Outcome of Sleeve Gastrectomy Converted to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass

Long-Term Outcomes of Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass vs Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy for Obesity: The SM-BOSS Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Reports on long-term outcomes from randomized clinical trials comparing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) are scarce.

Objective

To compare long-term weight and metabolic outcomes, reoperation rates, and quality of life for patients undergoing SG vs RYGB at 10 years and beyond.

Design, Setting, and Participants

The SM-BOSS (Swiss Multicenter Bypass or Sleeve Study) randomized clinical trial was conducted from January 2007 to November 2011 at 4 bariatric centers in Switzerland. (The last follow-up was obtained in July 2023.) A total of 3971 patients with severe obesity were assessed, and 217 patients were enrolled and randomized to undergo SG or RYGB.

Interventions

Laparoscopic SG or RYGB.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome of the SM-BOSS trial was the percentage excess body mass index loss (%EBMIL) at 5 years. The present study reports on the long-term weight and metabolic outcomes at 10 years and beyond, including changes in weight and obesity-related diseases, reoperation rates, and quality of life.

Results

Of 217 patients randomized to undergo SG or RYGB, mean (SD) age was 42.5 (11.1) years, mean (SD) baseline BMI was 43.9 (5.3), and 156 patients (71.9%) were female. Of 217 patients, 110 patients were randomized to RYGB and 107 to SG. Complete 10-year follow-up is available for 65.4% of patients. In the intention-to-treat population, mean (SD) %EBMIL was 60.6% (25.9) after SG and 65.2% (26.0) after RYGB (P = .29). Patients who underwent SG had significantly higher conversion rates because of insufficient weight reduction or reflux compared to RYGB (29.9% vs 5.5%; P < .001). Patients undergoing RYGB had significantly higher mean (SD) %EBMIL compared to SG after 10 years in the per-protocol (PP) population (65.9% [26.3] vs 56.1% [25.2]; P = .048). However, mean (SD) percentage total weight loss was not significantly different between groups (RYGB: 27.7% [10.8]; SG: 25.5% [15.1]; P = .37). SG patients had significantly more de novo gastroesophageal reflux (GERD) compared with RYGB (P = .02).

Conclusions and Relevance

In the SM-BOSS randomized clinical trial, RYGB led to significantly higher %EBMIL in the PP population compared with SG beyond 10 years of follow-up, with better results for GERD. Patients undergoing SG experienced a significantly higher number of conversions to different anatomy compared with RYGB.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT00356213.

Revisional bariatric surgery following sleeve gastrectomy: a meta-analysis comparing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and one anastomosis gastric bypass

INTRODUCTION

The number of bariatric operations is increasing each year. Sleeve gastrectomy is the most popular procedure; however, it often requires revision surgery because of insufficient weight loss, weight regain or gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GORD). The most popular revisional procedures are Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). The primary outcome of this meta-analysis was weight loss after revisional surgery following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and the secondary outcomes were gastro-oesophageal reflux, BMI difference, operative time, bleeding and anastomotic leak.

METHODS

A systematic electronic search was undertaken using PubMed, MEDLINE, Ovid, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar following PRISMA guidelines. The initial search identified 2,546 articles. After screening, seven papers met the inclusion criteria: six retrospective studies and one randomised controlled trial.

RESULTS

In total, 802 patients met the inclusion criteria: 390 had an OAGB and a further 412 had an RYBG. All patients previously had a sleeve gastrectomy for weight loss. The length of follow-up was 12 months for our primary outcome. We found no statistically significant difference in excess weight loss (%EWL) between OAGB and RYGB (p = 0.11). The incidence of postoperative reflux was statistically significantly higher in the OAGB group (16% vs 10.1%, p < 0.003). Operative time was statistically significantly lower in the OAGB group (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between the two revision bariatric surgery procedures for %EWL. RYGB was superior to OAGB in reducing the incidence of symptomatic GORD, whereas OAGB had a significant shorter operative time.

Remission of hypertension after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus Roux-en-Y-gastric bypass: a systematic review of randomized control trials

BACKGROUND

Besides its benefits for weight loss, current findings suggest that bariatric surgery can induce remission of hypertension. Limited data report the effect of bariatric surgery on this obesity-associated comorbidity.

OBJECTIVE

Compare the short-term, mid-term, and long-term remission of hypertension after sleeve gastrectomy versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

SETTING

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

Four databases (Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Science Direct) were searched for RCTs that compared the effects of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) on hypertension remission at <1 year, 2-4 years, and ≥5 years. Patients with a history of hypertension and who had primary bariatric surgery were included.

RESULTS

After reviewing 11,814 studies, only 11 RCTs were included. In total, the analysis included 2323 patients, with 1158 in the SG group (49.85%) and 1165 in the RYGB group (50.15%). It was found that SG and RYGB procedures had comparable hypertension remission at ≤1 year (Relative risk: 1.11, 95% CI .83-1.48, P = .49), and between 2 and 4 years (Relative risk: 1.11, 95% CI .90-1.37, P = .34). However, there was a significant difference in hypertension remission at ≥ 5 years, favoring RYGB (relative risk: 1.39, 95% CI 1.06-1.82, P = .02).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs demonstrates that RYGB is superior to SG in resolving hypertension beyond 5 years postoperatively. These findings highlight the long-term benefits of RYGB over SG in managing hypertension, providing valuable insights for surgical decision-making and patient counseling.

How preoperative upper gastrointestinal investigations affect the management of bariatric patients: results of a cohort study of 897 patients

INTRODUCTION

Preoperative diagnostic protocols vary worldwide, some prioritizing safety while others question routine procedures. Building on prior research, this study explores the impact of diverse preoperative findings on bariatric management and procedure selection.

METHODS

In a retrospective analysis of prospective data of over 1000 bariatric surgery patients from January 2017 to December 2022 undergoing primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) were analyzed. Preoperative assessment included upper endoscopy, upper GI series, and esophageal manometry. Sonography data were excluded. The primary endpoint examined the influence of preoperative exams on procedure selection, the secondary endpoint evaluated their therapeutic impact.

