Secondary surgery after sleeve gastrectomy: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch

Comparing the effects of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy on weight loss and comorbidity resolution: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG) and Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) are the most common bariatric modalities. There is ongoing debate on the two modalities' long-term effects on weight loss and comorbidity resolution.PubMed, EMbase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LRYGB versus LSG were searched by March 2024. Quality assessment was conducted by Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) guidelines, following the procedures outlined in the Cochrane Collaborations tool (RoB 2.0 Assessment Form).In total, 13 datasets were included from 10 RCTs that involved 1106 individuals. Both the percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) and percentage of total weight loss (%TWL) were greater in LRYGB compared to LSG at 3 years (MD: 13.04, 95%CI: 6.95-19.13; P < 0.0001) and 1 year (MD: 5.97, 95%CI: 5.23-6.71; P < 0.00001), respectively. When comparing LRYGB to LSG, the remission percentage for type 2 diabetes mellitus was greater at one (RR: 0.15, 95%CI: 0.03-0.27; P = 0.02) and 3 years (RR: 0.17, 95 % CI: 0.07-0.28; P = 0.001). Moreover, early (RR: 1.72, 95%CI: 1.19-2.46; P = 0.003) and late (RR: 1.40, 95%CI: 1.15-1.71; P = 0.001) adverse events were more common with LRYGB. Regarding remission from obstructive sleep apnea syndrome, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, no significant changes were seen. LRYGB and LSG are both viable bariatric surgery options for resolving long-term comorbidities. While the rate of adverse events is greater with LRYGB than LSG, the former may provide more long-term sustainable weight reduction.Additional research of a higher quality is necessary.

1- and 2-year outcomes and predictors of weight loss after gastric sleeve to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass conversion: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y bypass conversion is a commonly performed procedure, yet data are limited on outcomes and their predictors. The purpose of this study is to characterize the long-term outcomes of patients after sleeve-to-bypass conversion and identify predictors of post-conversion outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent sleeve-to-bypass conversion for obesity across four hospitals from 06/2017 to 04/2023. Predictors of the below-average percent excess weight loss (%EWL; relative to pre-conversion weight) at 1 and 2 years following conversion were identified using multivariate logistic regression models adjusting for comorbidities, demographics, and neighborhood socioeconomic status.

RESULTS

150 Patients undergoing sleeve-to-bypass conversion were identified. 99 had 1-year data and 63 had 2-year data. Mean %EWL at 1- and 2-years following conversion were 40.2% and 37.4%, respectively. EWL > 40% after sleeve gastrectomy was an independent predictor of the below-average %EWL 1-year post-conversion (OR 10.0, 95% CI 2.2-63.0, p < 0.01), and BMI > 40 kg/m2 at the time of conversion was an independent predictor of both 1- and 2-year below-average %EWL post-conversion (p = 0.01 and 0.05, respectively). Insignificant predictors of the below-average %EWL after conversion included: weight regain after sleeve, time between sleeve and conversion, alimentary limb length, and any bariatric surgery prior to sleeve gastrectomy.

CONCLUSION

Patients should be counseled that the typical expected %EWL for sleeve-to-bypass conversion is less than the 50% EWL benchmark of success for index bariatric operations. The main predictors of a suboptimal conversion outcome are > 40% EWL after sleeve or > 40 BMI kg/m2 at the time of conversion. Most variables in our analysis were not predictors of post-conversion %EWL, including weight regain between sleeve and conversion, alimentary limb length, and time interval between procedures, which suggests that these factors should not play a large role when considering sleeve-to-bypass conversion.

Weight loss after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and single anastomosis duodenoileostomy following failed sleeve gastrectomy

OBJECTIVE

While sleeve gastrectomy (SG) results in sustained weight loss for the majority of patients, some will experience inadequate weight loss or weight regain requiring revision. The objective of this study was to evaluate differences in weight loss over time between patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or single anastomosis duodenoileostomy (SADI) after SG.

METHODS

We queried a single institution's bariatrics registry to identify patients who underwent RYGB or SADI after previous SG over a three-year period. Demographics, operative characteristics, and post-operative complications were evaluated. Interval total body weight loss (TBWL) and excess body weight loss (EBWL) were calculated from available follow-ups within 2 years.

