Laparoscopic conversion of sleeve gastrectomy to a biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch or a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass due to weight loss failure: our algorithm

Conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Is Intrathoracic Migration of the Sleeve of High Incidence?

BACKGROUND

Conversion of SG to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is increasing. Intrathoracic migration of the sleeve (ITM) often seems associated and is increasingly reported.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients who underwent a conversion of SG to RYGB from August 2013 to December 2022 were included. Two groups were compared: patients operated on for weight loss failure (WLF gp) and those operated on for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD gp). Demographic data, the incidence of ITM, weight loss outcomes, resolution of symptoms, and morbidity were analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients were included with an average follow-up of 32 months: 46 patients in the GERD gp (78%) were compared to 13 patients (22%) in the WLF gp. Groups were comparable regarding age and gender, but BMI and commodities were significantly higher in the WLF gp. In the GERD gp, on preoperative gastroscopy, 30% had a esophagitis, 48% had an ITM which required a posterior crural closure versus no esophagitis (p=0.02) and 23% of ITM in the WLF gp (p=0.11). Conversion led to 93% of GERD symptom improvement. In the WLF gp, mean TWL% was 15.3%, significantly greater than in the GERD gp (TWL% = 4.6%, p = 0.01). The complication rate was 10% at 30 days and 3.4% after 30 days, not significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSION

The main indication of conversion of SG to RYGB was because of GERD: in these indications, the incidence of ITM was high requiring a surgical treatment with a very good efficacy on symptoms. Weight loss results were disappointing.

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.

How to address weight regain after bariatric surgery in an individualized way

Bariatric surgery is the most effective obesity treatment. As a chronic and progressive disease, weight loss response to surgery will vary individually. Thus, insufficient weight loss or regain can happen after surgery, but they lack a standard definition. There are different mechanisms underlying weight regain and/or insufficient weight loss, such as genetics, maladaptive eating behaviors, and the inadequate choice of index operations, among others. Patients with weight regain or insufficient weight loss should be submitted to an individualized and comprehensive evaluation by a multidisciplinary team. This may help identify the causes and direct the appropriate treatment individually. Options for patients with insufficient weight loss and/or weight regain following bariatric surgery include repair of postoperative complications, conversion into another operation, endoscopic therapies with inconsistent outcomes, and dietary/behavioral counseling. Revision and conversion surgeries have higher complication rates than primary operations. Although there is no standard pharmacological regimen for that indication, the new agents seem efficient and safe to promote the loss of the regained weight and even be adjunctive to selected patients before they reach the plateau. This review aims to summarize the knowledge of the best approach for patients with weight regain/insufficient weight loss and suggests an algorithm to customize the approach and therapeutic options after bariatric surgery.

The analysis of factors increasing the odds for type 2 diabetes mellitus remission following re-do bariatric surgery after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy- cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Metabolic/bariatric surgery is the only proven treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) with curative intent. However, in a number of patients, the surgery is not effective or they may experience a relapse. Those patients can be offered re-do bariatric surgery (RBS).

PURPOSE

The study aimed to determine factors increasing the odds for T2D remission one year after RBS following primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted between January 2010 and January 2020, which included 12 bariatric centers in Poland. The study population was divided into groups: Group 1- patients with T2D remission after RBS (n = 28) and Group 2- patients without T2D remission after RBS (n = 49). T2D remission was defined as HBA1c < 6.0% without glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy and glycemia within normal range at time of follow-up that was completed 12 months after RBS.

RESULTS

Fifty seven females and 20 males were included in the study. Patients who achieved BMI < 33 kg/m2 after RBS and those with %EBMIL > 60.7% had an increased chance of T2D remission (OR = 3.39, 95%CI = 1.28-8.95, p = 0.014 and OR = 12.48, 95%CI 2.67-58.42, p = 0.001, respectively). Time interval between primary LSG and RBS was significantly shorter in Group 1 than in Group 2 [1 (1-4) vs. 3 (2-4) years, p = 0.023].

CONCLUSIONS

Shorter time interval between LSG and RBS may ease remission of T2D in case of lack of remission after primary procedure. Significant excess weight loss seems to be the most crucial factor for T2D remission.

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.

Weight loss maintenance after bariatric surgery

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is an effective treatment for patients with morbid obesity and its comorbidities. However, many patients experience weight regain (WR) after achieving their nadir weight. Establishing the definition of WR is challenging as postoperative WR has various definitions. Risk factors for WR after MBS include anatomical, racial, hormonal, metabolic, behavioral, and psychological factors, and evaluating such factors preoperatively is necessary. Long-term regular follow-up and timely treatment by a multidisciplinary team are important because WR after surgery is multi-factorial. Although lifestyle interventions that focus on appropriate dietary education, physical activity education or interventions, and behavioral psychological interventions are suggested, more well-designed studies are needed because studies evaluating intervention methods and the effectiveness of WR prevention are lacking. Anti-obesity drugs can be used to prevent and manage patients with WR after MBS; however, more research is needed to determine the timing, duration, and type of anti-obesity drugs used to prevent WR.

Weight loss and clinical outcomes following primary versus secondary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a multi-institutional experience

BACKGROUND

Revisional bariatric surgeries are increasing for weight recurrence and return of co-morbidities. Herein, we compare weight loss and clinical outcomes following primary Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (P-RYGB), adjustable gastric banding to RYGB (B-RYGB), and sleeve gastrectomy to RYGB (S-RYGB) to determine if primary versus secondary RYGB offer comparable benefits.

METHODS

Participating institutions' EMRs and MBSAQIP databases were used to identify adult patients who underwent P-/B-/S-RYGB from 2013 to 2019 with a minimum one-year follow-up. Weight loss and clinical outcomes were assessed at 30 days, 1 year, and 5 years. Our multivariable model controlled for year, institution, patient and procedure characteristics, and excess body weight (EBW).

RESULTS

768 patients underwent RYGB: P-RYGB n = 581 [75.7%]; B-RYGB n = 106 [13.7%]; S-RYGB n = 81 [10.5%]. The number of secondary RYGB procedures increased in recent years. The most common indications for B-RYGB and S-RYGB were weight recurrence/nonresponse (59.8%) and GERD (65.4%), respectively. Mean time from index operation to B-RYGB or S-RYGB was 8.9 and 3.9 years, respectively. After adjusting for EBW, 1 year %TWL (total weight loss) and %EWL (excess weight loss) were greater after P-RYGB (30.4%, 56.7%) versus B-RYGB (26.2%, 49.4%) or S-RYGB (15.6%, 37%). Overall comorbidity resolution was comparable. Secondary RYGB patients had a longer adjusted mean length of stay (OR 1.17, p = 0.071) and a higher risk of pre-discharge complications or 30-day reoperation.

