Single Anastomosis Duodenoileal Bypass or Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass After Failed Sleeve Gastrectomy: Medium-Term Outcomes

Weight loss after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and single anastomosis duodenoileostomy following failed sleeve gastrectomy

OBJECTIVE

While sleeve gastrectomy (SG) results in sustained weight loss for the majority of patients, some will experience inadequate weight loss or weight regain requiring revision. The objective of this study was to evaluate differences in weight loss over time between patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or single anastomosis duodenoileostomy (SADI) after SG.

METHODS

We queried a single institution's bariatrics registry to identify patients who underwent RYGB or SADI after previous SG over a three-year period. Demographics, operative characteristics, and post-operative complications were evaluated. Interval total body weight loss (TBWL) and excess body weight loss (EBWL) were calculated from available follow-ups within 2 years.

RESULTS

We identified 124 patients who underwent conversion to RYGB (n = 61) or SADI (n = 63) following previous SG. There were no differences in sex, age, or medical comorbidities between groups. The median initial BMI was higher in the SADI group (44.9 vs. 41.9 for RYGB, p = 0.03) with greater excess body weight (56.7 vs. 64.3 kg, p = 0.04). The SADI group had a shorter median operative duration (157 vs. 182 min for RYGB, p < 0.01) and lower readmission rates (0 vs. 14.75%, p < 0.01). There was no difference in post-operative complications or need for rehydration therapy between the groups. Among 122 patients (98.4%) that had follow-up weights available, there were no differences in TBWL between groups. RYGB patients had a higher EBWL at 2, 3, and 6 months (p < 0.05 for all comparisons), but there were no differences between RYGB and SADI at 1 or 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Both RYGB and SADI conversions proved effective for further weight loss following failed SG at our academic center. While neither demonstrated clear superiority in long-term (> 1 year) weight loss, RYGB's restrictive gastric pouch may explain its early weight loss advantage.

Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease after Sleeve Gastrectomy: Effectiveness of Medical, Endoscopic, and Surgical Therapies

Introduction: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has become the most frequently performed bariatric operation in the United States. One of the main disadvantages of this procedure is the risk of developing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) after the operation. We aimed to analyze different approaches for the treatment of GERD after SG. Methods: A literature review was performed to identify all possible treatment options for post-SG GERD. All the studies were assessed for full eligibility by manual assessment of their aims, methodology, results, and conclusions. Records were individually reviewed by the authors comparing outcomes and complications between procedures. Results: Although some studies have shown improvement or even resolution of GERD symptoms after SG, most patients develop or worsen symptoms. Lifestyle modifications along with medical therapy should be started on patients with GERD after SG. For those who are refractory to medication, endoscopic and surgical therapies can be offered. Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is consistently effective in treatment of GERD and is the ideal therapy in patients with associated insufficient weight loss. Endoscopic and alternative surgical procedures are also available and have shown acceptable short-term outcomes. Conclusions: Several treatment options exist for the treatment of GERD after SG. Although conversion to RYGB remains the most effective therapy, other emerging endoscopic and surgical procedures could avoid the potential morbidity of this procedure and should be further evaluated. An evidence-based algorithm for the management of GERD after SG is proposed to guide decision making.

Outcomes and Management of Re-Establishing Bariatric Patients

BACKGROUND

Lifelong follow-up after metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is necessary to monitor for patient outcomes and nutritional status. However, many patients do not routinely follow-up with their MBS team. We studied what prompted MBS patients to seek bariatric care after being lost to follow-up and the subsequent treatments they received.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of patients after MBS who had discontinued regular MBS follow-up but represented to the MBS clinic between July 2018 and December 2022 to re-establish care. Patients with a history of a sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-En-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and adjustable gastric banding (AGB) were included.