RESULTS

We identified 124 patients who underwent conversion to RYGB (n = 61) or SADI (n = 63) following previous SG. There were no differences in sex, age, or medical comorbidities between groups. The median initial BMI was higher in the SADI group (44.9 vs. 41.9 for RYGB, p = 0.03) with greater excess body weight (56.7 vs. 64.3 kg, p = 0.04). The SADI group had a shorter median operative duration (157 vs. 182 min for RYGB, p < 0.01) and lower readmission rates (0 vs. 14.75%, p < 0.01). There was no difference in post-operative complications or need for rehydration therapy between the groups. Among 122 patients (98.4%) that had follow-up weights available, there were no differences in TBWL between groups. RYGB patients had a higher EBWL at 2, 3, and 6 months (p < 0.05 for all comparisons), but there were no differences between RYGB and SADI at 1 or 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Both RYGB and SADI conversions proved effective for further weight loss following failed SG at our academic center. While neither demonstrated clear superiority in long-term (> 1 year) weight loss, RYGB's restrictive gastric pouch may explain its early weight loss advantage.

Conversion of sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y laparoscopic gastric bypass: a comprehensive 14-year follow-up study on efficacy and outcomes

BACKGROUND

Failed sleeve gastrectomy (SG), defined by inadequate weight loss or weight regain and by reflux and structural complications, can be treated by a laparoscopic conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy and outcomes of conversion surgery over a 14-year follow-up period.

SETTING

Government and private medical centers in university settings.

METHODS

We conducted a cohort study of 58 patients who underwent conversion of SG to RYGB for 2 indications: invalidating reflux or weight recurrence during 2009-2023. Weight dynamics analysis was performed with 2 references of weight: before SG (with intention to treat) and before conversion.

RESULTS

At conversion surgery, the mean weight, body mass index (BMI), percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL), and percentage of total weight loss (%TWL) (calculated with intention to treat, from the weight before SG) were 92.2 ± 25.2 kg, 34.3 ± 8.0 kg/m2, 55.2% ± 39.9%, and 22.8% ± 15.2%, respectively. Mean nadir weight, BMI, %EWL, and %TWL after conversion (calculated from the weight before SG) were 71.1 ± 18.4 kg, 26.7 ± 5.5 kg/m2, 96.5% ± 30.5%, and 40.2% ± 10.6%, respectively. At follow-up, the mean weight, BMI, %EWL, and %TWL (calculated from the weight before SG) were 80.4 ± 17.7 kg, 29.6 ± 5.4 kg/m2, 78.9% ± 26.8%, and 33.3% ± 11.2%, respectively. The mean percentages of %EWLio and %TWLio (calculated from the weight before conversion = EWL from index operation) at nadir were 73.2% ± 92.7% and 20.1% ± 12.2% after conversion, respectively, and decreased to 41.9% ± 94.0% and 13.2% ± 15.2% at last follow-up (mean 6.6 yr), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

SG to RYGB conversion provides moderate to low complementary weight loss in the short term. By 3-4 years, there is a clear trend toward weight gain.

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.

Outcomes of revisional surgery options after inadequate sleeve gastrectomy: A comprehensive network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the success of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in of weight loss and treatment of the medical problems associated with obesity, some concerns have arisen about the need for revisional surgeries after SG in some patients. This study aimed to present an updated and comprehensive comparison among the presently available revisional surgeries employed explicitly in cases of inadequate outcomes after SG, which is the most frequently performed bariatric surgery in contemporary practice.

METHODS

This network meta-analysis included studies that compared the outcomes of different revisional bariatric procedures after an inadequate outcome of SG.

RESULTS

Searching across the electronic databases yielded 31 eligible articles. Re-SG was associated with the highest rate of significant complications. Patients treated with single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass (SADI) had a significantly higher percentage of total weight loss (%TWL) than those treated with one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). The percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) at the end of the follow-up period was significantly higher in patients in the SADI group compared to those in the RYGB group and the OAGB, and re-SG exhibited the least values compared to SADI, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD/DS), and OAGB. Significantly lower rates of reflux worsening/de novo development were observed in the SADI group compared to the OAGB group and the re-SG group, which showed significantly higher rates than SADI and RYGB.