CONCLUSION

Primary RYGB offers superior short-term weight loss outcomes compared to secondary RYGB, with decreased risk of 30-day reoperation.

Weight loss specific to indication, remission of diabetes, and short-term complications after sleeve gastrectomy conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most frequently performed bariatric procedure worldwide. Long-term complications such as insufficient weight loss (IWL) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) may necessitate SG conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). The aim of this review was to determine the indication-specific weight loss and diabetes remission after SG conversion to RYGB (STOBY). Our objective was to extract all available published data on indication for conversion, weight loss, remission of diabetes, and short-term complications after STOBY. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies reporting outcomes following STOBY. A random effects model was used for meta-analysis. The search identified 44 relevant studies. Overall short-term (12-mo) excess weight loss (EWL) was 54.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 46%-63%) in 23 studies (n = 712) and total weight loss (TWL) was 19.9% (95% CI, 14%-25%) in 21 studies (n = 740). For IWL, short-term (12-mo) pooled weight loss outcomes were 53.9% EWL (95% CI, 48%-59%) in 14 studies (n = 295) and 22.7% TWL (95% CI, 17%-28%) in 12 studies (n = 219), and medium-term (2-5 yr) outcomes were 45.8% EWL (95% CI, 38%-53%) in 7 studies (n = 154) and 20.6% TWL (95% CI, 15%-26%) in 9 studies (n = 206). Overall diabetes remission was 53% (95% CI, 33%-72%), and the perioperative complication rate was 8.2% (95% CI, 7.6%-8.7%). Revisional SG conversion to RYGB for IWL can achieve good weight loss outcomes and diabetes remission.

When Definitions Differ, are Comparisons Meaningful? Definitions of Weight Regain After Bariatric Surgery and Their Associations with Patient Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes - A Need for a Revisit?

INTRODUCTION

Definitions and prevalence of weight regain (WR) after bariatric surgery remains inconsistent and their clinical significance unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess WR five years after sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), employing six definitions; and appraise their association with patient characteristics/clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Consecutive patients (N = 589) who underwent LSG were followed up for 5 years. WR prevalence was calculated yearly employing six definitions. Regression analysis assessed associations between WR at 5 years, and patient characteristics (age, sex, preop BMI, number of follow-up visits, number of comorbidities) and remission of comorbidities (type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia).

RESULTS

Sample's mean age and BMI were 34 ± 11.6 years and 43.13 ± 5.77 kg/m², and 64% were females. Percentage of patients with WR at 2, 3, 4, and 5 years fluctuated between 2.53% and 94.18%, subject to definition, and time point. The definition "Any WR" generated the highest prevalence of WR (86-94%) across all time points. At 5 years, for patient characteristics, preoperative BMI was associated with three definitions (P 0.49 to < 0.001), sex was associated with two (P < 0.026-0.032), and number of comorbidities was associated with one definition (P = 0.01). In terms of comorbidities, only hypertension was associated with WR (one definition, P = 0.025). No other definitions of WR were associated with any of the variables under examination.

CONCLUSION

Weight regain is reasonably expected after BMS. WR definitions were of minor clinical significance due to weak associations with limited comorbidities. Dichotomous definitions might offer some guidance while managing individual patients. However, its utility as a comparator metric across patients/procedures requires refinements.

Conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass to Enhance Weight Loss: Single Enterprise Mid-Term Outcomes and Literature Review

Background

Suboptimal weight loss (SWL) occurs up to 30% after sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (cRYGB) has shown heterogeneous results in terms of additional weight loss and resolution of weight-related comorbidities. We aim to evaluate mid-term outcomes of cRYGB specifically for SWL after SG.

Methods

All patients who underwent cRYGB for SWL from April 2010 to June 2019 from prospective registries at three affiliated tertiary care centers were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who underwent revision or conversion for complications were excluded. Mixed-effects and polynomial regression models were used to evaluate weight loss results after conversion.

Results

Thirty-two patients underwent cRYGB from SG. About 68.7% were women with mean age of 46.6 years. Mean body mass index (BMI) before SG was 55.3 kg/m². Before conversion, mean BMI was 44.5 kg/m² with 17.3% total weight loss (TWL). All procedures were completed laparoscopically in a median surgical time of 183 min. Three major complications occurred (9.3%), one gastrojejunal (GJ) leak and two reoperations. Four cases (12.5%) of GJ stenosis were diagnosed. No mortality was registered. Mean follow-up time was 24 months and patients had 36 kg/m² mean BMI, 17.4% TWL, 27.2% had BMI >35 kg/m².

Conclusions

cRYGB after SG for SWL showed good mid-term results, better than those reported in literature.

Comparing weight loss outcomes after conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus duodenal switch from sleeve gastrectomy in a community hospital

Background

Recidivism after initial sleeve gastrectomy (SG) remains common. Revisional surgery to convert SG to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or duodenal switch (DS) for additional weight loss is increasing. This study aims to compare the outcomes after conversion of SG to RYGB or DS.

Methods

A retrospective single-institution review was conducted from 2015 to 2021, identifying 75 patients who underwent conversion from prior SG to either RYGB (40) or DS (35). Mean excess body weight loss (EBWL) at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months was assessed and compared. Secondary measures of length of stay (LOS), procedure length, and 30-day readmission rate were also reviewed.

Results

Percentage EBWL for RYGB vs DS was 24.0% vs 18.8% at 3 months (N = 36 vs 26; P < 0.0491), 34.8% vs 29.0% at 6 months (N = 29 vs 17; P < 0.2192), 43.0% vs 40.1% at 12 months (N = 28 vs 12; P < 0.6828), and 36.2% vs 41.7% at 24 months (N = 27 vs 7; P < 0.5553). Average LOS was 2.6 days ± 1.4 for RYGB and 2.8 days ± 1.3 for DS (P < 0.6032). Average procedure length was 134.4 min for RYGB and 189.8 min for DS (P < 0.0001). 30-day readmission rate was 27.5% (N = 11) for RYGB and 14.3% (N = 5) for DS (P < 0.1645). Significant weight loss was observed in both subgroups up to 12 months, with no significant weight loss between 12 and 24 months (RYGB N = 21, P < 0.2961; DS N = 5, P < 0.7233).

