim of this review is to summarize evidence-supported strategies and measures that may enhance precision medicine in general endoscopy practice.

Severe Gastric Ulcerations With Impending Necrosis in a Patient Who Had Gastric Balloon Insertion Following Previous Sleeve Gastrectomy

In this report, we discuss the case of a 44-year-old obese female patient who had her recently installed intragastric balloon removed due to ulceration in the gastric mucosa, which would have led to necrosis as shown by oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (OGD). In addition, she had symptoms of nausea, vomiting, dysuria, fever, and experienced severe dehydration, which could have resulted in the formation of ureteric and renal stones. Thus, she was rehydrated and was started on antibiotics. She also underwent successful removal of the intragastric balloon aimed at preserving and healing of the remaining gastric mucosa. Post-op findings were unremarkable; however, a tight peptic stricture at the proximal stomach was formed four weeks after her balloon removal. 

Status of bariatric endoscopy–what does the surgeon need to know? A review

BACKGROUND

Obesity is a chronic and multifactorial disease with a variety of potential treatment options available. Currently, there are several multidisciplinary therapeutic options for its management, including conservative, endoscopic, and surgical treatment.

AIM

To clarify indications, technical aspects, and outcomes of bariatric endoscopy.

METHODS

Narrative review of current literature based on electronic databases including MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, and SciELO.

RESULTS

Bariatric endoscopy is in constant development and comprises primary and revisional treatment options as well as management of surgical complications. Various devices act upon different mechanisms of action, which may be individualized to each patient. Despite favorable results for the endoscopic treatment of obesity, prospective randomized studies with long-term follow-up are required to fully validate primary and revisional endoscopic therapies. Regarding the management of bariatric surgery complications, endoscopic therapy may be considered the procedure of choice in a variety of situations. Still, as there is no standardized algorithm, local experience should be considered in decision-making.

CONCLUSION

The treatment of patients with obesity is complex, and a multidisciplinary approach is essential. Bariatric endoscopy has shown impressive results both in the treatment of obesity and its surgical complications, and therefore, must be part of the armamentarium in the fight against this disease.

Primary obesity surgery endoluminal (POSE) for the treatment of obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Primary obesity surgery endoluminal (POSE) utilizes an incision-less operating platform system to create full-thickness plications in the gastric fundus and body (original POSE). Many studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of original POSE for the treatment of obesity.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of available literature in an attempt to evaluate the outcomes of original POSE per the ASGE task force thresholds.

METHODS

Bibliographic databases were systematically searched for studies assessing the outcomes of POSE for the treatment of obesity. All randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that assessed outcomes of POSE were included. Studies were included if they reported percent total weight loss (%TWL) or percent excess weight loss (%EWL) and the incidence of serious adverse events (SAE).

RESULTS

A total of seven studies with 613 patients were included. Two included studies were RCTs, while the remaining were observational studies. Pooled mean %EWL at 3-6 months and 12-15 months were 42.62 (95% CI 37.56-47.68) and 48.86 (95% CI 42.31-55.41), respectively. Pooled mean %TWL at 3-6 months and 12-15 months was 13.45 (95% CI 8.93-17.97) and 12.68 (95% CI 8.13-17.23), respectively. Subgroup analysis of two RCTs showed that weight loss at 1 year was significantly higher in POSE patients (%EWL difference in means 19.45 (95% CI 4.65-34.24, p value = 0.01). The overall incidence of serious adverse events was only 2.84% and included GI bleeding, extra-gastric bleeding, hepatic abscess, severe pain, severe nausea, and severe vomiting. The mean number of total anchors placed in the fundus and body was 13.18 (95% CI 11.77-14.58), and the mean procedure time was 44.55 min (95% CI 36.44-52.65).

CONCLUSION

POSE, a minimally invasive endoscopic bariatric therapy, is a safe and effective modality for the treatment of obesity. The outcomes of POSE meet and surpass the ASGE joint task force thresholds. Future studies should evaluate newer versions of this procedure that emphasize gastric body plication sparing the fundus.

Bariatric and Metabolic Endoscopy: A New Paradigm

The prevalence of obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and metabolic syndromes is increasing globally. Minimally invasive metabobariatric (MB) endoscopic therapies are adjunct treatments that can potentially bridge the gap between surgical interventions and medical therapy. A growing number of MB techniques are becoming available, allowing for more personalized and patient-targeted treatment options for specific disease states. MB techniques are less invasive than surgery and can precisely target different parts of the gastrointestinal tract that may be responsible for the pathophysiology of obesity and metabolic syndromes such as type 2 diabetes mellitus. These alternatives should be selected on an individualized patient basis to balance the expected clinical outcomes and desired anatomical targets with the level of invasiveness and degree of acceptable risk. Each MB intervention presents great flexibility allowing for a tailored intervention and different levels of patient engagement. Patient awareness and motivation are essential to avoid therapy withdrawal and failure. Differences between MB procedures in terms of weight loss and metabolic benefit will be discussed in this review, along with the insights on clinical decision-making processes to evaluate the potential of further evolution and growth of bariatric and metabolic endoscopy.

The Efficacy and Safety of Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty as an Alternative to Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a therapeutic endoscopic technique for reducing the size of the gastric reservoir in obese patients, using a full-thickness endoscopic suturing device. The effectiveness of ESG in weight loss is significantly greater than that of high-intensity diet and lifestyle therapy and lower than that of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). The efficacy at 12 months after ESG in terms of percentage of total body weight loss and excess body weight loss was approximately 16% and 60%, respectively. The well-known predictive factors for increased weight loss by ESG are good compliance with regular monitoring and post-procedure care involving a multidisciplinary team approach. Although the underlying mechanism of weight loss induced by ESG is debatable, delayed gastric emptying and early satiation are some of the proposed mechanisms. The pooled rate of adverse events after ESG reported in several meta-analysis studies ranged from 1.5% to 2.3% and the incidence of new-onset gastroesophageal reflux disease after ESG was negligible, indicating that ESG has a superior safety profile to LSG. Moreover, ESG reduced the risk of obesity-related metabolic comorbidities, evidenced by the reduction in HbA1c level, systolic blood pressure, triglyceride level, and risk of hepatic steatosis and fibrosis; it even improved the quality of life. ESG could be considered safe and qualify as an alternative treatment to LSG.

The Clinical and Metabolic Effects of Intragastric Balloon on Morbid Obesity and Its Related Comorbidities

Obesity is becoming increasingly prevalent worldwide, and its metabolic sequelae lead to a significant burden on healthcare resources. Options for the management of obesity include lifestyle modification, pharmacological treatment, surgery, and endoscopic bariatric therapies (EBTs). Among these, EBTs are more effective than diet and lifestyle modification and are less invasive than bariatric surgery. In recent years, there have been significant advances in technologies pertaining to EBTs. Of all the available EBTs, there is a significant amount of clinical experience and published data regarding intragastric balloons (IGBs) because of their comparatively long development period. Currently, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved three IGBs, including Orbera (Apollo Endosurgery, Austin, TX, USA), ReShape Duo (ReShape Medical, San Clemente, CA, USA), and Obalon (Obalon Therapeutics, Carlsbad, CA, USA). The aim of this review is to summarize the available literature on the efficacy of IGBs in weight loss and their impact on obesity-related metabolic diseases.