CONCLUSION

Our comprehensive network meta-analysis highlights SADI as a promising revisional option post-SG, demonstrating superior weight loss outcomes, lower significant complication rates, and a favorable impact on reflux compared to other procedures. While acknowledging the limitations of our study, these findings support the potential efficacy of SADI in addressing the challenges of inadequate weight loss after sleeve gastrectomy.

The Trajectory of Revisional Bariatric Surgery: Open to Laparoscopic to Robotic

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is the most effective therapeutic intervention for patients with obesity, with sleeve gastrectomy (SG) being the most commonly performed primary MBS procedure. Long-term studies have demonstrated that 15-20% of patients require revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) due to weight-related issues or surgical complications. Despite the gold standard being laparoscopic revision, there are other available approaches such as open or robotic-assisted. An extensive literature review was performed for articles from their inception to February 2024. A descriptive review of MBS procedures (SG, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), single anastomosis duodeno-ileostomy (SADI) and biliopancreatic diversion-duodenal switch (BPD-DS)) was carried out to report and compare outcomes between primary and revisional bariatric surgery. A similar review was conducted to compare outcomes of revisional approaches (open, laparoscopic, robotic). RYGB remains the dominant RBS with a similar safety profile compared to revisional SADI and BPD-DS. In terms of the RBS surgical approach, all three options showed comparable short and long-term outcomes, with robotic RBS being associated with longer operative time and variable length of stay. Additional long-term studies are required to further validate our conclusions.

Infrequent but serious? Beriberi And Thiamine deficiency among adolescents and young adults after bariatric surgery

BACKGROUND

Thiamine deficiency (TD) among adolescents following metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) has not been assessed.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed TD among adolescents following MBS.

SETTING

University Hospital.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted for all adolescents and young adults (aged 10-25 years) who had MBS and subsequently presented with TD at our institution (n = 30). Diagnosis used clinical, laboratory, brain imaging, and neurophysiology criteria. Of 1575 patients, 7 subsequently had TD. Another 23 adolescents had MBS at private hospitals or overseas and presented at our institution with TD.

RESULTS

Based on MBS undertaken at our institution, TD prevalence was .45 cases per 100 MBS. The mean age of patients was 19.5 ± 3.23 years, 53.3% were male, 96.7% had sleeve gastrectomy, and time from MBS to admission averaged 4.97 ± 11.94 months. Mean weight loss from surgery to admission was 33.68 ± 10.90 kg. Associated factors included poor oral intake (90%), nausea and vomiting (80%), and noncompliance with multivitamins (71%). Signs and symptoms included generalized weakness, nystagmus, numbness, and paraparesis (83.3%-80%). Seven patients had Wernicke encephalopathy full triad; 16 displayed a mixed picture of Wernicke encephalopathy and dry beriberi; and there were no cases of wet beriberi. Half the patients achieved complete resolution of symptoms, whereas 47% and 40% had residual weakness or persistent sensory symptoms, respectively. There was no mortality. Most common concurrent nutritional deficiencies were of vitamins K, D, and A.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first in-depth study of TD among adolescents after MBS. Although TD is uncommon among adolescents after MBS, it is serious, requiring diligent suspicion and prompt treatment. Bariatric teams should emphasize compliance with multivitamin regimens and follow it up.

