Intragastric Balloon: a Retrospective Evaluation of 5874 Patients on Tolerance, Complications, and Efficacy in Different Degrees of Overweight.Obes Surg. 2020;30:4892-4898. [PMID: 32959329 DOI: 10.1007/s11695-020-04985-4]

Is Gastric Balloon Implantation Still an Effective Procedure for the Management of Obesity and Associated Conditions? Findings from a Multi-Center Study

PURPOSE

Both surgical and endoscopic procedures represent a mainstay of obesity treatment. Several procedures have been developed in recent years, although their impact on obesity is variable. This study examines and presents the results of a 6-month gastric balloon implantation (GBI).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The data from the German Bariatric Surgery Registry (GBSR) for the period from 2005 to 2021 were subjected to a multi-center analysis. Six months following GBI, demographic data, the peri-interventional course, weight, BMI reduction, as well as the development of comorbidities (arterial hypertension (aHTN), diabetes mellitus (T2D), reflux (GERD), and sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS)), were evaluated in male and female patients.

RESULTS

Of 3754 patients, 788 (45.3% male, 54.7% female) met the inclusion criteria for the study. Following 6 months of therapy, an average weight loss of 19.3 ± 15.2 kg was observed in male patients, while female patients exhibited an average weight loss of 16.3 ± 13.1 kg (p = 0.013). The EWL was found to be significantly higher in female patients than in male patients (24.8 vs. 18; p < 0.001). BMI reduction, %TWL, and mortality rate showed no significant disadvantage in either group (p > 5%). After 6 months of therapy, there was a significant advantage for women in the remission of aHTN. The remaining comorbidities did not differ significantly between the two groups (p > 5%).

CONCLUSIONS

GBI is an efficacious procedure for the treatment of obese patients with mild obesity and comorbidities or as a bridging procedure prior to planned bariatric surgery.

Safety and Effectiveness of Two Different Fluid-Filled Intragastric Balloons: A Single Center Experience

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study is to compare weight loss and safety outcomes of two different commonly available fluid-filled intragastric balloons (IGBs) used for weight loss.

METHOD

A retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database of adult patients who underwent IGB insertion between July 2020 and November 2021 in a single private clinic in Kuwait. The patient either received the Elipse™ or Orbera365™ balloon and was followed until the end of treatment.

RESULT

A total of 358 patients were included, of which 265 and 93 each received the Elipse and Orbera365 balloons, respectively. The mean age of patients was 32.8 (SD 9), the mean body mass index (BMI) was 35 kg/m2 (SD 4.8), and 72.1% of patients were female. In the Elipse group, 254 patients completed treatment, and 84 patients completed the treatment with Orbera365. Weight loss outcomes were measured at the end of treatment: 4 months after Elipse insertion, and 12 months after Orbera365 insertion. Interim 4 months weight loss outcomes were also measured for the Orbera365 balloon. Patients in the Orbera365 group had significantly better total body weight loss (%TBWL, 14.7 kg [SD 8.9]) compared to the Elipse group (%TBWL 10 kg, [SD 5.6], p ≤ 0.0001) at the end of treatment, while there was no difference in weight loss outcomes between the two balloons at 4 months. There were more complications requiring premature balloon removal in the Orbera365 group (9.7%) compared to the Elipse group (3.4%).

CONCLUSION

IGBs provide significant weight loss with an acceptable safety profile. The Orbera365 ballon shows better weight loss outcomes compared to the Elipse, likely due to longer duration of treatment. However, there was a higher rate of complications requiring premature balloon removal in the Orbera365 group. Studies with larger patient cohort is needed to verify the findings of this study.

Predictors of early removal of intragastric balloon due to intolerance: Insights from a multiethnic Asian cohort

Introduction

Intolerance frequently limits the use of intragastric balloons (IGBs) in the treatment of obesity. This includes refractory nausea, vomiting and abdominal discomfort. Our study aims to identify predictors of balloon intolerance and early removal, which will help to guide patient selection for this intervention and peri-procedure care.

Method

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 54 consecutive patients who underwent IGB insertion from July 2017 to July 2022 in a single tertiary institution in Singapore. Forty-seven (87.0%) patients completed therapy, while 7 patients (13.0%) had early removal of the balloon due to intolerance. Characteristics of both groups were compared.