Conclusion

Both revisional RYGB and revisional DS procedures had significant and sustained weight loss in the first 12 months. There was no significant excess body weight loss difference between revisional RYGB and revisional DS patients at 6, 12, and 24 months, with only significant greater weight loss for RYGB patients at 3 months. Additionally, procedure length was significantly longer for DS compared to RYGB, with no significant differences in LOS and 30-day readmission rates.

Graphical abstract

Weight loss outcomes for patients undergoing conversion to Roux-en-Y-gastric bypass after sleeve gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Despite excellent reported outcomes after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), a percentage of patients go on to have a secondary bariatric surgery to manage side-effects or address weight regain after LSG. Reported weight loss outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) after previous LSG are variable. We sought to determine the weight-loss outcomes of patients undergoing LRYGB after LSG in the largest bariatric surgical network in Canada and to determine whether outcomes differ according to indications for conversion.

METHODS

The Bariatric Registry is a multi-center database with prospectively collected standardized data on patients undergoing bariatric surgery at ten Bariatric Centers of Excellence within the Ontario Bariatric Network in Ontario, Canada. A retrospective analysis was performed of patients who underwent LRYGB after previous LSG between 2012 and 2019. Weight loss outcomes were compared between patients who underwent LRYGB for insufficient weight loss/weight regain and those who underwent conversion to LRYGB for other reasons.

RESULTS

Excluding patients with multiple revisions and those without follow-up data, 48 patients were included in the analysis: 33 patients (69%) underwent conversion to LRGYB for insufficient weight loss/weight regain (Group 1) and 15 patients (31%) underwent conversion for other reasons (Group 2). Mean body mass index (BMI) measured pre-LSG, pre-LRYGB, and at mid-term follow-up after LRYGB was 61, 48, and 43 kg/m² in Group 1 and 51, 39, and 34 kg/m² in Group 2, respectively. ΔBMI and %total weight loss (TWL) at mid-term follow-up were not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion to LRYGB after previous LSG resulted in an additional loss of 4 kg/m² in BMI points at mid-term follow-up. Patients lost a similar number of BMI points and cumulative %TWL was similar regardless of reason for conversion. This can help inform surgical decision-making in the setting of weight regain after LSG.

Racial Differences in Bariatric Surgical Approach: a Cross-Sectional National Inpatient Sample Analysis

PURPOSE

Although racial inequalities in referral and access to bariatric surgical care have been well reported, racial difference in the selection of surgical techniques is understudied. This study examined factors associated with the utilization of the two main bariatric surgical techniques: laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample database was queried for patients who underwent elective LSG or LRYGB for the treatment of severe obesity. Chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression assessed associations of surgical approach with patient and facility characteristics. Sensitivity analyses examined the following body mass index (BMI) subgroups: < 40.0 kg/m², 40.0-44.9 kg/m², 45.0-49.9 kg/m², and ≥ 50.0 kg/m².

RESULTS

Within the final cohort (N = 86,053), 73.0% (N = 62,779) underwent LSG, and 27.0% (N = 23,274) underwent LRYGB. Patients with BMI 45.0-49.9 kg/m² (OR = 0.85) and BMI ≥ 50.0 kg/m² (OR = 0.80) were less likely to undergo LSG than patients with BMI 40.0-45.0 kg/m² (all p < 0.001). However, Black (OR = 1.74) and White Hispanic patients (OR = 1.30) were more likely to undergo LSG than White non-Hispanic patients (all p < 0.005). In the BMI ≥ 50.0 kg/m² group, Black patients were still more likely to undergo LSG compared to White non-Hispanic patients (OR = 1.69, p < 0.001), while Asians/Pacific Islanders were less likely to receive LSG than White non-Hispanic patients (OR = 0.41, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In this observational study, we identified racial differences in the selection of common bariatric surgical approaches across various BMI categories. Future investigations are warranted to study and to promote awareness of the racial/ethnic influence in attitudes on obesity, weight loss, financial support, and surgical risks during bariatric discussions with minorities.

Five-year outcomes of one anastomosis gastric bypass as conversional surgery following sleeve gastrectomy for weight loss failure

The most accepted procedures as conversion for poor weight changes after sleeve gastrectomy (SG), are malabsorptive surgeries. This study was designed to evaluate the 5-year outcomes of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) following SG due to weight loss failure and weight regain. From September 2014 to January 2017, totally 23 patients with a history of SG conversion to OAGB in terms of weight loss failure or weight regain who had completed their 5-year follow-ups were studied. Some obesity related co-morbidities containing type-2 diabetes (DM), hypertension (HTN), dyslipidemia, obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) were also investigated at 1, 2, 3 and 5 years after conversional surgery. All cases had remission/improvement in DM, DLP, HTN and OSA 1 year after conversional OAGB. Analysis showed statistically significant (P < 0.001) change in trend of BMI. Mean BMI before conversional surgery, at 1, 2, 3and 5 years were 46.3 ± 10.4, 34.5 ± 8.5, 34.1 ± 8.6, 35.7 ± 8.7 and 37.5 ± 11.6, respectively. Mean percent excess weight loss (%EWL) at 1, 2, 3 and 5 years was 51.6 ± 11.0, 52.9 ± 13.1, 45.5 ± 16.4 and 41.0 ± 18.0, respectively. Mean percent total weight loss (%TWL) at 1, 2, 3 and 5 years was 26.6 ± 5.9, 27.4 ± 7.2, 23.9 ± 9.2 and 20.9 ± 9.3, respectively. OAGB is an effective conversional procedure for insufficient weight loss and weight regain following failed SG and lead to satisfactory changes in obesity associated medical problems. The optimal weight loss results are obtained at 2-year follow-ups and these effects are then reduced.

Single-Anastomosis Sleeve Jejunal (SAS-J) Bypass as Revisional Surgery After Primary Restrictive Bariatric Procedures

Purpose

Single-anastomosis sleeve jejunal (SAS-J) bypass is the modification of a single-anastomosis sleeve ileal (SASI) bypass with a short biliary limb. SAS-J bypass is reported to be a good primary bariatric procedure. This study aimed to evaluate the results of SAS-J bypass as a revisional surgery after failed primary restrictive bariatric procedures.

Material and Methods

This was a prospective cohort study including 43 patients who underwent SAS-J bypass as a revisional surgery for weight regain after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB), or laparoscopic gastric plication.

