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

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.

Decision-making Considerations in Revisional Bariatric Surgery

OBJECTIVE

With drastic variations in bariatric practices, consensus is lacking on an optimal approach for revisional bariatric surgeries.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors reviewed and consolidated bariatric surgery literature to provide specific revision suggestions based on each index surgery, including adjustable gastric band (AGB), sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD-DS), single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve (SADI-S), one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), and vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG).

RESULTS

AGB has the highest weight recurrence rate and can be converted to RYGB, SG, and BPD-DS. After index SG, common surgical options include a resleeve or RYGB. The RYGB roux limb can be distalized and pouch resized in context of reflux, and the entire anatomy can be revised into BPD-DS. Data analyzing revisional surgery after a single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve was limited. In patients with one anastomosis gastric bypass and vertical banded gastroplasty anatomy, most revisions were the conversion to RYGB.

CONCLUSIONS

As revisional bariatric surgery becomes more common, the best approach depends on the patient's indication for surgery and preexisting anatomy.

GERD after Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Prevalence and Risk Factors Analysis

Background and Objectives: The prevalence of GERD is increasing among individuals with obesity, and RYGB is an effective procedure to control GERD and obesity. However, some patients continue to have GERD after RYGB. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence and the risk factors for GERD after RYGB. Material and Methods: This prospective study included 180 RYGB patients followed for an average of 12.2 (0.6) years. In total, 126 (70%) patients agreed to participate and provided data on their weight, GERD symptoms, and filled the GERD-HRQL, TFEQ-18, and GSRS questionnaires. Results: The average age before surgery was 42.7 (10.5) years, and BMI was 45.2 (6.4) kg/m2. Moreover, 128 (71.1%) were females, and preoperative GERD was diagnosed in 74 (41.1%) patients. At the 12-year follow-up, the mean %EBMIL and %TWL was 60.37 and 25.73, respectively. The median %WR was 18.0 (39.0). Postoperative GERD was present in 30 (23.8%) patients, of whom 12 (40%) continued to have GERD symptoms and 18 (60%) developed de novo GERD. The GERD-HRQL score significantly decreased from 3.0 (9.0) at baseline to 2.0 (5.0) (p = 0.028) at 12 years. GSRS Diarrhea and Indigestion scores increased significantly from 1.33 (0.67) to 1.5 (2.42) (p < 0.001) and from 2.0 (1.25) to 2.25 (1.25) (p < 0.001), respectively. No change in the cognitive restraint score was observed. Uncontrolled eating and emotional eating scores decreased from 51.85 (22.22) to 40.74 (33.33) (p < 0.001) and from 44.44 (44.44) to 33.33 (22.22) (p < 0.001), respectively. In the multivariate analysis, %WR > 11 (OR = 3.22, p = 0.029) and GSRS Diarrhea score (OR = 3.21, p = 0.027) were significant predictors of GERD 12 years after RYGB. Conclusions: RYGB was an effective procedure to control GERD; however, 23.8% had persistent or de novo GERD after 12 years. The independent risk factors associated with GERD after RYGB were weight regain and GSRS Diarrhea score.

Outcomes following reoperative bariatric surgery following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy at a tertiary care centre

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common bariatric surgical procedure worldwide. Approximately 20%-30% of patients present with weight loss failure or reflux following SG, which might require reoperative surgery. We present the surgical outcomes and complications following reoperative bariatric surgery at a tertiary care centre.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospectively collected data of all patients undergoing reoperative bariatric surgery from 2008 to 2021 were analysed retrospectively. Weight loss, resolution of comorbidities and complications following reoperative surgery were evaluated.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients were included in the study. The mean age was 38.8 (10.8) years. The primary procedure performed was laparoscopic SG in all cases. Nine patients underwent Roux en Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (one banded RYGB) and 14 underwent one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) (three-banded OAGB). Three patients underwent resleeve. The most common indication was weight loss failure (65.3%). Fifteen patients were diagnosed to have hiatal hernia intraoperatively and concomitant repair was performed. The mean body mass index before revision surgery was 42.7 (9.8). It was 32.6 (5.7) kg/m2 and 33.0 (6.1) kg/m2 at 1 and 3 years, respectively. Age and pre-revision surgery excess weight correlated with weight loss (r = -0.79 and r = 0.99, respectively). Leak and bleeding occurred in one and two patients, respectively. There were two band-related complications and one 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