RESULTS

897 patients (741 RYGB, 156 SG) were included. All underwent upper endoscopy, revealing common findings such as type C gastritis and reflux esophagitis. Upper endoscopy prompted a therapeutic consequence in 216 patients (24.3%), resulting in a number needed to screen (NNS) of 4.1. Upper GI series and manometry were more frequently performed before LSG. Upper GI series detected hiatal hernias and motility disorders but did not result in any change of procedures. Esophageal manometry found pathologies in 37 (25.3%) patients rising to 41.5% if symptoms were present. Overall, 16 (1.8%) patients experienced a change in the planned procedure, with 14 changes prompted by preoperative findings and two by technical difficulties.

CONCLUSION

We advise routine upper endoscopies for all patients undergoing LRYGB or LSG, while reserving upper GI series only for selected cases. Manometry should be exclusively performed on symptomatic patients undergoing LSG, ensuring a balanced and individualized preoperative assessment.

Effect of sleeve gastrectomy on distal esophagus at 5 and 10 years

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is a primary surgical intervention for obesity management. However, several longitudinal studies have documented the emergence of long-term esophageal consequences, notably gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and its associated complications. This study aimed to assess the occurrence of esophageal complications, including esophagitis and Barret's esophagus (BE), 5 and 10 years after SG, in one medical center.

METHODS

Two cohorts of consecutive patients who underwent SG were studied: patients who underwent a systematic upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy (UGIE) at five years or conversion to RYGB < 5 years (cohort n°1, n = 219), and patients who underwent UGIE at 10 years or converted to RYGB > 5 years (cohort n°2, n = 72). Patients with missing UGIE before or after SG were excluded.

RESULTS

In the cohort n°1, 62.7% of the patients had clinical GERD at the 5-years follow-up (vs. 21.8 before SG, p < 0.0001), 27.4% had esophagitis (vs. 14.2% before SG, p = 0.0006), and 8.3% had BE (vs. 1.8% before SG, p = 0.002) with metaplasia in 1.8%. De novo esophagitis and BE accounted for 19.6% and 7.8%, respectively. In the cohort n°2, at 10 years, 61.5% had clinical GERD (vs.12.5 before SG, p < 0.0001), 23.6% had esophagitis (vs. 9.7% before SG, p = 0.025) including 20.8% de novo, and 8.3% had de novo BE, with metaplasia in 5.6%. De novo esophagitis accounted for 20.8%. One patient developed esophageal adenocarcinoma 10 years after SG. Pre-operative esophagitis was significantly associated with BE on UGIE at 5 or 10 years, while active smoking and preoperative esophagitis were risk factors for esophagitis.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights a significant increase in esophageal complications 5 and 10 years after SG. Pre-operative esophagitis should be considered when choosing a surgical technique for obesity management.

Comparative study of midterm outcomes between Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), diverted one-anastomosis gastric bypass (D-OAGB), and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB)

PURPOSE

Diverted one anastomosis gastric bypass (D-OAGB) is a new procedure that entails performing Roux-en-Y diversion during OAGB to preclude post-OAGB bile reflux. This study aimed to compare the mid-term outcomes of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and OAGB versus D-OAGB.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study that encompassed the analysis of data from patients undergoing bypass surgeries from 2015 to May 2021. The patients' data until 2 years of follow-up were compared.

RESULTS

This study included 140 patients who underwent OAGB (n = 64), RYGB (n = 24), and D-OAGB (n = 52). In the OAGB, RYGB, and D-OAGB groups, complication rates were 3.1%, 8.3%, and 5.8%, respectively. At the 3-month and 6-month follow-ups, the OAGB and D-OAGB groups showed a statistically significant higher percentage of excess weight loss (EWL%). Otherwise, the weight measures and weight loss outcome were comparable among the three groups in the other follow-up visits (p > 0.05). There was a significantly lower number of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remission cases and a higher number of de novo GERD cases in the OAGB group.

CONCLUSION

D-OAGB demonstrated favorable outcomes, including lower early adverse events and superior weight loss results in the first 6 months post-surgery when compared to RYGB. The D-OAGB group also showed higher rates of GERD remission and lower de novo GERD occurrence than OAGB. Further research is warranted to validate these findings and expand our understanding of this innovative surgical approach.

Therapeutic Options for Recurrence of Weight and Obesity Related Complications After Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: An IFSO Position Statement

Obesity is a chronic disease that may require multiple interventions and escalation of therapy throughout the years. Until recently, no universal definition existed for recurrent weight gain and insufficient weight loss. Standardization of reporting is key so outcomes can be compared and data can be pooled. The recent IFSO consensus provided standard terminology and definitions that will likely resolve this in the future, and publishers will need to enforce for authors to use these definitions. This current IFSO position statement provides guidance for the management of recurrent weight gain after bariatric surgery.

Surgical treatment strategies for gastroesophageal reflux after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy

Bariatric surgery has emerged as an effective therapeutic approach for combating obesity. As the most commonly performed bariatric surgery, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has a long-term and effective outcome in weight reduction. However, studies have reported an increased incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) among patients after LSG. For those who fail to respond to conventional oral acid-suppressing medication, surgical intervention comes into consideration. The most commonly performed revisional surgery for sleeve gastrectomy is the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, which can effectively alleviate the symptoms of reflux in patients and also continues to promote weight loss in patients who have not achieved satisfactory results or have experienced weight regain. In addition to this established procedure, innovative techniques such as laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) are being explored. MSA is less invasive, has good reflux treatment outcomes, and its safety and efficacy are supported by the literature, making it a promising tool for the future treatment of gastroesophageal reflux. This article also explores the role of endoscopic interventions for GERD treatment of post-sleeve gastrectomy patients. Although these methods have shown some therapeutic effect, their efficacy still requires further study due to a lack of support from more clinical data. For patients with preoperative hiatal hernia or gastroesophageal reflux symptoms, some experts now consider performing LSG combined with hiatal hernia repair or fundoplication to alleviate or prevent postoperative reflux symptoms. Both of these surgical approaches have demonstrated favorable outcomes; however, the addition of fundoplication requires further investigation regarding its long-term effects and potential postoperative complications. This article gathers and examines the current laparoscopic and endoscopic treatments for refractory gastroesophageal reflux following LSG, as well as the concurrent treatment of LSG in patients with preoperative gastroesophageal reflux or hiatal hernia.