Results

Multivariate analysis revealed significant associations between early balloon removal and both depression (P=0.012) and anxiety (P=0.001) after adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, height, nulliparity, balloon type and volume. Univariate analysis revealed that anxiety was the main risk factor (P=0.004, odds ratio 9.111, 95% confidence interval 1.624-51.124), while depression was no longer a significant predictor.

Conclusion

Identifying predictors of balloon intolerance and early removal can enhance patient selection and improve peri-procedural care. In patients with a history of depression or anxiety, it is important to ensure adequate counselling and preparation prior to balloon insertion.

Intragastric Balloon as a First Step Before Metabolic Bariatric Surgery in Patients with BMI ≥ 50 kg/m2: are the Results After Balloon Related to Global Outcomes After Surgery?

INTRODUCTION

Patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 50 kg/m2, classified with obesity class IV/V, require complex treatments. Intragastric balloon (IGB) is a possible treatment before metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) that may reduce peri-operative complications. This study evaluates IGB outcomes and complications before MBS in patients with Obesity IV/V, and subsequent MBS results, regarding weight loss and comorbidity resolution.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of all patients with BMI above 50 kg/m2 submitted to IGB before MBS between 2009 and 2023 in a high-volume center. Variables analyzed included weight loss after IGB and MBS, IGB complications, and comorbidity resolution. Suboptimal clinical responses were defined as %TWL < 5% for IGB, %TWL < 20% for MBS, and %TWL < 25% or BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 for IGB + MBS.

RESULTS

Seventy-four patients (mean BMI 58.8 ± 8 kg/m2) were included. After IGB, the mean %TWL was 14.2 ± 8.5%, with a 21.6% complication rate, predominantly nausea and vomiting, and one death. Suboptimal clinical response of IGB affected 13.5% of patients, and 5.4% required early removal. Two years after MBS, the mean %TWL was 38.2 ± 11.6%, mainly due to MBS, yet approximately one-third of %TWL was attributed to IGB. No correlation was found between IGB and MBS outcomes. At 2-year follow-up, 45.1% patients had %TWL ≥ 25 and BMI < 35 kg/m2.

CONCLUSION

The IGB is a treatment option before MBS in patients with Obesity Class IV/V, with acceptable weight loss outcomes but not infrequent complications. A multidisciplinary approach is mandatory, and all treatments must be considered in this difficult subset of patients.

Small Bowel Obstruction Following Dislodgement of an Intragastric Balloon: A Case Report

Obesity remains a significant health burden worldwide, requiring diverse and effective treatment strategies. The intragastric balloon (IGB), developed in the 1980s, offers a non-surgical option for weight management. Despite a decrease in usage, the IGB procedure continues to be an option for patients both domestically and abroad. In this article, we present the case involving a 30-year-old female who presented with severe abdominal complications 18 months after IGB placement in the Dominican Republic, well beyond the recommended six-month period for removal. This case highlights the critical risks associated with delayed IGB removal, including balloon rupture, migration, and symptoms indicative of gastric outlet obstruction. The literature supports increased complication rates with prolonged balloon retention, including risks such as gastric perforation, ulceration, and small bowel obstruction, emphasizing the importance of adhering to removal schedules. Furthermore, the case stresses the need for psychosocial evaluations before weight loss procedures and the necessity of alternative methods like laparoscopic removal when endoscopic extraction is unsuccessful. As obesity management evolves with new treatments like glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogs, ongoing research to understand their interaction with IGBs is crucial. This case underlines the importance of rigorous follow-up care, educating patients about procedural timelines, and conducting comprehensive evaluations to ensure the safety and effectiveness of IGB therapy.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on primary endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies for adults with obesity

This joint ASGE-ESGE guideline provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) in the management of obesity. The document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. It evaluates the efficacy and safety of EBMT devices and procedures that currently have CE mark or FDA-clearance/approval, or that had been approved within five years of document development. The guideline suggests the use of EBMTs plus lifestyle modification in patients with a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2, or with a BMI of 27.0-29.9 kg/m2 with at least 1 obesity-related comorbidity. Furthermore, it suggests the utilization of intragastric balloons and devices for endoscopic gastric remodeling (EGR) in conjunction with lifestyle modification for this patient population.