Efficacy of High-dose Liraglutide 3.0 mg in Patients with Poor Response to Bariatric Surgery: Real-world Experience and Updated Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Poor response to bariatric surgery, characterized by insufficient weight loss (IWL) or weight regain (WR), poses a significant challenge in obesity treatment. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of liraglutide in addressing this issue.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective, multicenter cohort study investigated the impact of liraglutide 3 mg on weight loss in adults with suboptimal responses or weight regain after bariatric surgery (BS). Additionally, a systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted for a comprehensive evaluation.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patients (mean age 41.03 ± 11.2 years, 71.4% female) who experienced IWL or WR after BS received pharmacologic therapy with liraglutide 3 mg. Mean percent weight loss in the entire cohort was 5.6 ± 2.6% at 12 weeks and 9.3 ± 3.6% at 24 weeks with a significant reduction in waist circumference (p < 0.0001). No serious side effects were reported. A meta-analysis, utilizing the fixed effect model with the metafor package in R, included 6 and 5 papers for the change in body weight and BMI after liraglutide treatment, respectively. The analysis demonstrated a considerable reduction in body weight (7.9; CI - 10.4; - 5.4, p < 0.0001) and BMI (3.09; CI 3.89; - 2.28, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Liraglutide 3 mg emerges as a viable option for significant weight loss in patients experiencing IWL or WR after BS. Its inclusion in a multimodal, sequential obesity treatment approach proves promising.

Post metabolic bariatric surgery weight regain: the importance of GLP-1 levels

Weight regain and insufficient weight loss are essential problems after metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) in people living with obesity. Changes in the level of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) secreted from the gut after bariatric surgery are one of the underlying mechanisms for successful initial weight loss. Studies and meta-analyses have revealed that postprandial GLP-1 levels increase after the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy, but fasting GLP-1 levels do not increase significantly. Some observational studies have shown the relationship between higher postprandial GLP-1 levels and successful weight loss after bariatric surgery. There is growing evidence that GLP-1-receptor agonist (GLP-1-RA) use in patients who regained weight after bariatric surgery has resulted in significant weight loss. In this review, we aimed to summarize the changes in endogenous GLP-1 levels and their association with weight loss after MBS, describe the effects of GLP-1-RA use on weight loss after MBS, and emphasize metabolic adaptations in light of the recent literature. We hypothesized that maintaining higher basal-bolus GLP-1-RA levels may be a promising treatment choice in people with obesity who failed to lose weight after bariatric surgery.

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

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

Non-response After Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy-the Theoretical Need for Revisional Bariatric Surgery: Results from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry

BACKGROUND

Revisional surgery is a second-line treatment option after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and gastric bypass (GBP) in patients with primary or secondary non-response. The aim was to analyze the theoretical need for revisional surgery after SG and GBP when applying four indication benchmarks.

METHOD

Based on data from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry, SG and GBP were compared regarding four endpoints: 1. excess weight loss (%EWL) < 50%, 2. weight regain of more than 10 kg after nadir, 3. fulfillment of previous IFSO-guidelines, or 4. ADA criteria for bariatric metabolic surgery 2 years after primary surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 60,426 individuals were included in the study (SG: n = 7856 and GBP: n = 52,570). Compared to patients in the GBP group, more SG patients failed to achieve a %EWL > 50% (23.0% versus 8.5%, p < .001), regained more than 10 kg after nadir (4.3% versus 2.5%, p < .001), and more often fulfilled the IFSO criteria (8.0% versus 4.5%, p < .001) or the ADA criteria (3.3% versus 1.8%, p < 001) at the 2-year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

SG is associated with a higher risk for weight non-response compared to GBP. To offer revisional bariatric surgery to all non-responders exceeds the bounds of feasibility and operability. Hence, individual prioritization and intensified evaluation of alternative second-line treatments are necessary.

What About My Weight? Insufficient Weight Loss or Weight Regain After Bariatric Metabolic Surgery

Context

This review study aimed to investigate the definition, etiology, risk factors (RFs), management strategy, and prevention of insufficient weight loss (IWL) and weight regain (WR) following bariatric metabolic surgery (BMS).

Evidence Acquisition

Electronic databases were searched to retrieve relevant articles. The inclusion criteria were English articles with adult participants assessing the definition, prevalence, etiology, RFs, management strategy, and prevention of IWL/WR.