Increased staple line leak rates following re-sleeve: analysis comparing re-sleeve versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass conversion and primary sleeve gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy is the most common bariatric procedure and its long-term complications include inadequate weight loss, weight regain, and de novo GERD, often requiring revisional surgery. Revisions, notably re-sleeve and conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), are frequently performed, but safety data is limited. Herein, we used the MBSAQIP database to compare 30 day outcomes of primary sleeve gastrectomy (SG) with re-sleeve (RS) and SG to RYGB conversion.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary SG, RS, and SG to RYGB conversion within the MBSAQIP data registry from January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2022 were included in this study. Using Propensity Score Matching analysis, the cohorts were matched for 23 preoperative characteristics. We then compared 30 day postoperative outcomes and bariatric-specific complications between primary SG and RS (analysis 1) and between RS and SG to RYGB conversion (analysis 2).

RESULTS

A total of 302,961 were included. The matched cohorts in analysis 1 (n = 1630) and analysis 2 (n = 1633) had similar pre-operative characteristics. Propensity-matched outcomes in analysis 1 showed that patients in the RS group had significantly higher staple line leak (1.3% vs. 0.1%, p < 0.001) when compared to primary SG. Similarly, longer operative times (90.16 ± 51.90 min vs. 68.32 ± 37.54 min, p < 0.001) and higher rates of readmissions (5.5% vs. 2.1%, p < 0.001), reoperations (2.3% vs. 0.6%, p < 0.001), interventions (2.5% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001) were found in those who underwent RS. In analysis 2, RS showed higher leak rates (1.3% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.015) when compared to conversion from SG to RYGB.

CONCLUSION

The RS group has a higher risk of staple line leaks compared to primary SG and conversion from SG to RYGB. In our study, there was a 2.6-fold increase in staple line leak after re-sleeve compared to RYGB conversion and a 13-fold increase compared to primary SG.

Modified One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Following Sleeve Gastrectomy for Severe Reflux and Delayed Gastric Emptying: A Prospective Trial with Clinical and Physiological Outcome Measures

BACKGROUND

Gastro-esophageal reflux (GORD) following sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is a central challenge, and precise indications for revisional surgery or the physiology have not been precisely defined. We aimed to determine whether OAGB performed for reflux post-SG (1) accelerates gastric emptying half-time, (2) reduces the frequency and severity of reflux events, and (3) improves reflux symptoms.

METHODS

We undertook a prospective trial (ACTRN12616001089426). There were 22 participants who underwent measurement before and after revisional surgery with 29 optimal SG (patients with optimal outcome from their primary surgery) as controls. All participants underwent a protocolized nuclear scintigraphy, 24-h pH monitoring, and gastroscopy and completed objective questionnaires.

RESULTS

Trial patients were 90.9% female, age 44.4 years. Conversion from SG to OAGB was at a median of 45.2 ± 19.6 months. Scintigraphy showed an increased rate of gastric emptying post-OAGB 34 (IQR 14) vs 24 (IQR 10.3) min, p-value 0.008, with decreased number of reflux events post-prandially (39 (IQR 13) vs 26 (IQR 7), p-value 0.001). This data correlated with the pH analysis; total acid events substantially reduced post-OAGB 58.5 (IQR 88) vs 12 (IQR 9.4) events, p-value 0.017. Endoscopic findings indicated a reduction in incidence of bile stasis 72.7% vs 40.9% post-OAGB, p-value < 0.00010. Post-OAGB, patients experienced less frequent regurgitation (12 ± 4.1 vs. 5.5 ± 3, p-value 0.012) and reflux (37.1 ± 15.7 vs. 16.8 ± 12.6, p-value 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

We found OAGB is an effective treatment for reflux associated with delayed gastric emptying post-SG. The likely mechanisms is by, an increase in the rate of gastric clearance and reduced reflux events and overall esophageal acid exposure. This suggests that some forms of post-SG reflux are driven by slower emptying of the residual stomach and are amenable to treatment with drainage above the incisura.

Key messages on obesity care from the 2023 ASPEN Physician Preconference Course: A narrative review

Obesity is a challenging chronic disease process that continues to affect a large percentage of the population at large. With the advent of new therapeutic options and interventions and a deeper scientific understanding of obesity as a complex illness, there is hope in curtailing this evolving pandemic. In this article, we present key medical information to engage and empower nutrition-focused providers to manage obesity and its nutrition complications. The topics summarized here were presented during the 2023 American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition Preconference Physician Course and include pathophysiology and hormonal regulation of obesity, multidisciplinary care planning and nutrition risk stratification of patients, and common approaches to treatment, including lifestyle modifications, antiobesity medications, and procedures from the perspective of the nutrition specialist.

Challenges of Revisional Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: A Comprehensive Guide to Unraveling the Complexities and Solutions of Revisional Bariatric Procedures

Revisional metabolic and bariatric surgery (RMBS) presents unique challenges in addressing weight loss failure or complications arising from initial bariatric procedures. This review aims to explore the complexities and solutions associated with revisional bariatric procedures comprehensively, offering insights into the evolving terrain of metabolic and bariatric surgery. A literature review is conducted to identify pertinent studies and expert opinions regarding RMBS. Methodological approaches, patient selection criteria, surgical techniques, preoperative assessments, and postoperative management strategies are synthesized to provide a comprehensive overview of current practices and advancements in the field, including institutional protocols. This review synthesizes key findings regarding the challenges encountered in RMBS, including the underlying causes of primary procedure failure, anatomical complexities, technical considerations, and assessments of surgical outcomes. Additionally, patient outcomes, complication rates, and long-term success are presented, along with institutional approaches to patient assessment and procedure selection. This review provides valuable insights for clinicians grappling with the complexities of RMBS. A comprehensive understanding of patient selection, surgical techniques, preoperative management, and postoperative care is crucial for enhancing outcomes and ensuring patient satisfaction in the field of metabolic bariatric surgery.

