Four-week omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids supplementation for liver left lateral section volume reduction in individuals with morbid obesity undergoing bariatric surgery: A double blind, multicenter, randomized placebo-controlled trial

Medical supervised duodenal-enteral feeding for the treatment of overweight and obesity: MESUDEFT

BACKGROUND

the development of specialised nutritional support techniques allows the maintenance of an adequate supply of nutrients in those patients in whom oral feeding is not possible or is insufficient in relation to their requirements, trying to improve the quality of life, especially in those with chronic diseases.

METHODS

single-center clinical study carried out in a clinical-nutritional center consisting of a medically supervised nasogastric-duodenal tube feeding treatment for overweight, obesity and increased body fat percentage in patients requiring it by means of duodeno-enteral feeding, expecting losses of more than 10 %.

RESULTS

twenty-nine patients completed the protocol (20.4 % male and 79.6 % female) with a mean age of 38 years (SD: 12.4); 87.2 kg (SD: 18.5) mean weight; 37.9 kg (SD: 4.8) mean iFat%; 32.4 (SD: 5.4) iMean body mass index (BMI); 100 cm (SD: 16.0) iMean waist; 113.6 cm (SD: 10.4) iMean hip; 33.8 cm (SD: 3.9) iMean upper arm circumference; 65.5 cm (SD: 7.5) iMean thigh circumference; 9.7 (SD: 4.8) iVisceral fat index; and 22.9 days (SD: 13.9) mean treatment. A mean of 22.9 (SD: 13.9) days of MESUDEFT influences weight loss, fat loss, visceral fat loss and decreased arm, hip and thigh circumferences (p < 0.05) (i: initial).

CONCLUSIONS

MESUDEFT is shown to be an effective alternative as a sole treatment or as an adjunct prior to bariatric surgery for obesity or overweight treatment with a minimum of 10 % loss of BMI and fat mass at completion and 3-6 months follow-up.

Clinical Impact of Enteral Protein Nutritional Therapy on Patients with Obesity Scheduled for Bariatric Surgery: A Focus on Safety, Efficacy, and Pathophysiological Changes

BACKGROUND

Ketogenic diet-induced weight loss before bariatric surgery (BS) has beneficial effects on the reduction in the liver volume, metabolic profile, and intra- and post-operative complications. However, these beneficial effects can be limited by poor dietary adherence. A potential solution in patients showing a poor adherence in following the prescribed diet could be represented by enteral nutrition strategies. To date, no studies describe the protocol to use for the efficacy and the safety of pre-operative enteral ketogenic nutrition-based dietary protocols in terms of weight reduction, metabolic efficacy, and safety in patients with obesity scheduled for BS.

AIMS AND SCOPE

To assess the clinical impact, efficacy, and safety of ketogenic nutrition enteral protein (NEP) vs. nutritional enteral hypocaloric (NEI) protocols on patients with obesity candidate to BS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

31 NEP were compared to 29 NEI patients through a 1:1 randomization. The body weight (BW), body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), hip circumference (HC), and neck circumference (NC) were assessed at the baseline and at the 4-week follow-up. Furthermore, clinical parameters were assessed by blood tests, and patients were asked daily to report any side effects, using a self-administered questionnaire.

RESULTS

Compared to the baseline, the BW, BMI, WC, HC, and NC were significantly reduced in both groups studied (p < 0.001). However, we did not find any significative difference between the NEP and NEI groups in terms of weight loss (p = 0.559), BMI (p= 0.383), WC (p = 0.779), and HC (p = 0.559), while a statistically significant difference was found in terms of the NC (NEP, -7.1% vs. NEI, -4%, p = 0.011). Furthermore, we found a significant amelioration of the general clinical status in both groups. However, a statistically significant difference was found in terms of glycemia (NEP, -16% vs. NEI, -8.5%, p < 0.001), insulin (NEP, -49.6% vs. NEI, -17.8%, p < 0.0028), HOMA index (NEP, -57.7% vs. NEI, -24.9%, p < 0.001), total cholesterol (NEP, -24.3% vs. NEI, -2.8%, p < 0.001), low-density lipoprotein (NEP, -30.9% vs. NEI, 1.96%, p < 0.001), apolipoprotein A1 (NEP, -24.2% vs. NEI, -7%, p < 0.001), and apolipoprotein B (NEP, -23.1% vs. NEI, -2.3%, p < 0.001), whereas we did not find any significative difference between the NEP and NEI groups in terms of aortomesenteric fat thickness (p = 0.332), triglyceride levels (p = 0.534), degree of steatosis (p = 0.616), and left hepatic lobe volume (p = 0.264). Furthermore, the NEP and NEI treatments were well tolerated, and no major side effects were registered.