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on primary endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies for adults with obesity

This joint ASGE-ESGE guideline provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) in the management of obesity. The document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. It evaluates the efficacy and safety of EBMT devices and procedures that currently have CE mark or FDA-clearance/approval, or that had been approved within five years of document development. The guideline suggests the use of EBMTs plus lifestyle modification in patients with a BMI of ≥30 kg/m2, or with a BMI of 27.0-29.9 kg/m2 with at least 1 obesity-related comorbidity. Furthermore, it suggests the utilization of intragastric balloons and devices for endoscopic gastric remodeling (EGR) in conjunction with lifestyle modification for this patient population.

Effect of preoperative intragastric balloon treatment on perioperative and postoperative outcomes after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: A retrospective cohort study

<b><br>Introduction:</b> Intragastric balloon (IGB) insertion is used as a bridging therapy in patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 50 kg/m2 . We arranged a retrospective study to evaluate whether pre-operative IGB treatment influences perioperative and postoperative weight loss outcomes after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG), and especially to evaluate the impact of post - IGB percentage of excessive weight loss (%EWL) on postoperative %EWL.</br> <b><br>Materials and methods:</b> Patients who underwent IGB placement followed by laparoscopic SG were divided into the following groups considering %EWL after IGB: Group 1 <=10.38%; Group 2 >10.38% and <=17.27%; Group 3 >17.27% and <=24.86%; Group 4 >24.86%. 1 year after SG data were collected. The following parameters were compared between groups: operative time, total blood loss, length of stay and weight, BMI, percentage of total weight loss (%TWL), %EWL.</br> <b><br>Results:</b> There were no statistically significant differences between groups in perioperative results. Post-SG %EWL was the highest in intermediate groups: 2 and 3. Post-treatment results were observed: body weight and BMI were the lowest in Group 4 and the highest in Group 1. Post-treatment %EWL was the highest in Group 4, the lowest in Group 1 and grew gradually in subsequent groups.</br> <b><br>Discussion:</b> The study confirmed the impact of weight loss on IGB on postoperative results. The study showed that %EWL after the IGB treatment influences %EWL after SG and most of all affects definitive %EWL after two-stage treatment and it could be a foreshadowing factor of these outcomes.</br> <b><br>Importance:</b> The importance of research for the development of the field %EWL after IGB influences the final BMI and final weight, which means that patients with the greatest %EWL after IGB are more likely to have the greatest postoperative weight loss and overall weight loss.</br>.

Safety and Efficacy of 12-Month Intra-gastric Balloon-Series of over 1100 Patients

BACKGROUND

Intra-gastric balloons (IGB) are a mainstay of endoscopic treatment of overweight and obesity. In recent years, an IGB which can remain in situ for 12 months has been developed. The current study aimed to analyse the safety and efficacy of this 12-month IGB.

METHODS

Consecutive patients receiving the Orbera 365TM IGB (Apollo Endosurgery, TX, USA) between September 2017 and August 2021 were included in a prospective database. Patients received regular follow-up consultations followed by endoscopic removal at 12 months. Demographic data along with weight loss data were collected. All adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

In total, 1149 patients were included in the study. A majority of the patients were female (87.13%). Median body mass index (BMI) prior to insertion was 36.30 kg/m2 (IQR 32.60-40.00 kg/m2). Median absolute weight loss for all patients was 11.36 kg (IQR 6.70-16.82 kg). There was ongoing sustained weight loss until device removal at week 52. For patients with a weight recording at point of IGB removal, median weight loss was greater (15.88 kg, IQR 10.43-21.72) with percentage total body weight loss of 15.38% (IQR 10.99-21.77) and excess weight loss of 53.99% (IQR 32.44-76.30). Increased patient engagement with post-procedural follow-up was associated with increased weight loss (p<0.001). There were 60 total complications (5.22%). Fifty patients required balloon removal due to intolerance. There were eight cases of balloon rupture. There were only two severe complications (0.17%).

CONCLUSION

The current study has confirmed safety of this IGB at 12 months with adverse events comparable to published literature. Weight loss increased up until the point of removal at 12 months.