Results

Of the total patients, 35 (81.4%) were female, and 8 (18.6%) were male. The mean BMI was 46.3 kg/m². The mean age was 41 years. Thirty-two patients (74.4%) had a failed sleeve, 9 (20.9%) had a failed LAGB, and 2 (4.7%) had a failed gastric plication. The mean operative time was 104 min. Intra-abdominal bleeding occurred in 1 case (2.3%), and intraluminal bleeding occurred in 3 cases (7%). No case (0%) developed a leak. The percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) reached 76.5% after 1 year. Type 2 diabetes mellitus remission occurred in all diabetic patients, hypertension remitted in 80%, hyperlipidemia remitted in 83.3%, and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome improved in all cases. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms were improved in 86.7% of patients. Significant biliary gastritis occurred in 4 patients (9.3%). Dumping syndrome was reported in 4 patients (9.3%).

Conclusions

SAS-J bypass was effective as a salvage surgery after failed restrictive bariatric procedures, but long-term follow-up is needed.

Graphical abstract

Postoperative morbidity and weight loss after revisional bariatric surgery for primary failed restrictive procedure: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

revisional bariatric surgery is gaining increasing interest as long term follow-up studies demonstrate an elevated failure rate of primary surgery due to insufficient weight loss, weight regain or complications. This particularly concerns restrictive bariatric surgery which has been widely adopted from the '80s till present through different procedures, notably vertical banded gastroplasty, laparoscopic adjusted gastric banding and sleeve gastrectomy. The aim of this study is to define which revisional bariatric procedure performs the best after failure of primary restrictive surgery.

METHODS

a systematic review and network meta-analysis of 39 studies was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines and the Cochrane protocol.

RESULTS

biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch guarantees the best results in terms of weight loss (1 and 3-years %TWL MD: 12.38 and 28.42) followed by single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass (9.24 and 19.13), one-anastomosis gastric bypass (7.16 and 13.1), and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (4.68 and 7.3) compared to re-sleeve gastrectomy. Duodenal switch and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass are associated to an increased risk of late major morbidity (OR: 3.07 and 2.11 respectively) compared to re-sleeve gastrectomy while no significant difference was highlighted for the other procedures. Re-sleeve gastrectomy is the revisional intervention most frequently burdened by weight recidivism; compared to it, patients undergoing single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass have the lowest risk of weight regain (OR: 0.07).

CONCLUSION

considering the analyzed outcomes altogether, single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass and one-anastomosis gastric bypass are the most performing revisional procedures after failure of restrictive surgery due to satisfying short and mid-term weight loss and low early and late morbidity. Moreover, single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass has low risk of weight recidivism.

Single anastomosis sleeve jejunal (SAS-J) bypass as a treatment for morbid obesity, technique and review of 1986 cases and 6 Years follow-up. Retrospective cohort

BACKGROUND

Santoro's operation is a sleeve gastrectomy with transit bipartition. The operation aims to maintain passage to the duodenum to minimize nutritional deficiency. This procedure is rapidly changed to single anastomosis sleeve ileal (SASI) bypass. SAS-J bypass is a modification of SASI with a short biliary limb.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study is a retrospective study of prospectively collected data. The study includes a comprehensive review of 1986 patients who underwent SAS-J bypass over 6 years. The total number is used to evaluate the perioperative data. One- and two-year follow-up was used to evaluate weight loss and comorbidities; follow-up of more than 5 years was used to obtain long-term results.

RESULTS

In this study, 70.4% of patients were female and 29.6% were male. The mean body mass index (BMI) was 44.7. The mean age was 42 years. Regarding comorbidities, 25.8% of the patients had type 2 diabetes, 31% were hypertensive, 14.2% had sleep apnea syndrome, 6.6% had gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), and 39.6% had hyperlipidemia. Of the 1294 patients who complete one-year follow up, %EWL reached 87%. Blood glucose levels were normalized in 98.5% of patients, hypertension remitted in 93%, hyperlipidemia improved in 97%, SAS is improved in all cases, and GERD improved in 89% of patients. After 5 years, 94 patients' BMI decreased from 44.3 to 28.3 without significant nutritional deficiency.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic SAS-J bypass is an effective and simple alternative bariatric procedure at short- and long-term follow-up.

Single Anastomosis Duodeno-ileal Bypass As a Revisional Procedure Following Sleeve Gastrectomy: Review of the Literature

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomies (LSGs) can experience weight-loss failure and conversion to another bariatric procedure. An analysis of the bariatric literature concerning the single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) as revisional surgery after LSG in terms of safety and efficacy identified 607 studies. Fifty-nine studies were analyzed for full content review and 9 primary studies (398 patients) were included. Revisional single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI) was performed in 294 patients at a mean interval of 37.7 months (range 11-179). Total weight loss (%) varies from 20.5% to 46.2%. Early complications after surgery occurred in 4.1% surgeries including leak (7 cases -1.9%). Mortality was nil. SADI after LSG, after failed sleeve gastrectomy or as a sequential procedure, offers a satisfactory weight loss result. Both early and late term complications are acceptable.

Indications and Outcomes of Conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Systematic Review and a Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most performed bariatric procedure. Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for SG-related complications such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), insufficient weight loss (ISWL), and weight regain (WR) is increasing. Our aim was to investigate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of conversion from SG to RYGB.

METHODS

A literature search was performed from database inception to May 2020. Eligible studies must report indications for conversion, %total body weight loss (%TWL), and/or complications. The pooled mean or proportion were analyzed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Seventeen unique studies (n = 556, 68.7% female, average age at time of conversion 42.6 ± 10.29 years) were included. The pooled conversion rate due to GERD was 30.4% (95% CI 23.5, 38.3%; I² = 63.9%), compared to 52.0% (95% CI 37.0, 66.6%; I² = 85.89%) due to ISWL/WR. The pooled baseline BMI at conversion was 38.5 kg/m² (95% CI 36.49, 40.6 kg/m²; I² = 92.1%) and after 1 year was 32.1 kg/m² (95% CI 25.50, 38.7 kg/m²; I² = 94.53%). The pooled %TWL after 1 year was 22.8% (95% CI 13.5, 32.1%; I² = 98.05%). Complication rate within 30 days was 16.4% (95% CI 11.1, 23.6%; I² = 57.17%), and after 30 days was 11.4% (95% CI 7.7, 16.7%; I² = 0%).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis showed that conversion from SG to RYGB is an option for conversion at a bariatric care center that produces sufficient weight loss outcomes, and potential resolution of symptoms of GERD. Further indication-based studies are required to obtain a clearer consensus on the surgical management of patients seeking RYGB following SG.