Medium and Long-Term Weight Loss After Revisional Bariatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Despite the current increase in revisional bariatric surgery (RBS), data on the sustainability of weight loss remain unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to assess weight loss outcomes in adult patients undergoing RBS with follow-up > 2 years. Twenty-eight observational studies (n = 2213 patients) were included. The %TWL was 27.2 (95%CI = 23.7 to 30.6), and there was a drop in BMI of 10.2 kg/m2 (95%CI =  - 11.6 to - 8.7). The %EWL was 54.8 (95%CI = 47.2 to 62.4) but with a high risk of publication bias (Egger's test = 0.003). The overall quality of evidence was very low. Our data reinforce that current evidence on RBS is mainly based on low-quality observational studies, and further higher-quality studies are needed to support evidence-based practice.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy vs one-anastomosis gastric bypass 5-year follow-up: a single-blinded randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is the most performed bariatric procedure worldwide, whereas one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is the third most performed procedure. Both procedures have reported good weight loss (WL) and low complications. However, should both have differences in the durability of WL and malnutrition?

METHODS

A single-blinded, randomized controlled trial of 300 patients was conducted to compare the outcomes of LSG and OAGB over a 5-year follow-up. The primary endpoint was WL in percentages of total WL (%TWL) and excess WL (%EWL). The secondary endpoints were complications, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), associated medical problems, bariatric analysis and reporting outcome system (BAROS) assessment, and weight recurrence (WR).

RESULTS

Overall, 201 patients (96 in the LSG group and 105 in the OAGB group) completed 5 years of follow-up. OAGB had significantly higher %TWL and %EWL than those of LSG throughout the follow-up. LSG had significantly higher WR and GERD. Both procedures had significant improvement in associated medical problems and BAROS scores compared with baseline, with no significant difference. WR was associated with higher relapse of associated medical conditions after initial remission and with lower BAROS scores regarding WL scores.

CONCLUSION

OAGB had significantly higher WL, less WR, and less GERD. However, it had a higher incidence of bile reflux. Both procedures had comparable complication rates, excellent remissions in associated medical problems, and improved quality of life. WR was associated with significantly more relapse of associated medical problems and significantly lower BAROS scores.

Current Management and Treatment Paradigms of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease following Sleeve Gastrectomy

Obesity is associated with serious comorbidities and economic implications. Bariatric surgery, most commonly Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy, are effective options for weight loss and the improvement of obesity-related comorbidities. With the growing obesity epidemic, there has been a concomitant rise in bariatric surgeries, particularly in sleeve gastrectomy, which has been the most widely performed bariatric surgery since 2013. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is highly prevalent in obese individuals, can significantly impact quality of life and may lead to serious complications. Obesity and GERD both improve with weight loss. However, as the incidence of sleeve gastrectomy rises, recent data have revealed a risk of exacerbation of pre-existing GERD or the development of de novo GERD following sleeve gastrectomy. We performed a detailed review of GERD post-sleeve gastrectomy, including its overall incidence, pathophysiology and current treatment paradigms.

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as Revisional Surgery Following Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most performed metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) worldwide, some patients require conversional procedures due to weight recurrence or late complications. Recently, one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) gained popularity as a viable option to address those problems. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the safety and efficacy of conversional OAGB after primary SG in the management of patients with obesity.

METHODS

Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for articles from their inception to February 2023 by two independent reviewers using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) system. The review was registered prospectively with PROSPERO (CRD42023403528).

RESULTS

From 1,117 studies screened, twenty studies met the eligibility criteria, with a total of 1,057 patients with obesity undergoing conversional OAGB after primary SG. The mean age ranged from 28.2 to 49.5 years, and 744 patients (75.2%) were women. At one year after revisional OAGB, the pooled mean percent excess weight loss (%EWL) was 65.2% (95%CI: 56.9, 73.4, I2 = 97%). The pooled mean %EWL after conversional OAGB was 71.1% (95%CI: 62.2, 80.0, I2 = 90%) at two years and 71.6% (95%CI: 61.0, 82.2, I2 = 50%) at five years. Additionally, resolution rates of diabetes and hypertension were 65.4% (95%CI: 0.522, 0.785, I2 = 65%) and 58.9% (95%CI: 0.415, 0.762, I2 = 89%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis demonstrated OAGB as an effective conversional procedure after primary SG in terms of weight loss and obesity-associated medical problems for selected patients. Despite the promising results, further randomized controlled studies with larger sample sizes and more extended follow-up periods are necessary to determine if the OAGB is the best conversional surgery after SG.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PACTR202310644487566 (retrospectively registered).

Revisional bariatric surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease: characterizing patient and procedural factors and 30-day outcomes for a retrospective cohort of 4412 patients

INTRODUCTION

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a well-established potential consequence of bariatric surgery and can require revisional surgery. Our understanding of the population requiring revision is limited. In this study, we aim to characterize patients requiring revisional surgery for GERD to understand their perioperative risks and identify strategies to improve their outcomes.

METHODS

Using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) registry, a retrospective cohort of patients who required revisional surgery for GERD in 2020 was identified. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to assess correlations between baseline characteristics and morbidity.

RESULTS

4412 patients required revisional surgery for GERD, encompassing 24% of all conversion procedures. In most cases, patients underwent sleeve gastrectomy (SG) as their original surgery (n = 3535, 80.1%). The revisional surgery for most patients was a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (n = 3722, 84.4%). Major complications occurred in 527 patients (11.9%) and 10 patients (0.23%) died within 30 days of revisional surgery. Major complications included anastomotic leak in 31 patients (0.70%) and gastrointestinal bleeding in 38 patients (0.86%). Multivariable analyses revealed that operative length, pre-operative antacid use, and RYGB were predictors of major complications.

