One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Single Anastomosis Duodenoileostomy with Sleeve: Comparative Analysis of 30-Day Outcomes Using the MBSAQIP

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.

Comparative multicenter analysis of sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass, and duodenal switch in patients with BMI ≥70kg/m2: a 2-year follow-up

Patients undergoing metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 70 kg/m2 are considered a high-risk group. There is limited literature to guide surgeons on the perioperative safety as well as the different procedural outcomes of MBS in this cohort. Our aim is to compare the safety profiles, early- and medium-term outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and duodenal switch (DS) in patients with BMI ≥ 70 kg/m2. A total of 156 patients with BMI ≥ 70kg/m2 underwent MBS (SG = 40, RYGB = 40, and DS = 76). Mean baseline BMI was 75.5 kg/m2. Total weight loss (%TWL) at 24 months was highest in the DS group compared to RYGB (40.6% versus 33.8%, P value = .03) and SG (40.6% versus 28.5%, P value = .006). There was no significant difference in %TWL between RYGB and SG (33.8% versus 28.5%, P value = .20). The 30-day complication rates were similar [SG (7.5%), RYGB (10%), and DS (9.2%) (P value = 1.0)]. There was one reported leak (DS). The 30-day mortality was zero. MBS is safe and effective in patients with BMI ≥ 70 kg/m2. All procedures had comparable safety profiles and complication rates. While DS achieved the highest %TWL at 24 months, similar comorbidity resolution rates among the procedures attenuate its clinical significance.

From database to practice: the MBSAQIP in the surgical literature

BACKGROUND

The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) has been a game changer for metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), with continuous improvements in safety and outcomes throughout the years of its usage. It allows in-depth evaluations of MBS procedures, presenting practitioners and researchers with unparalleled opportunities for quality assessment, research and clinical advancement.

OBJECTIVES

To offer an updated overview of MBSAQIP-related publications.

SETTING

United States.

METHODS

PubMed was queried using keywords "MBSAQIP" and "Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program." Letters to editors, duplicates, commentaries, and retracted articles were excluded. Studies that mentioned MBSAQIP but did not use the data within were also excluded.

RESULTS

A total of 400 search items were returned as of August 2023. After exclusions, 289 studies were reviewed. Articles were published in a total of 28 unique journals, the majority of which were featured in Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases (SOARD), with 114 articles (39.4%). Sixty-one articles were focused on creating predictive models or risk calculators, 58 on investigating the safety of procedures, and 52 on exploring complications. Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) were the 2 most commonly discussed procedures, at 80.3% and 80% respectively. Forty-three studies included patients who underwent robotic-assisted MBS.

CONCLUSIONS

The MBSAQIP is a valuable resource that has generated a wealth of studies in the literature. It has allowed for intense analysis of clinical issues and fostered a culture of safety and quality improvement. Participating surgeons must pledge commitment to extended follow-up periods to maximize its effectiveness.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

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.

One anastomosis gastric bypass as a primary bariatric surgery: MBSAQIP database analysis of short-term safety and outcomes

BACKGROUND

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is described as a simpler, potentially safe, and effective bariatric-metabolic procedure that has been recently endorsed by the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVES

First, we aim to compare the 30-day outcomes between OAGB and other bypass procedures: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and single anastomosis duodenoileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S). Second, identify the odds between postoperative complications and each surgical procedure.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary OAGB, RYGB, and SADI-S were identified using the MBSAQIP database of 2020 and 2021. An analysis of patient demographics and 30-day outcomes were compared between these three bypass procedures. In addition, a multilogistic regression for overall complications, blood transfusions, unplanned ICU admissions, readmission, reoperation, and anastomotic leak stratified by surgical procedure was performed.

RESULTS

1607 primary OAGBs were reported between 2020 and 2021. In terms of patient demographics, patients who underwent RYGB and SADI-S showed a higher incidence of comorbidities. On the other hand, OAGB had shorter length of stay (1.39 ± 1.10 days vs 1.62 ± 1.42 days and 1.90 ± 2.04 days) and operative times (98.79 ± 52.76 min vs 125.91 ± 57.76 min and 139.85 ± 59.20 min) than RYGB and SADI-S. Similarly, OAGB showed lower rates of overall complications (1.9% vs 4.5% and 6.4%), blood transfusions (0.4% vs 1.1% and 1.8%), unplanned ICU admission (0.3% vs 0.8% and 1.4%), readmission (2.4% vs 4.9% and 5.0%), and reoperation (1.2% vs 1.9% and 3.1%). A multilogistic regression analysis was performed, RYGB and SADI-S demonstrated higher odds of 30-day complications.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of primary OAGB has increased since its approval by ASMBS, from 0.05% reported between 2015 and 2019 to 0.78% between 2020 and 2021. OAGB had better 30-day outcomes and shorter operative times than RYGB and SADI-S and therefore, could be considered a viable alternative.