Revisional Laparoscopic SADI-S vs. Duodenal Switch Following Failed Primary Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Single-Center Comparison of 101 Consecutive Cases

BACKGROUND

Single-anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI-S) is being proposed for obese patients with insufficient weight loss or weight regain after sleeve gastrectomy (SG), but limited information is available. The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of SADI-S as a revisional surgery after SG, compared with standard duodenal switch (DS).

METHODS

Unicentric cohort study including all patients submitted to SADI-S and DS after failed SG in a high-volume institution, between 2008 and 2020.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients submitted to SADI-S and 55 to DS were included, 37.2 and 41.5 months after SG (p = 0.447), with initial BMI of 56.2 vs. 56.6 (p = 0.777) and 39.2 vs. 39.7 before revisional surgery (p = 0.675). All surgeries were laparoscopic. Clavien-Dindo > II complication rate was 6.5% for SADI-S and 10.9% for DS (p = 0.095), with no 90-day mortality. Follow-up at 2 years was available for 38 SADI-S' and 38 DS' patients, with total weight loss of 35.3% vs. 41.7% (p = 0.009), and excess weight loss 64.1% vs. 75.3% (p = 0.014). Comorbidities resolution for SADI-S and DS was: 44.4% vs. 76.9% for diabetes (p = 0.029) and 36.4% vs. 87.5% for hypertension (p = 0.006); with no differences for resolution of dyslipidemia (72.7% vs. 88.9%, p = 0.369) and obstructive sleep apnea (93.3% vs. 91.7%, p = 0.869). DS' patients required more extra nutritional supplementation. Three SADI-S patients needed conversion to DS, two for biliary reflux and one for weight regain.

CONCLUSION

After a failed SG, revisional DS permits better weight control and diabetes and hypertension resolution than SADI-S, at the expense of higher supplementation needs.

Transhiatal Migration After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Myth or Reality? A Multicenter, Retrospective Study on the Incidence and Clinical Impact

PURPOSE

Only anecdotally reported, intrathoracic migration (ITM) represents an unacknowledged complication after sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) contributing to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) development, both recurrent and de novo. The primary endpoint of this study was to evaluate the incidence of postoperative ITM ≥ 2 cm; the secondary endpoint was to determine the relationships between ITM, GERD, endoscopic findings, and percentage of patients requiring surgical revision.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective, multicenter study on prospective databases was conducted, analyzing LSGs performed between 2013 and 2018. Inclusion criteria consisted of primary operation; BMI ranging 35-60 kg/m²; age 18-65 years; minimum follow-up 24 months; and postoperative UGIE, excluding concomitant hiatal hernia repair. Esophageal manometry and 24-h pH-metry were indicated, based on postoperative questionnaires and UGIE; patients with GERD due to ITM, and non-responders to medical therapy, were converted to R-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

RESULTS

An ITM ≥ 2cm was postoperatively diagnosed in 94 patients (7% of 1337 LSGs), after mean 24.16 ± 13.6 months. Postoperative esophagitis was found in 29 patients vs. 15 initially (p=0.001), while GERD was demonstrated in 75 (vs. 20 preoperatively, p< 0.001). Fifteen patients (16%) underwent revision to RYGB with posterior cruroplasty. Seventeen patients with severe GERD presented improvement of endoscopic findings and clinical symptoms as a result of conservative therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

ITM after LSG is not a negligible complication and represents an important pathogenic factor in the development or worsening of GERD. Postoperative UGIE plays a fundamental role in the diagnosis of esophageal mucosal lesions.

Conversion of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy after weight loss failure into laparoscopic one anastomosis gastric bypass: short-term safety and efficacy and effect of indications on outcome

BACKGROUND

Revisional surgery after failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is growing and laparoscopic one anastomosis gastric bypass (LOAGB) has been proposed as a revisional procedure due to its combined restrictive and malabsorptive effects. The aim is to study short-term complications and weight loss (WL) results of the revisional LOAGB after LSG for the two-weight loss failure (WLF) types [insufficient weight loss (IWL) and weight regain (WR)] and to assess the possible effects of these two types of failure and gastric tube anatomy on the final outcome.

METHODS

The data of 28 patients who completed 1-year follow-up for their revisional LOAGB after their failed LSG were assessed and statistically correlated to leakage and one year WL results.

RESULTS

Operative time was 96 ± 17.4 min. Leakage occurred in 2 patients (7.1%); the small number of leak patients does not allow statistical analysis for leakage. Percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) at one year was 79.0 ± 14.4%; percentage of total weight loss (%TWL) was 31.7 ± 6.4%. %EWL was 84.2 ± 13.1 with IWL and 73.0 ± 13.9 with WR (P = 0.036). %TWL was 35.0 ± 5.2 with IWL and 27.8 ± 5.5 with WR (P = 0.001). %TWL at persistent fundus, diffusely dilated, and nondilated stomach were 38.98 ± 4.57, 31.3 ± 5.33, and 28.54 ± 5.91, respectively (P = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

LOAGB is a highly effective and safe procedure as a revision after LSG with WLF. Patients with IWL and patients with persistent fundus lost more weight than those with WR and those with diffuse stomach dilation or nondilation, respectively.

Weight Regain and Insufficient Weight Loss After Bariatric Surgery: Definitions, Prevalence, Mechanisms, Predictors, Prevention and Management Strategies, and Knowledge Gaps-a Scoping Review

Some patients experience weight regain (WR) or insufficient weight loss (IWL) after bariatric surgery (BS). We undertook a scoping review of WR and IWL after BS. We searched electronic databases for studies addressing the definitions, prevalence, mechanisms, clinical significance, preoperative predictors, and preventive and treatment approaches including behavioral, pharmacological, and surgical management strategies of WR and IWL. Many definitions exist for WR, less so for IWL, resulting in inconsistencies in the reported prevalence of these two conditions. Mechanisms and preoperative predictors contributing to WR are complex and multifactorial. A range of the current knowledge gaps are identified and questions that need to be addressed are outlined. Therefore, there is an urgent need to address these knowledge gaps for a better evidence base that would guide patient counseling, selection, and lead to improved outcomes.