RESULTS

We identified 400 patients (83.5% women, mean age 50.3 ± 12.2 years at the time of re-establishment of bariatric care), of whom 177 (44.3%) had RYGB, 154 (38.5%) had SG, and 69 (17.2%) had AGB. Overall, recurrent weight gain was the most common reason for presentation for all three procedures (81.2% in SG, 62.7% in RYGB, and 65.2% in AGB; p < 0.001). Patients who underwent SG were more likely to undergo a revision MBS compared with patients who underwent RYGB (16.9% vs 5.8%, p < 0.001), whereas patients who underwent RYGB were more likely to undergo an endoscopic intervention than patients who underwent SG (17.5% vs 7.8%, p < 0.001). The response to antiobesity medication agents, specifically glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists drugs, was better in patients who underwent RYGB, than that in patients who underwent SG.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights recurrent weight gain as the most common reason for patients after MBS seeking to re-establish care with the MBS team. SG had a higher rate of revision MBS than RYGB, whereas endoscopic interventions were performed more frequently in the RYGB group. Antiobesity medication agents, especially glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists drugs, were more effective in patients who underwent RYGB.

The SAGES MASTERS program bariatric surgery pathway selects 10 seminal publications on revisional bariatrics

BACKGROUND

The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Masters Program designated bariatric surgery as a clinical pathway. Among the tiers of the Masters Program, revisional bariatric surgery is the highest tier of "mastery" within the pathway. This article presents the top 10 seminal studies representing the current landscape of revisional bariatrics.

METHODS

The literature was systematically searched and seminal articles designated by consensus agreement of the SAGES Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery committee using multiple criteria, including impact on the field, citation frequency, and expert opinion. Articles were reviewed by committee members and presented in summarized fashion.

RESULTS

The top 10 papers are presented in grouped thematic categories covering the early evolution of revisional bariatrics, changing criteria for reoperative bariatric surgery, divergence of revision versus conversion bariatric surgery, and recent technologic innovations in revisional bariatric surgery. Each summary is presented with expert appraisal and commentary.

CONCLUSION

These seminal papers represent a snapshot of the dynamic field of revisional bariatric surgery and emphasize the need to not only remain current with contemporary trends but also keep a patient-oriented perspective on patient and intervention selection for optimal success.

The risk and benefit of revisional vs. primary metabolic- bariatric surgery and drug therapy - A narrative review

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) leads to long-term weight loss, reduced risk of cardiovascular events and cancer, and reduced mortality. Sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass are currently the most common surgical techniques. Weight loss after MBS was previously believed to work through restriction and malabsorption, however, mechanistic studies show that MBS techniques with long term efficacy instead alter physiological signaling between the gut and the brain. In revisional MBS, the initial surgical technique is corrected, modified, or converted to a new one. The indication for revisional MBS can be to achieve further weight loss or improvement in obesity comorbidity, but it may be necessary due to complications (e.g., gastroesophageal reflux or obstruction). Revisional MBS is associated with an increased risk of surgical complications and often less weight loss compared to the results following primary surgery. This narrative review summarizes data from revisional MBS where information is often presented with inconsistent definitions for indications and outcomes, making comparison between strategies difficult. In summary, we suggest careful weighing of potential benefits and risks with revisional MBS, bearing in mind the option of add-on therapy with new anti-obesity drugs.

Side-to-side magnetic duodeno-ileostomy in adults with severe obesity with or without type 2 diabetes: early outcomes with prior or concurrent sleeve gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Conventional metabolic/bariatric surgical anastomoses with sutures/staples may cause severe adverse events (AEs).

OBJECTIVES

The study aim was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of primary and revisional side-to-side duodeno-ileostomy (DI) bipartition using a novel magnetic compression anastomosis device (Magnet Anastomosis System [MS]).

SETTING

Multicenter: private practices and university hospitals.