CONCLUSION

GERD is the second most common indication for revisional surgery in patients who have undergone bariatric surgery. Patients who underwent SG as their initial procedure were the primary group who required revisional surgery for GERD; most underwent revision via RYGB. Further inquiry is needed to tailor operative approaches and pre-operative optimization for revisional surgery patients.

Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Versus One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as Revisional Surgery After Failed Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Purpose

This study aimed to assess the outcomes of revisional procedures, namely Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) following unsuccessful laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

Materials and Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis included 817 patients (404 in OAGB group, 413 in RYGB group) from seven retrospective comparative studies. Data on sample size, demographics, perioperative complications, operative time, pre- and post-revisional body mass index, total weight loss, and global weight loss over follow-up were extracted.

Results

The mean operative time was 98.2-201 minutes for RYGB versus 78.7-168 minutes for OAGB. Despite classical RYGB gastric bypass taking longer, mini gastric bypass resulted in greater weight loss than RYGB, with a mean difference of -5.84 (95% confidence interval [CI], -6.74 to -4.94; P<0.00001; I2=0%), greater total weight loss, and a higher diabetes remission rate (odds ratio [OR], 0.32; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.71). However, OAGB was associated with a significantly higher incidence of postoperative gastroesophageal reflux than RYGB (52 vs. 31: OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.67; P=0.0005; I2=0%).

Conclusion

OAGB was performed more quickly and boasted greater total weight loss and higher diabetes remission rates compared to RYGB after failed sleeve gastrectomy. However, OAGB also demonstrated a higher incidence of postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease. Thus, careful patient selection is essential when considering OAGB.

Trial Registration

PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42023474966.

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

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

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG): systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to compare weight loss and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remission after one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

METHODS

In PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, a search was performed using the terms "Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus one anastomosis gastric bypass," "revisional surgery," and "sleeve gastrectomy." Only original articles in English language comparing OAGB and RYGB were included. No temporal interval was set. The primary outcome measure was weight loss (%TWL). The secondary endpoints were leak, bleeding, marginal ulcer, and GERD. PRISMA flowchart was used. Differences in continuous and dichotomous outcome variables were expressed as mean difference (MD) and risk difference (RD) with 95% CI, respectively. Heterogeneity was assessed by using I2 statistic.

RESULTS

Six retrospective comparative articles were included in the present meta-analysis. Weight loss analysis showed a MD = 5.70 (95% CI 4.84-6.57) in favor of the OAGB procedure with a statistical significance (p = 0.00001) and no significant statistical heterogeneity (I2 = 0.00%). There was no significant RD for leak, bleeding, or marginal ulcer after the two revisional procedures. After conversion to OAGB, remission from GERD was 68.6% (81/118), and it was 80.6% (150/186) after conversion to RYGB with a RD = 0.10 (95% CI -0.04, 0.24), no statistical significance (p = 0.19), and high heterogeneity (I2 = 96%). De novo GERD was 6.3% (16/255) after conversional OAGB, and it was 0.5% (1/180) after conversion to RYGB with a RD = -0.23 (95% CI -0.57, 0.11), no statistical significance (p = 0.16), and high heterogeneity (I2 = 92%).

Outcome of Revisional Bariatric Surgery After Failed Sleeve Gastrectomy: a German Multicenter Study

PURPOSE

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is a common bariatric procedure that has been shown to be effective in both the short and long term, but it is not without risks, some of which necessitate revision or redo surgery (RS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

GBSR (German Bariatric Surgery Registry) data were evaluated in this multicenter analysis. Short-term results (1-year follow-up) of RS (Re-Sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, RYGB, Omega-loop gastric bypass, OLGB, and duodenal switch, DS) following primary SG (n = 27939) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of PSG patients, 7.9% (n=2195) needed revision surgery. Nine hundred ninety-four patients underwent the aforementioned four surgical procedures (95 with R-SG, 665 with RYGB, 141 with OLGB, and 93 DS). Loss of follow-up within 1 year 52.44%. The most common reasons for RS were weight regain and/or a worsening of preexisting comorbidities. Regarding the operating time, R-SG was the shortest of the four procedures, and DS was the longest. In general, there were no significant advantages of one procedure over another in terms of complication incidence in these categories. However, certain complications were seen more often after R-SG and DS than with other redo procedures. There were significant differences in BMI reduction 1 year after surgery (RYGB: 5.9; DS: 10.1; OLGB: 9.1; and R-SG: 9.1; p<0.001). GERD, hypertension, and sleep apnea demonstrated statistically significant comorbidity remission. Diabetes exhibited non-significant differences.

CONCLUSION

According to the findings of our study, all revision surgeries effectively resolved comorbidities, promoted weight loss, and lowered BMI. Due to the disparate outcomes obtained by various methods, this study cannot recommend a particular redo method as the gold standard. Selecting a procedure should consider the redo surgery's aims, the rationale for the revision, the patient's current state, and their medical history.

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.

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in Obesity: Bariatric Surgery as Both the Cause and the Cure in the Morbidly Obese Population

Gastrointestinal reflux disease (GERD) is a chronic, highly prevalent condition in the United States. GERD can significantly impact quality of life and lead to complications including aspiration pneumonia, esophageal stricture, Barrett's esophagus (BE) and esophageal cancer. Obesity is a risk factor for GERD, which often improves with weight loss and bariatric surgery. Though the incidence of bariatric surgery, in particular, minimally invasive sleeve gastrectomy, has risen in recent years, emerging data has revealed that the severity or new onset of GERD may follow bariatric surgery. We performed a literature review to provide a detailed analysis of GERD with an emphasis on bariatric surgery as both the cure and the cause for GERD in the morbidly obese population. We also describe the pathophysiological mechanisms, management approach and treatment strategies of GERD following bariatric surgery.