CONCLUSIONS

Enteral feeding is an effective and safe treatment before BS, with NEP leading to better clinical results than NEI on the glycemic and lipid profiles. Further and larger randomized clinical trials are needed to confirm these preliminary data.

The Impact of Bariatric-Surgery-Induced Weight Loss on Patients Undergoing Liver Transplant: A Focus on Metabolism, Pathophysiological Changes, and Outcome in Obese Patients Suffering NAFLD-Related Cirrhosis

Because of their condition, patients with morbid obesity develop several histopathological changes in the liver, such as non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), cirrhosis, and end-stage liver disease (ESLD). Hence, a liver transplant (LT) becomes an opportune solution for them. Due to many challenges during the perioperative and postoperative periods, these patients are recommended to lose weight before the surgery. There are many proposals to achieve this goal, such as intragastric balloons and many different bariatric surgery (BS) procedures in combination with a preparation diet (very-low-calorie diet, ketogenic diet, etc.). All the interventions focus on losing weight and keeping the continuity and functionality of the digestive tract to avoid postoperative complications. Thus, this review analyzes recent publications regarding the metabolic and pathophysiological impacts of BS in LT patients suffering from NAFLD-related cirrhosis, the effect of weight loss on postoperative complications, and exposes the cost-effectiveness of performing BS before, after, and at liver transplantation. Finally, the authors recommend BS before the LT since there are many positive effects and better outcomes for patients who lose weight before the procedure. Nevertheless, further multicentric studies are needed to determine the generalizability of these recommendations due to their impact on public health.

Laparoscopic Anatomical Versus Non-anatomical hepatectomy in the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The choice of surgical modality for laparoscopic hepatectomy for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has not been supported by high level of medical evidence hitherto. A prospective randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted to compare the perioperative and follow-up outcomes of patients with HCC treated by laparoscopic anatomical hepatectomy (LAH) and non-anatomical hepatectomy (LNAH).

METHODS

Between March 2013 and Jan 2018, eligible patients undergoing LAH and LNAH were enrolled and divided randomly into LAH group and LNAH group in this study. The perioperative and follow-up outcomes of both groups were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 385 patients with HCC were randomly divided into LAH (n = 192) and LNAH (n = 193) groups. The groups were evenly matched for age, sex, liver background, segment involvement, tumor size, Child-Pugh grade and preoperative liver function. The operative time in the LAH group was longer than that of the LNAH group (p = 0.003). No significant between-group differences in intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.368), transfusion rate (p = 0.876), conversion to laparotomy rate (p = 0.365), overall complication rates (p = 0.054) were observed. The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year overall survival rates (OS) in the LAH group were 91.1%, 67.2%, 43.2%, respectively. The corresponding data in the LNAH group were 89.1%, 63.7%, and 35.2%, respectively. No significant difference was observed with regard to the 5-year OS rate (p = 0.054) between the two groups. The 1-year, 3-year and 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates in the LAH group were 87.0%, 54.7%, 33.9%, respectively. The corresponding data in LNAH group were 70.5%, 34.7%, and 30.1%, respectively. The 5-year DFS rate in the LAH group was significantly higher than that in the LNAH group (p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

LAH versus LNAH for selected HCC patients was associated with increased DFS, lower intrahepatic ipsilateral recurrence rate, comparable long-term OS and postoperative complications. LAH is therefore recommended for selected HCC patients.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02009176 (https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/).