METHODS

In patients with body mass index ([BMI, kg/m2] ≥35.0 to ≤50.0 with/without type 2 diabetes [T2D] glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1C > 6.5 %]), two linear MS magnets were delivered endoscopically to the duodenum and ileum with laparoscopic assistance and aligned, initiating magnet fusion and gradual DI (MagDI). The MagDI-after-SG group had undergone prior sleeve gastrectomy (SG); the MagDI + SG group underwent concurrent SG. AEs were graded by Clavien-Dindo Classification (CDC).

RESULTS

Between November 22, 2021 and May 30, 2023, 43 patients (88.0% female, mean age 43.7 ± 1.3 years) underwent the study procedures. The MS met feasibility criteria of magnet device placement, creation of patent anastomoses confirmed radiologically, and magnet passage in 100.0% of patients. There were 64 AEs, most were CDC grade I and II, significantly fewer in the MagDI-after-SG group (P < .001). No device-related AEs including anastomotic leakage, bleeding, obstruction, infection, or death. The MagDI-after-SG group experienced 6-month mean weight loss of 8.0 ± 2.5 kg (P < .01), 17.4 ± 5.0% excess weight loss (EWL). The MagDI + SG group had significantly greater weight loss (34.2 ± 1.6 kg, P < .001), 66.2 ± 3.4% EWL. All patients with T2D improved.

CONCLUSIONS

In early results of a multicenter study, the incisionless, sutureless Magnet System formed patent, complication-free anastomoses in side-to-side DI with prior or concurrent SG.

Single Anastomosis Duodenoileostomy with Sleeve: A Comprehensive Review of Anatomy, Surgical Technique, and Outcomes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Single anastomosis duodenoileal bypass with sleeve (SADI-S) is a recently endorsed metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) procedure in the US. Despite its favorable characteristics, the utilization of SADI-S remains limited, accounting for a mere 0.25% of all MBS procedures performed. This review aims to offer an updated examination of the technique, while also presenting the safety and outcomes associated with SADI-S on both the short and long term.

RECENT FINDINGS

The safety of SADI-S is well-established, with short-term complication rates as low as 2.6%. A common channel length of 300 cm has consistently shown a lower incidence of malabsorption complications compared to shorter lengths. Bile reflux after SADI-S is relatively rare with an incidence of only 1.23%. SADI-S demonstrated sustained total weight loss (%TWL) at 5 years (37%) and 10 years (34%) postoperatively. Resolution of weight-related medical conditions was also significant after SADI-S, with remission rates of diabetes mellitus as high as 86.6% with over 5 years of follow-up. SADI-S is a safe and effective MBS procedure that has shown impressive and sustainable results in terms of weight loss and improvement in obesity-related medical conditions. Careful limb length selection is essential in minimizing the risk of nutritional deficiencies. SADI-S holds great promise as a valuable option for individuals seeking effective weight loss and improvement in associated health conditions.

Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass (SADI) as a Second Step After Failed Sleeve Gastrectomy: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Purpose

Our aim in this study is to assess single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI) as a salvage procedure following sleeve gastrectomy (SG), examining its technical feasibility, outcomes, and potential complications.

Materials and Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted, drawing data from PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane library. The analysis encompassed 14 studies, involving 1,066 patients. We evaluated operative time, comorbidity resolution (hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes), post-operative diarrhea incidence, excess weight loss (EWL) at six, twelve, and twenty-four months, and post-operative leak rates.

Results

SADI as a salvage procedure following SG yielded positive outcomes. Mean operative time was 125.98 minutes (95% CI 102.50-149.46, I2=99%). Importantly, SADI led to comorbidity resolution in a notable proportion of cases: hypertension in 48% (95% CI 38-57%, I2=44%), dyslipidemia in 55% (95% CI 40-69%, I2=30%), and diabetes in 63% (95% CI 53-72%, I2=30%) of patients. Post-operative diarrhea incidence was relatively low at 2% (95% CI 1-9%, I2=75%). In terms of weight loss, SADI patients exhibited substantial EWL: 47.73% (95% CI 37.86-57.61, I2=95%) at six months, 59.39% (95% CI 51.18-67.61, I2=95%) at twelve months, and 23.84% (95% CI 5.76-41.92, I2=100%). At twenty-four months. Furthermore, post-operative leak rate was relatively low, reported in only 1% (95% CI 0-5%, I2=80%) of cases.