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

BACKGROUND

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Clinical influence of conversion of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy to one anastomosis gastric bypass on gastroesophageal reflux disease

PURPOSE

Assess the subjective impact of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms on patients undergoing revision from laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) to one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) using the Reflux Disease Questionnaire for GERD (RDQ) and the GERD-health related quality of life score (GERD-HRQL), prior to- and following conversion.

METHODS

Patients undergoing revision from LSG to OAGB were prospectively followed between May 2015 and December 2020. Data retrieved included demographics, anthropometrics, previous bariatric history, time interval between LSG and OAGB, weight loss, and co-morbidities. Pre- and post-OAGB RDQ and GERD-HRQL questionnaires were obtained. In the case of sleeve dilatation, sleeve resizing was performed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 37 patients underwent revision from LSG to OAGB. Mean ages at LSG and pre-OAGB were 38 ± 11.74 and 46 ± 12.75, respectively. Median follow-up time was 21.5 months (range 3-65). All patients underwent sleeve resizing. RDQ and GERD-HRQL scores were obtained at a median of 14 months (range 3-51) between pre- and post-OAGB. Median RDQ score pre-OAGB vs post-OAGB was significantly reduced (30 (range 12-72) vs 14 (range 12-60), p = 0.007). All 3 parts of the GERD- HRQL questionnaires were significantly reduced between pre-OAGB and post-OAGB: Symptoms (20; 62.5% vs 10; 31.3%, p = 0.012), overall score (15 (0-39) vs 7 (0-28), p = 0.04) and subjective improvement (10; 31% vs 20; 62.5%, p = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

Conversion of LSG to OAGB showed subjective improvement of GERD symptoms both in RDQ and in GERD-HRQL.

Conversion to Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass: a successful means of mitigating reflux after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become the most common bariatric procedure due to the technical ease and weight loss success of the operation. However, there has been concern that LSG contributes to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) postoperatively with a proportion of patients requiring conversion to a Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB). The objective of this study was to characterize the patients who underwent revision in our hospital system and to better understand pre-operative predictors of GERD and revision.

METHODS

After IRB approval, a retrospective review was conducted assessing for patients who had conversion of LSG to RYGB at three hospitals within the University of Pennsylvania Health System from January 2015 to December 2021. The patients' charts were then reviewed to evaluate for demographics, BMI, operative findings, imaging and endoscopic reports, and post-operative outcomes.

RESULTS

97 patients were identified who underwent conversion of LSG to RYGB between January 2015 and December 2021. The cohort was predominantly female (n = 89, 91.7%) with an average age of 42.7 ± 10.6 years at the time of conversion. The most common indications for revision were GERD (72.2%) and obesity/insufficient weight loss (24.7%). Patients lost an average of 11.1 ± 12.9 kg after revision to RYGB. Of the patients who underwent revision for GERD, 80.2% noted global symptomatic improvement after revision and 19.4% were able to stop their proton pump inhibitor (PPI) postoperatively, with most patients decreasing the frequency of the PPI use postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients who underwent conversion from LSG to RYGB due to GERD and saw marked improvements in GERD symptoms and outcomes. These findings illuminate the real-world practices and outcomes of bariatric revisional procedures for reflux and the need for more research on standardized practice.

Safety of concomitant cholecystectomy during one anastomosis gastric bypass compared with sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

Candidates of metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) are prone for gallstone formation. Concomitant cholecystectomy (CC) during MBS is controversial. This study is first to examine the safety of CC during one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), compared with sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Single-center retrospective comparative study of CC (2012-2021) during OAGB, to SG and RYGB. CC was performed in 115 patients during OAGB (n = 50), SG (n = 39), and RYGB (n = 26). All procedures were completed laparoscopically. Baseline characteristics were similar except age, body mass index, gastroesophageal reflux disease, obstructive sleep apnea, and previous MBS (p < 0.05). Intraoperative complications occurred in one OAGB patient (2% vs. 0%, 0%; p = 0.52), which was not cholecystectomy related. There were no differences in total (6% vs. 2.6%, 15.4%; p = 0.13) and major (2% vs. 0%, 3.8; p = 0.50) early-complication rates. Of them, cholecystectomy-related complications occurred in one OAGB, compared with none of SG and one RYGB (2% vs. 0%, 3.8%; p = 0.50). The former was major, and the latter was minor complication. None of the OAGB patients needed re-admission (0% vs. 0%, 11.5; p = 0.04). All CC outcome parameters were similar between asymptomatic and symptomatic gallstones. Previous bariatric procedures were found to be a significant risk for major complications and readmissions (OR = 16.87, p = 0.019). CC during OAGB for gallstones seems safe, as in SG and RYGB. No cholecystectomy-related intraoperative complications occurred, and postoperative complication rates were low and acceptable. Outcomes for asymptomatic gallstones were similar to symptomatic ones, and we cautiously support CC in the presence of gallstones.

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Compared with Sleeve Gastrectomy in Elderly Patients: Safety and Long-term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

As life expectancy increases, more elderly patients are being considered for metabolic bariatric surgery. We aimed to assess the safety and long-term effectiveness of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) compared to sleeve gastrectomy (SG).

METHODS

Single-center retrospective comparative study of OAGB and SG (2012-2019) in patients aged ≥ 65 years.