Ultrasonography Guided Modified BRILMA (Blocking the Cutaneous Branches of Intercostal Nerves in the Middle Axillary Line) Block in Bariatric Surgery

Background: Postoperative pain is one of the major problems after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy besides complications. Management of pain control is still unclear in the obese population. Modified BRILMA (blocking the cutaneous branches of intercostal nerves in the middle axillary line) is a new analgesia technique which is performed by ultrasonography guided through the way between eighth and ninth rib level. This study is to evaluate the efficiency of modified BRILMA in bariatric patients while comparing with trocar site infiltration. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective designed retrospective data analysis study. Patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy between June 2019 and January 2020 were divided into two groups. One group underwent BRILMA block; the other group used traditional trocar site injection. Postoperative pain was followed by using visual analogue scale (VAS) (at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48 hours postoperatively). Results: Thirty patients were included in the study. Twenty-four (80%) of the patients were women, and 6 (20%) of the patients were men. Mean body mass index of patients were 39.83 ± 4.02 kg/m2. Mean operational time was calculated 86.16 ± 19.94 minutes. When the patients' VAS was compared, 12th hour VAS value was statistically less in the BRILMA group. There were no significant differences in other hours' VAS between two groups. When compared with the use of opioid amount, there were no statistically significant difference between the two groups (P = .66), but BRILMA group had less amount. Conclusion: Modified BRILMA is an alternative technique to the use of trocar site bupivacain injection in bariatric surgery. It is new technique that is tried in bariatric population, which is also cost-effective and has less opioid consumption.

Surgical Management of Intra-gastric Balloon Complications, Single-Center Experience, and Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

In Saudi Arabia, the prevalence of obesity has multiplied in the last decades leading to a surge in bariatric surgery and other endoscopic modalities. The intra-gastric balloon (IGB) is the most used endoscopic modality. Surgical management for IGB complications is required for gastrointestinal perforation and/or obstruction. However, the literature seems to underestimate these complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective descriptive study was conducted in King Fahd University Hospital, Saudi Arabia, from Jan 2017 to Dec 2021, including all patients with complicated IGB who necessitated any surgical procedure. Exclusion criteria were patients with complicated IGBs that were only managed conservatively or endoscopically.

RESULTS

A total of 326 patients were admitted with different complications after bariatric procedures. Of them, six patients were referred due to IGB complications that necessitated operative intervention. All patients were young females. Three patients had gastric wall perforation, and were managed by endoscopic removal of the IGBs followed by exploratory laparotomy. One patient had an intestinal obstruction on top of a migrated IGB that was surgically removed. One patient had failed endoscopic retrieval of IGB and required a laparoscopic gastrostomy. Another patient had an esophageal rupture that required left thoracotomy, pleural flap, and insertion of an esophageal stent. All cases were discharged and followed up with no related complications.

CONCLUSION

IGB is an endoscopic alternative, within specific indications, for the management of obesity. However, surgical management may be necessary to manage its complications, including gastrointestinal perforation, IGB migration, and failure of endoscopic removal.

Factors of Affecting the Success of Intragastric Balloon

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to determine the efficacy and safety of intragastric balloon (IGB) application and the factors affecting its success by evaluating the results of patients who underwent IGB.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 277 consecutive patients that underwent IGB between January 2019-September 2020 in our clinic were evaluated. Patients' demographic data, height and weight before the IGB procedure, weight at 6 and 12 months after the procedure, follow-up period, complication status, and whether they received dietician's assistance during the follow-up were recorded.

RESULTS

In 5 (1.8%) patients, IGB was removed for various reasons before the standard period of 6 months. The mean age of the patients was 35.6±9.5 years, the mean baseline weight and body mass index (BMI) was 92.6±14 kg and 33.5±5.4 kg/m 2 respectively. The mean follow-up time was 13±4.9 months, whereas in 146(53.6%) patients the follow-up was≥12 months. In the 6-month follow-up, the mean %excess weight loss and %body weight loss were 65.65±25.19% and 14.69±6.96%, respectively, whereas at the 12-month follow-up they were 32.38±24.79% and 6.56±5.31%, respectively. High BMI (odds ratio=1.2, 95% CI=1.0-1.2) and not receiving dietitian's assistance (odds ratio=8.5, 95% CI=3.1-23.7) were independent risk factors for unsuccessful IGB application at both 6-month and 12-month follow-ups.

