Is there an indication left for gastric band? A single center experience on 178 patients with a follow-up of 10 years

Reports of Gastric Banding and Bowel Obstruction: A Narrative Review of the Literature

The utilization rates of laparoscopic gastric banding (LAGB) declined worldwide from 42.3% in 2008 to 1.8% in 2018. Rates of complications requiring removal may reach 40-50% in the medium to long term. Bowel obstruction is a rare but severe complication that occurs after LAGB. A comprehensive literature search in PubMed was carried out to identify all available case reports of intestinal obstruction after gastric banding. The search terms were as follows: "intestinal obstruction", "small bowel obstruction", "gastric band", "gastric banding", "gastric band complications", and "laparoscopic gastric band obstruction". The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) flowchart was used. Forty-three case reports were included in our review. Laparotomy was necessary in 18/43 (41%) of patients. Vomit was not always reported, while abdominal pain was constantly present. A CT scan was the preferred diagnostic tool. The main causes of occlusion were found to be the erosion of the gastrointestinal tract or internal hernia due to a loose tube loop. Forty-six percent of cases occurred within 5 years from insertion. Even if rare, small bowel obstruction after LAGB requires surgical intervention often with an open approach. The absence of vomit masks symptoms, but an obstruction must be always suspected in the case of severe colicky abdominal pain. A CT scan is recommended for making diagnoses.

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass for Revisional Bariatric Surgery: Assessment of Short-Term Safety

PURPOSE

With the continued increase in bariatric procedures being performed in the USA, a growing percentage are revisions for weight regain after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and gastric banding (LAGB). Standard practice in the USA involves conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Internationally, one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) has become a popular and effective alternative. Without the jejuno-jejunal anastomosis, OAGB has reduced potential related long-term complications. The purpose of this study is to compare the short-term safety of revision to OAGB versus RYGB.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent conversion to OAGB from LAGB or SG for weight regain from January 2019 to October 2021 were compared to BMI, sex, and age-matched patients who underwent conversion to RYGB.

RESULTS

In our study, 82 patients were included, 41 in each cohort (41 OAGB vs. 41 RYGB). The majority in both groups underwent conversion from SG (71% vs. 78%). Operative time, estimated blood loss, and length of stay were comparable. There was no difference in 30-day complications (9.8% vs. 12.2%, p = .99) or reoperation (4.9% vs. 4.9%, p = .99). Mean weight loss at 1 month was also comparable (7.91 lbs vs 6.36 lbs).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing conversion to OAGB for weight regain had similar operative times, post-operative complication rates, and 1-month weight loss compared to those who underwent RYGB. While more research is needed, this early data suggests that OAGB and RYGB provide comparable outcomes when used as conversion procedures for to failed weight loss. Therefore, OAGB may present a safe alternative to RYGB.

Comparison of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy for Revision of Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding: 5-Year Outcomes

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is in continuous decline due to low effectiveness and high reoperation rates. This study aims to evaluate outcomes of converting LAGB to one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) for insufficient weight loss or weight regain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective comparative study, based on prospective registry database of a tertiary center (2012-2019).

RESULTS

In all, 276 LAGB patients were converted to OAGB (n = 125) and SG (n = 151). Body mass index (BMI) at revision was 41.3 ± 6.6 and 42.3 ± 9.6 kg/m2 (P = 0.34) in OAGB and SG patients, respectively. Time interval was longer in OAGB patients (p < 0.001). Major early complication rates were comparable (2.4% and 4%; p = 0.46). At 5-years, OAGB patients had lower BMI (31.9 vs. 34.5 kg/m2; p = 0.002), and a higher total weight loss (25.1% vs. 18.8%; p = 0.003), compared with SG patients. Resolution of type 2 diabetes was higher in OAGB patients (93.3% vs. 66.6%; p = 0.047), while resolution of hypertension was not significantly different (84.6% and 80.5%; p = 0.68). Revision due to delayed complications was required in five (4%) OAGB patients and nine (8.6%) SG patients (p = 0.14).

CONCLUSION

OAGB for revision after LAGB due to insufficient weight loss or weight regain is safe, and has better effectiveness in weight reduction and resolution of type 2 diabetes than SG.

Long-term outcomes of revisional one anastomosis gastric bypass post laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy

PURPOSE

Revisional bariatric surgeries following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) have demonstrated a dramatic increase worldwide. Recently, one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) has become a contender as an appropriate revisional procedure; however, no long-term data currently exist on the effectiveness of it as a revisional surgery post-LSG.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on all patients who underwent LSG at a public hospital in Kuwait from 2008 to 2017. A list was obtained of those who underwent revisional OAGB surgery after initial LSG, after which a phone survey was performed and demographics were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 29 patients underwent revisional OAGB post-initial LSG, of which 89.7% were female. Prior to LSG, the mean weight of the patients was 127.5 kg, and the mean BMI was 49.0 kg/m2. The mean weight loss after initial LSG was 43.8 kg, while the average duration until patients underwent revisional OAGB was 5.3 years. The cause for revision was weight regain (86.2%) or inadequate weight loss (13.8%). Prior to undergoing revisional OAGB, the weight and BMI of the patients was 110.9 kg and 42.4 kg/m2, respectively. Revisional OAGB demonstrated a %excess weight loss of 14.5%, 31.9%, 48.0%, 56.3%, 57.2%, and 54.7% at 2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 4 years, and 5 years, respectively. Twelve morbidities were reported during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

Revisional bariatric surgery is technically demanding and may be associated with a high complication rate. However, OAGB as a revisional procedure has proven to be safe and effective in the long-term outcomes of revisional OAGB patients post-LSG.