RESULTS

In all, 124 patients underwent OAGB (n = 41) and SG (n = 83). Mean age was 67.6 ± 2.8 and 67.6 ± 2.6 years (p = 0.89), respectively. Baseline characteristics were comparable, except lower rates of hypertension (HTN) and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in OAGB than SG patients (43.9% vs. 74.6%; p < 0.001, and 39.0% vs. 89.1%; p < 0.001, respectively). Body mass index (BMI) of OAGB and SG patients decreased from 41.8 ± 7.8 and 43.3 ± 5.9 kg/m² (p = 0.25) to 28.6 ± 4.7 and 33.2 ± 5.3 (p < 0.001), at long-term follow-up, respectively. Excess weight loss (EWL) > 50% was achieved in 80.6% and 43.2% of OAGB and SG patients, with a mean EWL of 67.2% ± 22.3 and 45.8% ± 18.0 (p < 0.001) and a mean total weight loss (TWL) of 30.7% ± 10.4 and 21.9% ± 8.1 (p < 0.001), respectively. Resolution rates of obesity-associated medical problems were similar, except type 2 diabetes (T2D) and HTN, which were 86.6% and 73.3% in OAGB, compared with 29.7% and 36.3% in SG patients (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001), respectively. Major early complication rates were comparable (2.4% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.73, respectively). Revision for late complications was required in two OAGB patients.

CONCLUSIONS

OAGB in the elderly is safe and results in better long-term weight reduction and resolution of T2D and HTN than SG.

Esophageal function and non-acid reflux evaluated by impedance-24 h-pH-metry, high-resolution manometry, and gastroscopy after one-anastomosis gastric bypass-outcomes of a prospective mid-term study

BACKGROUND

One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) is the third most common bariatric operation for patients with obesity worldwide. One concern about OAGB is the presence of acid and non-acid reflux in a mid- and long-term follow-up. The aim of this study was to objectively evaluate reflux and esophagus motility by comparing preoperative and postoperative mid-term outcomes.

SETTING

Cross-sectional study; University-hospital based.

METHODS

This study includes primary OAGB patients (preoperative gastroscopy, high-resolution manometry (HRM), and impedance-24 h-pH-metry) operated at Medical University of Vienna before 31st December 2017. After a mean follow-up of 5.1 ± 2.3 years, these examinations were repeated. In addition, history of weight, remission of associated medical problems (AMP), and quality of life (QOL) were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 21 patients were included in this study and went through all examinations. Preoperative weight was 124.4 ± 17.3 kg with a BMI of 44.7 ± 5.6 kg/m², total weight loss after 5.1 ± 2.3 years was 34.4 ± 8.3%. In addition, remission of AMP and QOL outcomes were very satisfactory in this study. In gastroscopy, anastomositis, esophagitis, Barrett´s esophagus, and bile in the pouch were found in: 38.1%, 28.3%, 9.5%, and 42.9%. Results of HRM of the lower esophageal sphincter pressure were 28.0 ± 15.6 mmHg, which are unchanged compared to preoperative values. Nevertheless, in the impedance-24 h-pH-metry, acid exposure time and DeMeester score decreased significantly to 1.2 ± 1.2% (p = 0.004) and 7.5 ± 8.9 (p = 0.017). Further, the total number of refluxes were equal to preoperative; however, the decreased acid refluxes were replaced by non-acid refluxes.

CONCLUSION

This study has shown decreased rates of acid reflux and increased non-acid reflux after a mid-term outcome of primary OAGB patients. Gastroscopy showed signs of chronic irritation of the gastrojejunostomy, pouch, and distal esophagus, even in asymptomatic patients. Follow-up gastroscopies in OAGB patients after 5 years may be considered.

Intrathoracic pouch migration in one-anastomosis gastric bypass with and without hiatoplasty: A 3-dimensional-computed tomography volumetry study

BACKGROUND

Currently, 4.8% of bariatric operations worldwide are one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) procedures. If a hiatal hernia is detected in a preoperative gastroscopy, OAGB can be combined with hiatoplasty. Intrathoracic pouch migration (ITM) is common after bypass procedures because the fundus, a natural abutment, is separated from the pouch.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to find out whether OAGB or OAGB combined with hiatoplasty carries a higher risk of ITM and, therefore, also gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

SETTING

University hospital.

METHODS

Fifty patients (group 1: 25× primary OAGB; group 2: 25× primary OAGB with hiatoplasty) were included in this study. History of weight, GERD, and quality of life were recorded in patient interviews and pouch volume and ITM were evaluated using 3-dimensional-computed tomography volumetry.

RESULTS

There were no differences in terms of patient characteristics, history of weight, pouch volume, or quality of life between both groups. ITM was found in group 1 in 60% (n = 15) and group 2 in 76% (n = 19) of all patients (P = .152). The ITM mean length was significantly lower in group 1 with .9 ± 1.1 cm than in group 2 with 1.8 ± 1.2 cm (P = .007). Regarding GERD, there was no difference between both groups; nevertheless, significantly more patients with ITM (38.2%; n = 13) had GERD compared with patients without ITM (6.3%; n = 1).

CONCLUSION

In primary OAGB, an additional hiatoplasty was not associated with higher rates of ITM or GERD; nevertheless, the length of ITM was higher after hiatoplasty. If ITM occurs, patients have a risk of developing GERD.

One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass as Revisional Surgery After Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The demand for revisional bariatric surgery after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has increased, but the ideal procedure remains unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare the outcomes of weight loss and safety of one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures for failed SG. Four retrospective comparative studies were included, comprising 499 individuals. Patients submitted to OAGB had a more significant total weight loss (TWL) (MD =  - 5.89%; 95% CI - 6.80 to - 4.97) after revisional surgery. Overall early complication rate was similar between procedures (RD = 0.04; 95% CI: - 0.05 to 0.12). Limited and heterogeneous data prevent meaningful conclusions, but the present analysis suggests that OAGB has a better TWL after revisional surgery.

Hiatal reconstruction is safe and effective for control of reflux after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy

Background

Gastroesophageal reflux is a known complication following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) as anatomical changes predispose to reduced lower esophageal sphincter pressure and development of hiatus hernia. The mainstay of surgical management has been Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) which is not without risk. Hiatus hernia repair (HHR) with surgical reattachment of the oesophagus to the crura, recreating the phreno-esophageal ligament is a simple procedure specifically targeting a number of anatomical changes responsible for reflux in this population.