Third time's a charm: band to sleeve to bypass

BACKGROUND

Adjustable gastric bands (AGB) are frequently converted to sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) due to weight recurrence or band complications. Such conversions carry a higher-risk than primary procedures. Some patients undergo two conversions-from AGB to SG, and subsequently from SG to RYGB. This presents a unique situation with limited literature on indications and complication rates associated with these double conversions.

METHODS

We examined the 2020-2021 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Participant Use File to evaluate conversions from AGB to SG and then to RYGB. Patient and operative characteristics, along with outcomes, were evaluated. Descriptive statistics were applied.

RESULTS

We identified 276 patients who underwent a conversion from AGB to SG and then to RYGB. The primary reason for the second conversion (SG to RYGB) was gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) at 55.1%, followed by inadequate weight loss or weight regain (IWL/WR) at 36.9%. The remaining reasons included dysphagia, nausea, vomiting, or others. Patients converted for IWL/WR demonstrated a higher baseline body mass index and prevalence of sleep apnea compared to other cohorts (both p < 0.001). Meanwhile, patients in the "other reasons" group had the highest rate of open surgical approaches (9.1%) and concurrent lysis of adhesions (p = 0.001 and p = 0.022), with correspondingly higher rates of anastomotic leak, reoperations, serious complications, and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing double conversions (AGB to SG to RYGB) do so primarily for GERD or IWL/WR. Further research is required to better define the optimal primary operation for each patient, aiming to reduce the necessity for multiple conversions.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Comparative analysis of 5-year efficacy and outcomes of single anastomosis procedures as revisional surgery for weight regain following sleeve gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

It is imperative to assess the results of revisional procedures following Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG), given the substantially growing population of patients who experience weight regain within a few years after undergoing this procedure.

OBJECTIVE

Examine the comparative effectiveness of the Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass (SADI-S) and the One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB-MGB) as revisional procedures, with respect to their impact on weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, incidence of complications, and rates of reoperation in patients who had weight regain after SG with up to or more than 5 years of follow-up.

SETTING

Hamad General Hospital, Academic tertiary referral center, Qatar.

METHODS

This study retrospectively analyzed a database of patients who underwent the Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Switch (SADI-S) or the One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass - Mini Gastric Bypass- (OAGB-MGB) as revisional procedures for weight recidivism after a primary Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG). The follow-up period was at least 5 years, during which the impact of both procedures on weight loss, comorbidities, nutritional deficiencies, complications, and outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

The study comprised 91 patients, with 42 and 49 in the SADI-S and OAGB-MGB groups, respectively. Significant weight loss (measured by total weight loss percentage, TWL%) was observed at the 5-year follow-up for the SADI-S group compared to the OAGB-MGB group (30.0 ± 18.4 vs. 19.4 ± 16.3, p = 0.008). Remission of comorbidities, specifically diabetes mellitus and hypertension, was more prevalent in the SADI-S group. Notably, the OAGB-MGB group had a higher incidence of complications (28.6% vs. 21.42%) and reoperations (5 patients vs. 1 in the SADI-S group). No mortality events were reported in either group.

CONCLUSION

While both the OAGB-MGB and SADI-S have demonstrated efficacy as revisional procedures for weight regain following SG, the SADI-S exhibits superior outcomes compared to the OAGB-MGB with regard to weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, complication rates, and reoperation rates.

Marginal Ulcer and Dumping Syndrome in Patients after Duodenal Switch: A Multi-Centered Study

BACKGROUND

The current design of biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD/DS) and single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve (SADI-S) emphasizes the importance of the pylorus' preservation to reduce the incidence of marginal ulcer (MU) and dumping. However, no institutional studies have yet reported data on their prevalence. We aimed to assess the incidence of MU and dumping after duodenal switch (DS) and identify the associative factors.

METHODS

A multi-center review of patients who underwent BPD/DS or SADI-S between 2008 and 2022. Baseline demographics, symptoms, and management of both complications were collected. Fisher's exact test was used for categorical variables and the independent t-test for continuous variables.

RESULTS

A total of 919 patients were included (74.6% female; age 42.5 years; BMI 54.6 kg/m2) with mean follow-up of 31.5 months. Eight patients (0.9%) developed MU and seven (0.8%) had dumping. Patients who developed MU were more likely to be using non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) (p = 0.006) and have a longer operation time (p = 0.047). Primary versus revisional surgery, and BDP/DS versus SADI-S were not associated with MU or dumping.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidences of MU and dumping after DS were low. NSAID use and a longer operation time were associated with an increased risk of MU, whereas dumping was attributed to poor dietary habits.