Conclusion

SADI as a salvage procedure post-SG demonstrates technical feasibility and marked effectiveness. It offers substantial comorbidity resolution, significant weight loss, and low post-operative complication rates, notably post-operative leaks. Further research should investigate the long-term impact of SADI on patient nutritional status to facilitate its broader adoption.

The Efficacy and Safety of Laparoscopic Single-Anastomosis Duodeno-ileostomy with Sleeve Gastrectomy (SADI-S) in Mid- and Long-Term Follow-Up: a Systematic Review

This systematic review of 10 studies aimed to investigate the mid- and long-term results of duodeno-ileostomy with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) according to the PRISMA guideline. Related articles, which reported outcomes of laparoscopic SADI-S with follow-up ≥ 3 years, were selected and analyzed. The percentage of excess weight loss (EWL) was 70.9-88.7%, and 80.4% at 6, and 10 years, respectively. The more common late complications were malabsorption (6.3%) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (3.6%). The remission rates of hypertension, diabetes, GERD, obstructive sleep apnea, and dyslipidemia were 62.9%, 81.3%, 53.2%, 60.9%, and 69.7%, respectively. In conclusion, SADI-S is a safe and effective surgical technique with durable weight loss and a high rate of comorbidity resolution in mid and long term.

Primary single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) versus sleeve gastrectomy to SADI conversions: a comparison study of prevalence and safety

BACKGROUND

Conversion from sleeve gastrectomy (SG) to single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI) is becoming increasingly common, but data regarding safety is of these conversions is scarce. As such, the objective of this study was to compare the 30-day rate of serious complications and mortality of primary SADI (p-SADI-S) with SG to SADI (SG-SADI) conversions.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study analyzed the MBSAQIP database. Patients undergoing p-SADI-S and SG-SADI were included. Data collection was limited to 2020 and 2021. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed between groups to determine if SG-SADI was an independent predictor of 30-day serious complications or mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 783 patients were included in this study, 488 (62.3%) underwent p-SADI-S and 295 (37.6%) underwent SG-SADI. The mean body mass index (BMI) at the time of surgery was lower in the SG-SADI cohort (45.1 vs 51.4 kg/m2, p < 0.001). Indications for revision in the SG-SADI cohort included weight recurrence (50.8%), inadequate weight loss (41.0%), other (3.0%), GERD (2.7%), and persistent comorbidities (2.5%). SG-SADI had longer operative times (156.7 vs 142.1 min, p < 0.001) and was not associated with a higher rate of serious complications (5.7 vs 6.9%, p = 0.508) compared to p-SADI-S. p-SADI-S was associated with a higher rate of pneumonia (1.2 vs 0.0%, p < 0.001), and SG-SADI was not correlated with higher rates of reoperation (3.0 vs 3.2%, p = 0.861), readmission (5.4 vs 5.5%, p = 0.948) and death (0.0 vs 0.2%, p = 0.437). On multivariable analysis, SG-SADI was not independently predictive of serious complications (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.52, p = 0.514) when adjusting for age, sex, BMI, comorbidities, and operative time.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of SG-SADI is high, representing 37.6% of SADI-S procedures. Conversion from sleeve to SADI, is safe, and as opposed to other studies of revisional bariatric surgery, has similar 30-day complication rates to primary SADI-S.

Mid-Term Outcomes After Conversion Procedures Following Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

PURPOSE

In the long term, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) may be associated with insufficient weight loss (IWL), gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and persistence or relapse of associated medical problems. This study's objective is to present mid-term results regarding weight loss (WL), evolution of associated medical problems, and reoperation rate of patients who underwent a conversion after SG.

METHODS

Retrospective single-center analysis of patients with a minimal follow-up of 2 years after conversion.