Ten-Year Results of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Retrospective Matched Comparison with Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding-Is There a Significant Difference in Long Term?

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is the most common bariatric procedure performed worldwide while the laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has been almost abandoned. Aim of this study was to retrospectively assess 10-year outcomes of LSG through a matched comparison with LAGB.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective search of prospectively maintained database of our university was carried out to find all patients that underwent LSG before December 2010. Each subject with LSG was matched one-to-one with a patient that had undergone LAGB in the same period with correspondent preoperative age, BMI, and sex.

RESULTS

A total of 76 patients underwent LSG before 2010 and were all included in this study; a matched group of 76 out of 178 LAGB patients with 10-year follow-up was retrieved from our database. Comparison between the two groups showed better outcomes after LSG at 1 and 5 years but weight loss was comparable with the LAGB group at 10 years (%TWL 22.2 ± 13 vs 21.2 ± 16.1; p = 0.89). No significant difference was found in conversion/removal rate (15.8% vs 18.4%; p = 0.67).

CONCLUSION

LSG is an effective stand-alone bariatric procedure with better outcomes than LAGB in medium term, but results are comparable at 10 years. Subjects undergoing LSG should be informed that conversion to RYGB or OAGB may be necessary to achieve further weight loss or to treat reflux.

It is really time to retire laparoscopic gastric banding? Positive outcomes after long-term follow-up: the management is the key

After the initial widespread diffusion, laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has been progressively abandoned and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become the worldwide most adopted procedure. Nevertheless, recent reports raised concerns about the long-term weight regain after different bariatric techniques. Considering the large LAGB series recorded in our multicentric bariatric database, we analysed the anthropometric and surgical outcomes of obese patients underwent LAGB at a long-term follow-up, focusing on LAGB management. Between January 2008 to January 2018, demographics, anthropometric and post-operative data of obese patients undergone LAGB were retrospectively evaluated. To compare the postoperative outcomes, the cohort was divided in two groups according to the quantity of band filling (QBF): low band filling group (Group 1) with at most 3 ml of QBF, and patients in the high band filling group (Group 2) with at least 4 ml. 699 obese patients were considered in the analysis (351 in Group 1 and 348 in Group 2). Patients in Group 1 resulted significantly associated (p < 0.05) to higher % EWL and quality of life score (BAROS Score), 49.1 ± 11.3 vs 38.2 ± 14.2 and 5.9 ± 1.8 vs 3.8 ± 2.5, respectively. Moreover, patients with lower band filling (Group 1) complained less episodes of vomiting, epigastric pain and post-prandial reflux and significantly decreased slippage and migration rate (p < 0.001 for all parameters). LAGB is a safe and reversible procedure, whose efficacy is primarily related to correct postoperative handling. Low band filling and strict follow-up seem the success' key of this technique, which deserves full consideration among bariatric procedures.

Effect of bariatric surgery on in vitro fertilization in infertile men with obesity

BACKGROUND

Obesity has previously been related to reduced female fertility, with prolonged waiting time to pregnancy among women with a body mass index (BMI) >35 kg/m² but there are few studies investigating the relationship between high BMI, bariatric surgery, and male fertility.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this article was to investigate the effect of bariatric surgery on in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes in a cohort of men with morbid obesity who underwent sleeve gastrectomy (SG).

SETTING

University hospital, bariatric surgery unit.

METHODS

Pre- and postsurgery data on patient age, body mass index (BMI), and variables related to male fertility (semen volume, concentration, progressively motile sperm count, and sperm morphology) were collected; assisted reproductive technology outcomes before and after bariatric surgery were measured by the number of metaphase II oocytes; the number of top-quality oocytes and embryos; the number of fertilized oocytes; the number of transferred embryo; the implantation rate; the pregnancy rate; the live birth rate and the miscarriage rate.

RESULTS

Thirty-five men with obesity and idiopathic infertility were included in this study. We found a significant increase, after bariatric surgery, in semen volume, total sperm concentration, progressively motile sperm count, and sperm morphology. Considering IVF outcomes, mean number of top-quality oocytes, mean number of fertilized oocytes, mean number of embryos obtained, and top-quality embryos were significantly increased after bariatric procedure.

CONCLUSION

Bariatric surgery is confirmed to be safe and effective in increasing the outcomes of assisted reproductive technology treatment also in case of infertile men with obesity, both in terms of pregnancy and live birth rate.

One Anastomosis/Mini-Gastric Bypass (OAGB/MGB) as Revisional Surgery Following Primary Restrictive Bariatric Procedures: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB) has gained popularity in the past decade. International databases were searched for articles published by September 10, 2020, on OAGB/MGB as a revisional procedure after restrictive procedures. Twenty-six studies examining a total of 1771 patients were included. The mean initial BMI was 45.70 kg/m², which decreased to 31.52, 31.40, and 30.54 kg/m² at 1, 3, and 5-year follow-ups, respectively. Remission of type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) following OAGB/MGB at 1-, 3-, and 5-year follow-up was 65.16 ± 24.43, 65.37 ± 36.07, and 78.10 ± 14.19%, respectively. Remission/improvement rate from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Also, 7.4% of the patients developed de novo GERD following OAGB/MGB. Leakage was the most common major complication. OAGB/MGB appears to be feasible and effective as a revisional procedure after failed restrictive bariatric procedures.