Single Anastomosis Duodeno-ileostomy (SADI-S) Versus One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB-MGB) as Revisional Procedures for Patients with Weight Recidivism After Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Comparative Analysis of Efficacy and Outcomes

Purpose

Many revisional procedures are available for unsuccessful laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients with complications or weight recidivism. Single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI-S) and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB-MGB) are two revisional procedures to address the problem of weight recidivism. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of the 2 revisional approaches (SADI-S vs. OAGB-MGB).

Materials and Methods

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected database of patients who underwent SADI-S or OAGB-MGB as a revisional procedure for weight recidivism after primary LSG with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Weight loss, comorbidities, nutritional deficiencies, complications, and outcomes were compared in the 2 procedures.

Results

Ninety-one patients were included in the study (42 SADI-S and 49 OAGB-MGB). There was a significant weight loss (total weight loss percentage, TWL%) at 1-year follow-up observed for SADI-S when compared to OAGB-MGB (23.7 ± 5.7 vs. 18.7 ± 8.5, p = 0.02). However, this difference was not statistically significant at 18 months (26.4 ± 7.3 vs. 21.2 ± 11.0, p = 0.25). Remission of comorbidities (diabetes mellitus and hypertension) was comparable. Although OAGB-MGB had higher complication rate than SADI-S, the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.39). No mortality was reported in the study groups.

Conclusion

Both SADI-S and OAGB-MGB are effective and safe revisional procedures for weight regain after LSG. The short-term outcomes are comparable; however, SADI-S is associated with less upper gastrointestinal complications and could be a better option for patients suffering from GERD post-LSG. Moreover, the underlying bile reflux may get worse with OAGB-MGB. However, further prospective larger studies are needed.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s11695-020-04933-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Resolution of Erosive Esophagitis After Conversion from Vertical Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become the preferred bariatric procedure in many countries. However, there is one shortcoming of LSG in the long-term follow-up, and this is the onset of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) and erosive esophagitis (EE). Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is considered an option in patients unresponsive to medical therapy. Currently, there is no evidence of EE improvement or resolution after conversion surgery. In this study, we objectively evaluate the effectiveness of RYGB in management of EE with upper endoscopy (EGD) to identify the significant variables in patients with GERD symptoms post LSG refractory to medical therapy and require conversion surgery.

METHODS

Over a period of 11 years (2008-2019) at Singapore General Hospital, we retrospectively reviewed a prospectively collected database of a cohort of patients whom had conversion surgery to RYGB for refractory GERD and EE after LSG. Patient's endoscopic findings and demographic and anthropometric data were analyzed.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 14 patients who underwent LSG to RYGB conversions for endoscopic proven erosive esophagitis in our unit during the study period. Eight patients (57.1%) had concurrent hiatal hernia repaired. Nine (64.3%) patients were females. The median age of patients in this cohort was 44 (range 30-61) years. Mean weight and BMI were 87.7 kg (± 19.2) and 32.8 (± 3.09) kg/m2, respectively, on the day of conversion surgery. The median time between LSG and revision to RYGB was 36 (range 6-68) months. Seven patients (50%) had complete resolution of GERD symptoms after conversion, and 6 patients (42.9%) had partial resolution. Six out of 7 patients had complete resolution of EE. There were 4 anastomotic strictures (28.6%). Older patients, Indian ethnicity, present of hiatal hernia and lower weight loss after initial LSG were more likely to undergo conversion surgery.

CONCLUSION

Conversion to RYGB after LSG is clinically relevant and may be a feasible solution if patients have ongoing GERD refractory to medical therapy. Ninety-three percent of our patients achieved complete resolution of their GERD symptoms and significant improvement of erosive esophagitis with significant weight loss after conversion. This study has important implications as LSG is increasingly being performed and a proportion of these will need revision surgery for various reasons, particularly GERD which is extremely prevalent.

Midterm results of revisional bariatric surgery postsleeve gastrectomy: resleeve versus bypass

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery has been shown to produce the most predictable weight loss results, with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) being the most performed procedure as of 2014. However, inadequate weight loss may present the need for a revisional procedure.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of laparoscopic resleeve gastrectomy (LRSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in attaining successful weight loss.

SETTING

Public hospital following SG.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on all patients who underwent SG from 2008-2019. A list was obtained of those who underwent revisional bariatric surgery after initial SG, and their demographic characteristics were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 2858 patients underwent SG, of whom 84 patients (3%) underwent either a revisional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (rLRYGB) or LRSG. A total of 82% of the patients were female. The mean weight and body mass index (BMI) before SG for the LRSG and rLRYGB patients were 136.7 kg and 49.9 kg/m² and 133.9 kg and 50.5 kg/m², respectively. The mean BMI showed a drop from 42.0 to 31.7 (P < .001) 1 year post revisional surgery for the LRSG group and 42.7 to 34.5 (P < .001) for the rLRYGB group, correlating to an excess weight loss (EWL) of 61.7% and 48.1%, respectively. At 5 years post revisional surgery, LRSG patients showed an increase in BMI to 33.8 (EWL = 45.3%), while those who underwent rLRYGB showed a decrease to 34.3 (EWL = 49.2%). Completeness of follow-up at 1, 3, and 5 years for rLRYGB and LRSG were 67%, 35%, and 24% and 45%, 21%, and 18%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Revisional bariatric surgery is a safe and effective method for the management of failed primary SG. LRSG patients tended to do better earlier on; however, it leveled off with those who underwent rLRYGB by 5 years.

Short or Long Biliopancreatic Limb Bypass as a Secondary Procedure After Failed Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) may be associated with long-term problems such as insufficient weight loss or weight regain, persistence or relapse of comorbidities, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This study analyzes the outcome of patients that underwent conversion of SG to a gastric bypass procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients that underwent conversion from SG to the following four different gastric bypass procedures were analyzed: short biliopancreatic limb (BPL) bypass types such as proximal Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (PRYGB) or type 2 distal Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (type 2 DRYGB) and long BPL types such as long BPL RYGB or one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB).

RESULTS

Between 2012 and 2016, 52 patients received the following revisional procedures after primary SG: proximal RYGB (n = 12, 23.1%), type 2 DRYGB (n = 8, 15.4%), long BPL RYGB (n = 20, 38.5%), and OAGB (n = 12, 23.1%). The long BPL type procedures (long BPL RYGB, OAGB) resulted in a significant long-term additional %EWL (33.8%; 33.2%) at 3 years. In the PRYGB, the effect lasted only for 2 years. In all patients with GERD and dysphagia as the dominant post-SG symptoms, the conversion to a bypass procedure resulted in the complete resolution of these.