RESULTS

In this series of 549 SGs, 84 patients (15.3%) underwent a conversion, and 71 met inclusion criteria. They were converted to short biliopancreatic limb Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (short BPL RYGB) (n = 28, 39.4%), biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD/DS) (n = 19, 26.8%), long biliopancreatic limb Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (long BPL RYGB) (n = 17, 23.9%), and re-sleeve gastrectomy (RSG) (n = 7, 9.9%). Indications were GERD (n = 24, 33.8%), IWL (n = 23, 32.4%), IWL + GERD (n = 22, 31.0%), or stenosis/kinking of the sleeve (n = 2, 2.8%). The mean pre-revisional body mass index (BMI) was 38.0 ± 7.5 kg/m2. The mean follow-up time after conversion was 5.1 ± 3.1 years. The overall percentage of total weight loss (%TWL) was greatest after BPD/DS (36.6%) and long BPL RYGB (32.9%) compared to RSG (20.0%; p = 0.004; p = 0.049). In case of GERD, conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) led to a resolution of symptoms in 79.5%. 16.9% of patients underwent an additional revisional procedure.

CONCLUSION

In the event of IWL after SG, conversion to BPD/DS provides a significant and sustainable additional WL. Conversion to RYGB leads to a reliable symptom control in patients suffering from GERD after SG.

Weight-Related Outcomes After Revisional Bariatric Surgery in Patients with Non-response After Sleeve Gastrectomy-a Systematic Review

Weight non-response after sleeve gastrectomy is an emerging issue. This systematic review compared revisional procedures for weight-related outcomes. We searched several databases for relevant articles and included adult patients with revisional bariatric procedures after primary sleeve gastrectomy. Twelve trials with 1046 patients were included, covering five revisional procedures. There were no randomised controlled trials, and 10 studies had a critical risk of bias. Significant variations in inclusion criteria, therapy benchmarks, follow-up schemes, and outcome measurements were observed, preventing meaningful comparison of results. Evidence-based treatment strategies for weight non-response after sleeve gastrectomy cannot be deduced from the current literature. Prospective studies with well-defined indications, standardised techniques, and strict adherence to outcome measurements are needed.

Weight loss specific to indication, remission of diabetes, and short-term complications after sleeve gastrectomy conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most frequently performed bariatric procedure worldwide. Long-term complications such as insufficient weight loss (IWL) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) may necessitate SG conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). The aim of this review was to determine the indication-specific weight loss and diabetes remission after SG conversion to RYGB (STOBY). Our objective was to extract all available published data on indication for conversion, weight loss, remission of diabetes, and short-term complications after STOBY. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies reporting outcomes following STOBY. A random effects model was used for meta-analysis. The search identified 44 relevant studies. Overall short-term (12-mo) excess weight loss (EWL) was 54.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 46%-63%) in 23 studies (n = 712) and total weight loss (TWL) was 19.9% (95% CI, 14%-25%) in 21 studies (n = 740). For IWL, short-term (12-mo) pooled weight loss outcomes were 53.9% EWL (95% CI, 48%-59%) in 14 studies (n = 295) and 22.7% TWL (95% CI, 17%-28%) in 12 studies (n = 219), and medium-term (2-5 yr) outcomes were 45.8% EWL (95% CI, 38%-53%) in 7 studies (n = 154) and 20.6% TWL (95% CI, 15%-26%) in 9 studies (n = 206). Overall diabetes remission was 53% (95% CI, 33%-72%), and the perioperative complication rate was 8.2% (95% CI, 7.6%-8.7%). Revisional SG conversion to RYGB for IWL can achieve good weight loss outcomes and diabetes remission.

Conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Indications, Prevalence, and Safety

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) frequently requires conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) due to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or weight recurrence. Current evidence evaluating the safety of conversion from SG to RYGB and its indications is limited to single centers.