Re-operative bariatric surgery following SG has adequate weight loss with acceptable complication rates. Band placement in re-operative surgery might lead to a higher complication rate.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHOD

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

RESULT

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

CONCLUSION

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

Outcomes of primary versus conversional Roux-En-Y gastric bypass after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Conversional surgery is common after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) because of suboptimal weight loss (SWL) or poor responders and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the most common conversional procedure after LSG.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study analyzed patients who underwent primary RYGB (PRYGB) or conversional RYGB (CRYGB) at three specialized bariatric centers between 2008 and 2019 and tested for weight loss, resolution of GERD, food tolerance (FT), early and late complications, and the resolution of associated medical problems. This was analyzed by propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

In total, 558 (PRYGB) and 155 (CRYGB) completed at least 2 years of follow-up. After PSM, both cohorts significantly decreased BMI from baseline (p < 0.001). The CRYGB group had an initially more significant mean BMI decrease of 6.095 kg/m2 at 6 months of follow-up (p < 0.001), while the PRYGB group had a more significant mean BMI decrease of 5.890 kg/m2 and 8.626 kg/m2 at 1 and 2 years, respectively (p < 0.001). Food tolerance (FT) improved significantly in the CRYGB group (p < 0.001), while CRYGB had better FT than PRYGB at 2 years (p < 0.001). A GERD resolution rate of 92.6% was recorded in the CRYGB (p < 0.001). Both cohorts had comparable rates of early complications (p = 0.584), late complications (p = 0.495), and reoperations (p = 0.398). Associated medical problems at 2 years significantly improved in both cohorts (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CRYGB is a safe and efficient option in non- or poor responders after LSG, with significant weight loss and improvement in GERD. Moreover, PRYGB and CRYGB had comparable complications, reoperations, and associated medical problem resolution rates.

Revisional One-Step Bariatric Surgical Techniques After Unsuccessful Laparoscopic Gastric Band: A Retrospective Cohort Study with 2-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has high reported rates of revision due to poor weight loss (WL) and high complication rates. Yet, there is yet to be a consensus on the best revisional procedure after unsuccessful LAGB, and studies comparing different revisional procedures after LAGB are still needed.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study that compared the outcomes of one-step revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (rRYGB), one-anastomosis gastric bypass (rOAGB), or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (rLSG) after LAGB. WL, complications, resolution of associated medical conditions, and food tolerance were assessed with a post hoc pairwise comparison one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) throughout a 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 102 (rRYGB), 80 (rOAGB), and 70 (rLSG) patients. After 2 years, an equal percentage of excess weight loss was observed in rOAGB and rRYGB (both >90%; p=0.998), significantly higher than that in rLSG (83.6%; p<0.001). In our study, no leaks were observed. rRYGB had higher complication rates according to the Clavien-Dindo classification (10.8% vs. 3.75% and 5.7% in rOAGB and rLSG, respectively, p=0.754), and re-operations were not statistically significant. Food tolerance was comparable between rOAGB and rRYGB (p = 0.987), and both had significantly better food tolerance than rLSG (p<0.001). The study cohorts had comparable resolution rates for associated medical problems (p>0.60).

CONCLUSION

rOAGB and rRYGB had better outcomes after LAGB than rLSG regarding WL, feasibility, food tolerance, and safety. rOAGB had significantly higher rates of nutritional deficiencies.

Boosting weight loss after conversional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass with liraglutide and placebo use. A double-blind-randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Conversional bariatric surgery inherently has less weight loss (WL) compared to primary procedures. Adjunctive use of the GLP-1 analog, liraglutide with conversional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (cRYGB) may maximize the WL benefits of surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This single-center randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial included 80 patients randomized into two groups; the liraglutide group (40 patients) who received daily injections of liraglutide, and the placebo group (40 patients) who received normal saline starting at 6 weeks from cRYGB and continued for 6 months. After discontinuing the drugs at 6 months and unblinding, the patient were followed up to 12 months. The endpoints were percentage of total weight loss (%TWL) and percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL), and changes in the metabolic biomarkers, and complications within 30 and 90 days according to the global outcome benchmark (GOB) stratification.