CONCLUSION

In case of weight regain or insufficient weight loss after SG, revisional surgery with a long BPL should be considered. The OAGB provides effective additional weight loss, with low morbidity and malnutrition rates, respectively. Conversion to the malabsorptive long BPL RYGB with a total alimentary limb length below 400 cm should be avoided. Patients that suffer primarily from post-SG GERD or dysphagia should undergo conversion to PRYGB.

Resleeve for failed laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite excellent long-term results, insufficient weight loss, weight regain, and pathologic gastroesophageal reflux disease may require revisional procedures after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Resleeve gastrectomy (ReSG) for failed LSG, has been proposed as an alternative to more complex malabsorptive procedures. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the current evidence on the therapeutic role and outcomes of ReSG for failed LSG. PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science data sets were consulted. A systematic review and Frequentist meta-analysis were performed. Ten studies published between 2010 and 2019 met the inclusion criteria for a total of 300 patients. The age of the patient population ranged from 20 to 66 years old and 80.5% were females. The elapsed time between the LSG and ReSG ranged from 9 to 132 months. The estimated pooled prevalence of postoperative leak and overall complications were 2.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] = .5%-4.7%) and 7.6% (95%CI = 3.1%-13.4%). The estimated pooled mean operative time and hospital length of stay were 51 minutes (95%CI = 49.4-52.6) and 3.3 days (95%CI = 3.13-3.51). The postoperative follow-up ranged from 12 to 36 months and the estimated pooled mean percentage excess weight loss was 61.46% (95%CI = 55.9-66.9). The overall mortality ranged from 0% to 2.2%. ReSG after failed LSG seems feasible and safe with acceptable postoperative leak rate, overall complications, and mortality. The effectiveness of ReSG in term of weight loss seems promising in the short-term but further studies are warranted to explore its effect on patients' quality of life, postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease, and long-term weight loss.

A Multi-institutional Study on the Mid-Term Outcomes of Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass as a Surgical Revision Option After Sleeve Gastrectomy

INTRODUCTION

Recently, a single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) has become increasingly popular for patients with BMI > 50 as a primary or staged surgery. Staging allows surgeons to do the sleeve gastrectomy (SG) first with the conversion only happening when a failure or technical challenge is identified.

PURPOSE

We present the mid-term outcomes of SADI bypass surgery after SG.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis was performed on a prospective database from four institutions. Ninety-six patients were identified from 2013 to 2018. Patients were divided into two groups: one had two-stage SADI because of insufficient weight loss, the second had planned two-stage SADI because of super obesity (BMI > 50 kg/m²). Incidence of complications was divided into < 30 days and > 30 days.

RESULT

Of 96 patients, 3 patients were completely lost to follow-up. The mean age was 44.8 ± 11.3 years. There were no deaths or conversion to open surgery. The postoperative early complication and late complication rate was 5.3% and 6.4% respectively. At 24 months, group 2 had higher %weight loss (WL) and change in BMI units compared to group 1 with statistically significant difference. The average WL and change in BMI for entire patient's population at 24 months after 2nd stage SADI was 20.5% and 9.4 units respectively. The remission rate for DM was 93.7% with or without the use of medication.

CONCLUSION

The two-stage approach to SADI-S appears technically simpler than a single compromised operation. However, this approach needs more patients to understand its limitations.

Mini/One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass as a Second Step Procedure After Sleeve Gastrectomy-a Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Whether one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is a better revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is still under debate. The aim is to compare short-term outcomes of RYGB and OAGB as a RBS after SG, pertaining to their effects on weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, and complications.

METHODS

We performed a single-center analysis of 55 patients (n = 34 OAGB, n = 21 RYGB). Indications for revisional surgery included weight regain/loss failure (67%) and intractable gastroesophageal reflux disease (33%). Data were collected up to 1-year follow-up (FU) and included time of revisional surgery, operation time, weight, body mass index, excess weight loss, and total weight loss (TWL), both in percent, complications and resolution of comorbidities.

RESULTS

Operation time was 79 ± 36 (OAGB-MGB) and 98 ± 24 min (RYGB) (p = 0.03). In the first 30 postoperative days, three patients in the RYGB group, and no patient in the OAGB group, had postoperative complications. FU was 100%. Minor complication rates at 12 months were 33.3% (RYGB) and 35.3% (OAGB). At 12 months, mean % TWL was 10.3 ± 7.6% (RYGB) and 15.8 ± 7.8% (OAGB) (p = 0.0132).

CONCLUSIONS

OAGB after failed SG was found to be a quicker procedure with less perioperative complications. At 1-year FU, no significant differences were seen between RYGB and OAGB regarding readmission and minor complications. Still long-term FU including the risk of malnutrition is needed to have a complete evaluation of OAGB as a RBS for the future.

Revision operation to one-anastomosis gastric bypass for failed sleeve gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

There are few publications on revising sleeve gastrectomy (SG) to one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB).

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to determine outcomes in terms of weight loss and resolution of co-morbidities in patients who had SG revised to OAGB.

SETTINGS

A high-volume university-affiliated bariatric surgery center in India.

METHOD

Information was collected from patients identified in a prospectively maintained database of patients who had a revision from SG to OAGB. An analysis of outcomes in terms of weight loss and maintenance with up to 3-years follow-up is reported.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were revised from SG to OAGB. Of the 32 revised patients, 9 (28%) had type 2 diabetes, 15 (47%) had hypertension, and 2 (6%) had sleep apnea at the time of the initial SG. At the time of revision only 2 of 32 (6.25%) had type 2 diabetes, 3 (9.4%) had hypertension, and none had sleep apnea. The average initial weight in this study before SG was 118 kg and body mass index was 44.04 kg/m². The average weight at the nadir and at revision was 92.1 and 103.5 kg, respectively. Average weight was 93.5, 94.3, and 100.6 kg (P < .002) at 1-, 2-, and 3-year follow-up, respectively. There was reoccurrence of type 2 diabetes in 1 patient at 3 years after revision due to weight regain. There were no complications in this study.

CONCLUSION

In this study, revision of SG to OAGB because of inadequate weight loss or significant weight regain was safe and effective at 2-year follow-up; however, there was a tendency toward weight regain at 3 years. Multicenter studies with larger series of patients and longer-term follow-up after SG revision to OAGB are needed.