Methods

We conducted a single centre retrospective analysis of adult patients with post-sleeve reflux refractory to medical treatment, managed with either HHR, RYGB or One-anastomosis Duodenal switch (OADS). PPI use and symptoms of reflux were assessed at early and mid-term time points via validated questionnaires.

Results

99 patients were included, of these the surgical procedure was HHR alone in 58, RYGB in 29 and OADS in 12. At early follow-up control of reflux symptoms was achieved in 72.4% after HHR, 82.1% after RYGB and 100% after OADS with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.09). At mid-term followup (median 10 months IQR 7–21) there was no significant difference in the presence of symptomatic reflux as determined by post-op Visick score nor a difference in PPI use. The GerdQ score was significantly lower after OADS as compared to HHR and RYGB (4.6 ± 2.3 vs 7.7 ± 2.2 vs 8.7 ± 3.5, p = 0.006).

Conclusion

HHR with reconstruction of the phreno-esophageal ligament is a safe and effective procedure for patients with reflux after LSG, that avoids more complex operations such as RYGB and OADS and their associated long-term sequelae.

Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Versus Revisional One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass After Failed Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

High rates of revision surgery have been reported for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), with weight regain (WR) as the most frequently reported cause. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the most commonly performed revision procedure, whereas one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a less popular approach.

Methods

A single-blinded randomized controlled trial was conducted. One hundred seventy-six patients were enrolled and randomized. After loss to follow-up, 80 patients for RYGB and 80 patients for OAGB were analyzed, with a 2-year follow-up. Patients with grade B or higher gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) were excluded. Early and late postoperative complications were recorded. Body mass index (BMI), percentage of excess BMI loss (%EBMIL), nutritional laboratory test results, and the resolution of associated medical problems were assessed after revision surgery.

Results

After 2 years, both groups achieved significantly lower BMI than their post-LSG nadir BMI (p < 0.001). The %EBMIL changes showed significantly faster weight loss in the OAGB group than in the RYGB at the 6-month follow-up (mean difference: 8.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.2 to 16.9%). However, at 1-year and 2-year follow-ups, the differences were statistically insignificant (p > 0.05). Early and late complications were similar between two groups. Both groups showed improvement or resolution of associated medical problems, with no statistically significant differences after 2 years (p = 1.00).

Conclusion

Both revisional RYGB and OAGB have comparable significant weight loss effects when performed for WR after LSG. After a 2-year follow-up, both procedures were safe, with no significant differences in the occurrence of complications and nutritional deficits.

Graphical abstract

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass for Revision of Restrictive Procedures: Mid-Term Outcomes and Analysis of Possible Outcome Predictors

PURPOSE

Revisional one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) for insufficient weight reduction following primary restrictive procedures is still investigated. We report mid-term outcomes and possible outcome predictors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Single-center retrospective comparative study of revisional OAGB outcomes (2015-2018) following laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG); silastic ring vertical gastroplasty (SRVG) is separately discussed.

RESULTS

In all, 203 patients underwent revisional OAGB following LAGB (n = 125), SG (n = 64), and SRVG (n = 14). Comparing LAGB and SG, body mass index (BMI) at revision were 41.3 ± 6.6 and 42 ± 11.2 kg/m² (p = 0.64), reduced to 31.3 ± 8.3 and 31.9 ± 8.3 (p = 0.64) at mid-term follow-up, respectively. Excess weight loss (EWL) > 50% was achieved in ~ 50%, with EWL of 79.4 ± 20.4% (corresponding total weight loss 38.5 ± 10.4%). SRVG patients had comparable outcomes. Resolution rates of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and hypertension (HTN) were 93.3% and 84.6% in LAGB compared with 100% and 100% in SG patients (p = 0.47 and p = 0.46), respectively. In univariable analysis, EWL > 50% was associated with male gender (p < 0.001), higher weight (p < 0.001), and BMI (p = 0.007) at primary surgery, and higher BMI at revisional OAGB (p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, independent predictors for EWL > 50% were male gender (OR = 2.8, 95% CI 1.27-6.18; p = 0.01) and higher BMI at revisional OAGB (OR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.03-1.19; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

Revisional OAGB for insufficient restrictive procedures results in excellent weight reduction in nearly 50% of patients, with resolution of T2D and HTN at mid-term follow-up. Male gender and higher BMI at revision were associated with EWL > 50% following revisional OAGB. Identification of more predictors could aid judicious patient selection.

Comparison of the Long-term Outcomes of RYGB and OAGB as Conversion Procedures After Failed LSG - a Case-Control Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of RYGB and OAGB on patients after failed treatment of obesity by laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

STUDY DESIGN

A case-control study based on a prospectively maintained database of reoperated patients after failed LSG, which included 33 patients who underwent RYGB conversion and 47 patients who underwent OAGB conversion.

RESULT

The mean %EBWL after a 5-year follow-up for RYGBc vs OAGBc was 84.04% vs 72.95% (p = 0.2176), respectively. Complete long-term diabetes remission was observed significantly more frequently in the OAGBc than in the RYGBc group (97.3% vs 33%; p = 0.035). There were no other statistically significant differences in the remission rate of comorbidities between RYGBc and OAGBc: hypertension 30% vs 27.3% (p = 0.261), dyslipidemia 83.3% vs 59.1% (p = 0.277), OSAS 100% vs 60% (p = 0.639), and GERD 40% vs 71.4% (p > 0.99), respectively. 7 patients were newly diagnosed with GERD after OAGBc and none after RYGBc. There were no statistically significant differences in the number of complications between the OAGBc and RYGB groups. The Comprehensive Complication Index was 17.85 (± IQR 29.6) in the OAGBc group and 14.92 (± IQR 21.75) in the RYGBc group (p = 0.375).

CONCLUSION

The authors recognized complete long-term type 2 diabetes remission after conversion surgery as the most relevant difference, where the OAGB variety was found superior for its better efficacy. Any other statistically significant differences in the consequences after both conversion procedures used after the failure of LSG have not been stated. Both methods therefore can be considered to complete the initial treatment, considering the preferences and individual burdens of the patients.