RESULTS

In total, 38 patients in the liraglutide group and 31 in the placebo group completed the 24 weeks. Liraglutide group experienced better WL with a significantly higher mean %TWL at 1 month (10.27±1.39 vs. 8.41±2.08), at 6 weeks (12.65±1.77 vs. 10.47±2.23), at 6 months (18.29 ±1.74 vs. 15.58 ±1.65), and at 12 months 24.15±2.35 versus 22.70±2.13 (all P <0.001). For %EWL, this was also significantly higher in the liraglutide group at all time points. A %TWL of greater than 20% at 6 months of treatment was recorded in six (15.8%) patients in the liraglutide group and none in the placebo group ( P =0.029). Both groups had comparable changes in metabolic biomarkers. Adverse events were recorded in 11 (27.5%) patients in the liraglutide, with no adverse events in the placebo group ( P <0.001). Both groups had Clavien-Dindo scores I and II (5.0 and 2.5%), and GOB values indicated that 90.0 and 97.5% were low-risk patients.

CONCLUSION

Adjunctive use of liraglutide with cRYGB gives significantly higher WL and resolution of associated medical problems.

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.

Effect of Primary Versus Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) on Fatty Acid Profile

INTRODUCTION

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is one option of a revisional procedure for failed sleeve gastrectomy. Moreover, it can be used as a primary bariatric procedure, and is an effective surgery resulting in significant weight loss and the resolution or improvement of obesity-associated medical problems, accompanied by low perioperative complications. However, as with any therapy, OAGB has its limitations, including micronutrient deficiency or malnutrition. In our study, we compared the fatty acid (FA) profile in serum of patients after both primary OAGB (pOAGB) and revisional OAGB (rOAGB) to identify potential postsurgical FA alterations.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study on patients with obesity who underwent OAGB procedures (pOAGB n=68; rOAGB n=17), conducted from 2016 to 2018. In blood, we analyzed a series of biochemical parameters, and in the serum, the FA profile was determined using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

The percentage of excess BMI loss (% EBMIL) after pOAGB was 73.5 ± 2.47% in comparison to 45.9 ± 4.15% in the rOAGB group (p<0.001). In contrast to the lack of effect of rOAGB on most polyunsaturated FAs, in the pOAGB group, there was a decrease in eicosapentaenoic acid, and eicosatetraenoic and docosahexaenoic acid levels (p<0.001). We also found a decrease in very long-chain FAs (VLCFAs) and an increase in branched-chain FAs (BCFAs) after both types of OAGB procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Both OAGB procedures improved the profile of most FAs, leading to a decrease in VLCFAs, which are considered harmful, and an improvement in BCFAs, which are considered to be beneficial. There is a need to further investigate the possibility of n-3 polyunsaturated FA supplementation after pOAGB, due to the large decrease in these FAs after pOAGB.

Bariatric Surgery in Obesity: Metabolic Quality Analysis and Comparison of Surgical Options

Obesity is a constantly growing health problem which reduces quality of life and life expectancy. Bariatric surgery (BS) for obesity is considered when all other conservative treatment modalities have failed. Comparison of the multidisciplinary programs with BS regarding to the weight loss showed that substantial and durable weight reduction have been achieved only with bariatric surgical treatments. Although laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is the most popular BS, it has high long-term failure rates, and it is claimed that one of every three patients will undergo another bariatric procedure within a 10-year period. Although BS provides weight loss and improvement of metabolic comorbidities, in long-term follow-up, weight gain is observed in half of the patients, while decrease in bone mass and nutritional deficiencies occur in up to 90%. Moreover, despite significant weight loss, several psychological aspects of patients are worsened in comparison to preoperative levels. Nearly one-fifth of postoperative patients with "Loss-of-eating control" meet food addiction criteria. Therefore, the benefits of weight loss following bariatric procedures alone are still debated in terms of the proinflammatory and metabolic profile of obesity.

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.

Clinical factors associated with remission of obese acanthosis nigricans after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Acanthosis nigricans (AN) involves skin hyperpigmentation in body folds and creases. Obesity-associated AN (OB_AN) is the most common type of AN. The skin condition of obese patients with AN can be improved through bariatric surgery, such as laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), after weight loss. However, the contributing factors to the remission of AN after surgery are still not fully determined. The authors aimed to assess the metabolic and pathological factors associated with remission of AN following LSG in obese individuals.

METHODS

The study included 319 obese patients who underwent LSG at our hospital. The subjects were divided into obesity (OB) only (OB, n =178) or OB with AN (OB_AN, n =141) groups. The basic clinical and metabolic indices and the dermatological features via reflectance confocal microscopy and histology were collected from patients prior to and after LSG.