CONCLUSION

IGB application is a relatively effective and safe weight loss treatment for overweight and obese individuals. High BMI and not getting help from a dietician are risk factors for failure of IGB. To increase compliance with dieticians and therefore success of IGB application, patients should undergo psychiatric evaluation before IGB procedure, and receive psychiatric support, if necessary.

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.

Endobariatrics: well past infancy and maturing rapidly

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review summarizes the key developments with regard to FDA-approved endoscopic bariatric metabolic therapies (EBMTs) in the last 2 years.

RECENT FINDINGS

The prevalence of obesity has increased during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and obesity worsens COVID-19 related outcomes. Several studies have confirmed the safety and short-term efficacy of intragastric balloons (IGBs). In the short-term IGBs may improve steatosis and fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and improve quality of life and mental health. Unfortunately weight loss from these temporarily placed devices is not sustained long-term. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) may be more effective and durable than IGBs, and result in fewer adverse events compared to bariatric surgery. The recently completed MERIT trial may catapult ESG as a first-line EBMT. Aspiration therapy meets safety and effectiveness thresholds for incorporation into routine practice, but overall acceptance has been lower than other FDA-approved EBMTs.

SUMMARY

The field of endobariatrics is rapidly maturing. Significant knowledge gaps remain with regards to combining EBMTs with pharmacologic therapy to improve durability of weight loss. The rapid expansion in the literature supporting safety and long-term efficacy ESG may prompt revision of existing guidelines.

Endoscopic Treatment of Obesity and Nutritional Aspects of Bariatric Endoscopy

Obesity is a significant problem worldwide. Several serious diseases that decrease patient quality of life and increase mortality (high blood pressure, dyslipidaemia, type 2 diabetes etc.) are associated with obesity. Obesity treatment is a multidisciplinary and complex process that requires maximum patient compliance. Change of lifestyle is fundamental in the treatment of obesity. While pharmacotherapeutic options are available, their efficacy is limited. Surgical treatment though highly effective, carries the risk of complications and is thus indicated mostly in advanced stages of obesity. Endoscopic treatments of obesity are less invasive than surgical options, and are associated with fewer complications and nutritional deficits. Currently, there is a large spectrum of endoscopic methods based on the principles of gastric volume reduction, size restriction and gastric or small bowel bypass being explored with only few available in routine practice. The aim of this publication is to present an up-to-date summary of available endoscopic methods for the treatment of obesity focusing on their efficacy, safety and nutritional aspects.

Efficacy and Mechanisms of Gastric Volume-Restriction Bariatric Devices

Obesity is a chronic disease that affects over 795 million people worldwide. Bariatric surgery is an effective therapy to combat the epidemic of clinically severe obesity, but it is only performed in a very small proportion of patients because of the limited surgical indications, the irreversibility of the procedure, and the potential postoperative complications. As an alternative to bariatric surgery, numerous medical devices have been developed for the treatment of morbid obesity and obesity-related disorders. Most devices target restriction of the stomach, but the mechanism of action is likely more than just mechanical restriction. The objective of this review is to integrate the underlying mechanisms of gastric restrictive bariatric devices in obesity and comorbidities. We call attention to the need for future studies on potential mechanisms to shed light on how current gastric volume-restriction bariatric devices function and how future devices and treatments can be further improved to combat the epidemic of obesity.

Six intragastric balloons: Which to choose?

Endoscopically placed intragastric balloons (IGBs) have played a significant role in obesity treatment over the last 30 years, successfully bridging the gap between lifestyle modification/pharmacotherapy and bariatric surgery. Since they provide a continuous sensation of satiety that helps the ingestion of smaller portions of food, facilitating maintenance of a low-calorie diet, they have generally been considered an effective and reversible, less invasive, non-surgical procedure for weight loss. However, some studies indicate that balloons have limited sustainable effectiveness for the vast majority attempting such therapy, resulting in a return to the previous weight after balloon removal. In this review we try to summarize the pros and cons of various balloon types, to guide decision making for both the physician and the obese individual looking for effective treatment. We analyzed the six most commonly used IGBs, namely the liquid-filled balloons Orbera, Spatz3, ReShape Duo and Elipse, and the gas-filled Heliosphere and Obalon - also including comments on the adjustable Spatz3, and the swallowable Obalon and Elipse - to optimize the choice for maximum efficacy and safety.