Single- or double-anastomosis duodenal switch versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass as a revisional procedure for sleeve gastrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is one of the most commonly performed bariatric procedure worldwide. There is currently no consensus on which revisional procedure is best after an initial SG.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety between single-anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI) or biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD-DS) versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as a revisional procedure for SG.

SETTING

University Hospital, Canada.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PubMed were searched up to August 2018. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they compared SADI or BPD-DS with RYGB as a revisional bariatric procedure for SG. Primary outcome was absolute percentage of total weight loss. Secondary outcomes were length of stay, adverse events, and improvement or resolution of co-morbidities (diabetes, hypertension, or hypercholesterolemia). Pooled mean differences were calculated using random effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Six retrospective cohort studies involving 377 patients met the inclusion criteria. The SADI/BPD-DS group achieved a significantly higher percentage of total weight loss compared with RYGB by 10.22% (95% confidence interval, -17.46 to -2.97; P = .006). However, there was significant baseline equivalence bias with 4 studies reporting higher initial body mass index (BMI) in the SADI/BPD-DS group. There were no significant differences in length of stay, adverse events, or improvement of co-morbidities between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

SADI, BPD-DS, and RYGB are safe and efficacious revisional surgeries for SG. Both SADI and RYGB are efficacious in lowering initial BMI but there is more evidence for excellent weight loss outcomes with the conversion to BPD-DS when the starting BMI is high. Further randomized trials are required for definitive conclusions.

Failed Sleeve Gastrectomy: Single Anastomosis Duodenoileal Bypass or Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass? A Multicenter Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has become the most performed bariatric procedure to induce weight loss worldwide. Unfortunately, a significant portion of patients show insufficient weight loss or weight regain after a few years.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effectiveness of the single anastomosis duodenoileal (SADI) bypass versus the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) on health outcomes in morbid obese patients who had undergone SG previously, with up to 2 years of follow-up.

METHODS

From 2007 to 2017, 140 patients received revisional laparoscopic surgery after SG in four specialized Dutch bariatric hospitals. Data was analyzed retrospectively and included comparisons for indication of surgery, vitamin/mineral deficiencies, and complications; divided into short-, medium-term. To compare weight loss, linear regression and linear mixed models were used.

RESULTS

Conversion of a SG to SADI was performed in 66 patients and to RYGB in 74 patients. For patients in which additional weight loss was the main indication for surgery, SADI achieved 8.7%, 12.4%, and 19.4% more total body weight loss at 6, 12, and 24 months compared to RYGB (all p < .001). When a RYGB was indicated in case of gastroesophageal reflux or dysphagia, it greatly reduced complaints almost directly after surgery. Furthermore, a similar amount of complications and nutritional deficiencies was observed for both groups. There was no intra- or post-operative mortality.

CONCLUSION

Conversion into a SADI resulted in significantly more weight loss while complications rates and nutritional deficiencies were similar and may therefore be considered the recommended operation for patients in which only additional weight loss is required.

Single-anastomosis duodeno-ileal - new revision procedure in a patient with insufficient weight loss after sleeve gastrectomy

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is one of the most popular and effective bariatric surgical procedures worldwide. The effect of LSG is mostly dependent on the restrictive mechanism, which makes it more vulnerable to failure. Failing of bariatric procedure is not uncommon and occurs in 6% to 23%. In case of weight loss failure, there are no hard recommendations on the choice of the redo procedure. One of the most novel options, introduced in 2007, relatively simple to perform following LSG is single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass. Herein we describe surgical technique and history of a patient with inadequate weight loss after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, who underwent single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass.

MANAGEMENT OF ENDOCRINE DISEASE: Which metabolic procedure? Comparing outcomes in sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en Y gastric bypass

Obesity and its associated comorbidities have become one of the largest challenges for health care in the near future. Conservative therapy for obesity and related comorbidities has a very high failure rate and poor long-term results. Similarly, the conservative and medical management of the majority of metabolic diseases such as type 2 diabetes mellitus are only able to slow down disease progression but have no causal effect on the disease process. Obesity surgery has evolved as a highly effective therapy for severe obesity achieving long-lasting weight loss. Furthermore, several studies have demonstrated the beneficial effects of obesity surgery on reduction of overall mortality, reduction of cardiovascular events and superior control of obesity-related diseases such as type 2 diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia and also the non-alcoholic steatohepatitis compared to medical therapy. Based on these findings, the term 'metabolic surgery' with the focus on treating metabolic diseases independent of body weight has been coined. Of great interest are recent studies that show that even existing complications of metabolic diseases such as diabetic nephropathy or the non-alcoholic steatohepatitis can be reversed by metabolic surgery. Although metabolic surgery has proven to be a safe and effective treatment for obesity, resolution of comorbidities and enhancing quality of life, it is still uncertain and unclear, which surgical procedure is the most effective to achieve these metabolic effects. The aim of this review is to compare the effects of the two currently most widely used metabolic operations, the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and the sleeve gastrectomy in the treatment of obesity and its related comorbidities.

Weight Regain Following Sleeve Gastrectomy-a Systematic Review

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is a commonly performed bariatric procedure. Weight regain following SG is a significant issue. Yet the defining, reporting and understanding of this phenomenon remains largely neglected. Systematic review was performed to locate articles reporting the definition, rate and/or cause of weight regain in patients at least 2 years post-SG. A range of definitions employed to describe weight regain were identified in the literature. Rates of regain ranged from 5.7 % at 2 years to 75.6 % at 6 years. Proposed causes of weight regain included initial sleeve size, sleeve dilation, increased ghrelin levels, inadequate follow-up support and maladaptive lifestyle behaviours. Bariatric literature would benefit from standardising definitions used to report weight regain and its rate in clinical series. Larger prospective studies are required to further understand mechanisms of weight regain following SG.

Weight Regain Following Sleeve Gastrectomy-a Systematic Review

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is a commonly performed bariatric procedure. Weight regain following SG is a significant issue. Yet the defining, reporting and understanding of this phenomenon remains largely neglected. Systematic review was performed to locate articles reporting the definition, rate and/or cause of weight regain in patients at least 2 years post-SG. A range of definitions employed to describe weight regain were identified in the literature. Rates of regain ranged from 5.7 % at 2 years to 75.6 % at 6 years. Proposed causes of weight regain included initial sleeve size, sleeve dilation, increased ghrelin levels, inadequate follow-up support and maladaptive lifestyle behaviours. Bariatric literature would benefit from standardising definitions used to report weight regain and its rate in clinical series. Larger prospective studies are required to further understand mechanisms of weight regain following SG.