RESULTS

OB_AN patients had higher fasting plasma glucose, homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance, and testosterone levels than OB patients. LSG could significantly improve the biochemical and histopathological features of OB_AN patients. The remissive rate of OB_AN patients was about 86.5% (122 out of 141) after surgery. The remission of OB_AN skin lesions was positively correlated with testosterone levels ( P <0.01). In addition, there was a significant positive correlation between changes in AN scores and epidermal thickness and skin pigmentation scores after surgery ( P <0.01).

CONCLUSION

The remissive rate of OB_AN after LSG is associated with improved testosterone levels and reduced epidermal thickness and skin pigmentation levels.

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.

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

Introduction

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

Materials and Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Two-Year Results of the Banded Versus Non-banded Re-sleeve Gastrectomy as a Secondary Weight Loss Procedure After the Failure of Primary Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Insufficient weight loss or weight regain has been reported in up to 30% of patients after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Approximately 4.5% of patients who undergo LSG need revisional surgery for a dilated sleeve.

METHODS

This randomized controlled trial compared the outcomes between banded (BLSG) and non-banded re-LSG (NBLSG) after weight regain. Percentage excess body weight loss (%EWL), percentage total weight loss (%TWL), associated medical problems, gastric volume measurement, and endoscopy were measured preoperatively and 1 and 2 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

Both groups (25 patients each) achieved similar % EWL and %TWL at six months, one year, and two years postoperatively (%EWL 46.9 vs. 43.6, 83.7 vs. 86.3, and 85.7 vs. 83.9) (p= > 0.151) (%TWL 23.9 vs. 21.8, 43.1 vs .43.3, 44.2 vs. 42.2) (p=>0.342), respectively. However, the body mass index was significantly lower with BLSG (24.9 vs. NBLSG, 26.9). Both groups showed a significant reduction in stomach volume after two years (BLSG -248.4 mL vs. NBLSG -215.8 mL). Food tolerance (FT) scores were significantly reduced in both groups, whereby BSLG had significantly lower FT with an average of -1.1 point. No significant differences were observed regarding improvement of the associated medical problems after the first and two years after revisional LSG or the postoperative complications between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic re-LSG is feasible and safe with satisfactory outcomes in patients with weight regain after LSG who have gastric dilatation without reflux esophagitis. Both groups had comparable significant weight loss effects and improvement of associated medical problems. The BLSG tends to have a more stable weight loss after two years with a significantly lower BMI, lower stomach volume, and less weight regain. Food tolerance decreased in both groups but reduced more in the BLSG group. After a 2-year follow-up, we may regard both procedures are safe, with no significant differences in the occurrence of complications and nutritional deficits.

Diet quality and anthropometric indices of patients undergone bariatric surgery: the prospective Tehran obesity treatment study

BACKGROUND

Patients undergone bariatric surgery (BS) has long-term risks including decrease in diet quality, nutritional deficiencies and weight regain. This study focus on assessing dietary quality and food group components in patients one year after BS, the relationship between dietary quality score and anthropometric indices, and also evaluating the trend of body mass index (BMI) of these patients three years after BS.

METHODS

A total of 160 obese patients (BMI ≥ 35 kg/m²) were undergone sleeve gastrectomy (SG) (n = 108) or gastric bypass (GB) (n = 52), participated in this study. They were assessed for dietary intakes using three 24-hour dietary recalls one year after surgery. Dietary quality was assessed using food pyramid for post BS patients and healthy eating index (HEI). Anthropometric measurements were taken pre-surgery and 1, 2 and 3 years after operation.

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 39.9 ± 11 years (79% female). The mean ± SD percentage of excess weight loss was 76.6 ± 21.0 one year after surgery. Intake patterns are generally (up to 60%) not consistent with the food pyramid. The mean total HEI score was 64 ± 12 out of 100. More than %60 of participants is exceeding the recommendations for saturated fat and sodium. The HEI score did not show significant relationship with anthropometric indices. The mean of BMI in SG group increased over three years of follow up, while in GB group, there were no significant differences in BMI during three years of follow up.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings showed that patients had not healthy pattern intake one year after BS. Diet quality did not show significant relationship with anthropometric indices. The trend of BMI three years after surgery was different based on surgery types.