METHODS

The objective was to determine the rate of serious complications and mortality of conversion of SG to RYGB (SG-RYGB) compared to primary RYGB (P-RYGB). This was a retrospective analysis of the MBSAQIP database which includes 30-day outcomes. Individuals undergoing P-RYGB or SG-RYGB were included. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine if revisional surgery was an independent predictor of serious complications or mortality.

RESULTS

In 2020 and 2021, 84,543 (86.3%) patients underwent P-RYGB and 13,432 (13.7%) underwent SG-RYGB. SG-RYGB cohort had lower body mass index, lower rates of diabetes and hypertension, and higher rates of GERD. GERD was the most common indication for revision (55.3%) followed by weight regain (24.4%) and inadequate weight loss (12.7%). SG-RYGB had longer operative times (145 vs. 125 min, p < 0.001) and a higher rate of serious complications (7.2 vs. 5.0%, p < 0.001). This included higher rates of anastomotic leak (0.5 vs. 0.4%, p = 0.002), bleeding (2.0 vs. 1.6%, p < 0.001), and reoperation (3.0 vs. 1.9%, p < 0.001) but not death (0.1 vs. 0.1%, p = 0.385). On multivariable analysis, SG-RYGB was independently predictive of serious complications (OR 1.21, 95%CI 1.12 to 1.32, p < 0.001) but not mortality (p = 0.316).

CONCLUSIONS

While SG-RYGB is safe with a low complication rate, SG-RYGB was associated with a higher rate of serious complications compared to P-RYGB.

Best practice approach for redo-surgeries after sleeve gastrectomy, an expert's modified Delphi consensus

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common metabolic and bariatric surgical (MBS) procedure worldwide. Despite the desired effect of SG on weight loss and remission of obesity-associated medical problems, there are some concerns regarding the need to do revisional/conversional surgeries after SG. This study aims to make an algorithmic clinical approach based on an expert-modified Delphi consensus regarding redo-surgeries after SG, to give bariatric and metabolic surgeons a guideline that might help for the best clinical decision.

METHODS

Forty-six recognized bariatric and metabolic surgeons from 25 different countries participated in this Delphi consensus study in two rounds to develop a consensus on redo-surgeries after SG. An agreement/disagreement ≥ 70.0% on statements was considered to indicate a consensus.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached for 62 of 72 statements and experts did not achieve consensus on 10 statements after two rounds of online voting. Most of the experts believed that multi-disciplinary team evaluation should be done in all redo-procedures after SG and there should be at least 12 months of medical and supportive management before performing redo-surgeries after SG for insufficient weight loss, weight regain, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Also, experts agreed that in case of symptomatic GERD in the presence of adequate weight loss, medical treatment for at least 1 to 2 years is an acceptable option and agreed that Roux-en Y gastric bypass is an appropriate option in this situation. There was disagreement consensus on efficacy of omentopexy in rotation and efficacy of fundoplication in the presence of a dilated fundus and GERD.

CONCLUSION

Redo-surgeries after SG is still an important issue among bariatric and metabolic surgeons. The proper time and procedure selection for redo-surgery need careful considerations. Although multi-disciplinary team evaluation plays a key role to evaluate best options in these situations, an algorithmic clinical approach based on the expert's consensus as a guideline can help for the best clinical decision-making.

Quality evaluation of metabolic and bariatric surgical guidelines

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the quality of surgical guidelines on bariatric/metabolic surgery.

METHODS

Four independent reviewers used the AGREE II (The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) tool to assess the methodological quality of the included guidelines and conducted a comparative analysis of the main recommendations for surgical methods of these guidelines.

RESULTS

Nine surgical guidelines were included in this study. Five articles with AGREE II scores over 60% are worthy of clinical recommendation. The field of rigor of development was relatively low, with an average score of 50.82%. Among 15 key recommendations and the corresponding best evidence in the guidelines, only 4 key recommendations were grade A recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of metabolic and bariatric guidelines is uneven, and there is much room for improvement.

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.