Results

Definition: The preferred definition for post-BMS IWL/WR are the terms "Lack of maintenance of total weight loss (TWL)>20%" and "weight change in percentage compared to nadir weight or weight loss". Prevalence: The exact prevalence of IWL/WR is still being determined due to the type of BMS and various definitions. Etiology: Several mechanisms, including hormonal/metabolic, dietary non-adherence, physical inactivity, mental health, and anatomic surgical failure, are possible etiologies of post-BMS IWL/WR. Risk factors: Preoperative body mass index (BMI), male gender, psychiatric conditions, comorbidities, age, poor diet, eating disorders, poor follow-ups, insufficient physical activity, micronutrients, and genetic-epigenetic factors are the most important RFs. Management Strategy: The basis of treatment is lifestyle interventions, including dietary, physical activity, psychological, and behavioral therapy. Pharmacotherapy can be added. In the last treatment line, different techniques of endoscopic surgery and revisional surgery can be used. Prevention: Behavioral and psychotherapeutic interventions, dietary therapy, and physical activity therapy are the essential components of prevention.

Conclusions

Many definitions exist for WR, less so for IWL. Etiologies and RFs are complex and multifactorial; therefore, the management and prevention strategy is multidisciplinary. Some knowledge gaps, especially for IWL, exist, and these gaps must be filled to strengthen the evidence used to guide patient counseling, selection, and improved outcomes.

Quality of life after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: Pre-operative, 1-year and 5-year results

Introduction

The negative impact of obesity on the quality of life (QoL) and its association with multiple comorbidities is unquestionable. The primary objective of this study was to compare the QoL of patients before, 1 year and 5 years after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Secondary objectives were to evaluate the resolution of obesity-related comorbidities and weight loss success.

Materials and Methods

We included patients who underwent LSG for body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 between August 2016 and April 2017 and completed the Moorehead-Ardelt QoL Questionnaire II (MA II). Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS IBM Statistics for Windows version 21.

Results

In total, 64 patients participated with a female majority (73.44%) and a mean age of 36.09 with an average BMI at 40.47. Percentage of excess BMI loss and excess weight loss (% EWL) at one and 5 years after surgery went from 90.18% to 85.05% and 72.17% to 67.09%, respectively. The total MA II score before LSG was - 0.39 ± 0.94. Postoperatively, it increased to 1.73 ± 0.60 at 1 year and 1.95 ± 0.67 at 5 years. The positive impact of LSG on QoL was more significant in patients presenting ≥30% of weight loss and in females. At 5 years, a significant improvement in many comorbidities was noted except for arterial hypertension, coxalgia, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease and lower extremities' varices.

Conclusion

LSG maintains a long-term QoL improvement, a significant EWL and a resolution of the most common obesity-associated comorbidities such as diabetes, dyslipidaemia and symptoms related to sleep apnoea.

Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Prescription of Supplements in Pre- and Post-bariatric Surgery Patients: An Updated Comprehensive Practical Guideline

Only in the USA, 315 billion dollars are spent annually on the medical cost of obesity in adult patients. Till now, bariatric surgery is the most effective method for treating obesity and can play an essential role in reducing the direct and indirect costs of obesity treatment. Nonetheless, there are few comprehensive guidelines which include nutrition, physical activity, and supplements, before and after surgery. The purpose of the present narrative review is to provide an updated and comprehensive practical guideline to help multidisciplinary teams. The core keywords include nutrition, diet, physical activity, exercise, supplements, macronutrients, micronutrients, weight reduction, bariatric surgery, Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass, Sleeve Gastrostomy, Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding, and Biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch which were searched in databases including PubMed/Medline, Cochrane, and some other sources such as Google Scholar. We answered questions in five important areas: (a) nutritional strategies before bariatric surgery, (b) nutrition after bariatric surgery, (c) physical activity before and after bariatric surgery, (d) weight regain after bariatric surgery, and (e) micronutrient assessments and recommendations before and after bariatric surgery. Some new items were added in this updated guideline including "weight regain" and "pregnancy after bariatric surgery." Other fields were updated based on new evidence and guidelines.

Weight-Related Outcomes After Revisional Bariatric Surgery in Patients with Non-response After Sleeve Gastrectomy-a Systematic Review

Weight non-response after sleeve gastrectomy is an emerging issue. This systematic review compared revisional procedures for weight-related outcomes. We searched several databases for relevant articles and included adult patients with revisional bariatric procedures after primary sleeve gastrectomy. Twelve trials with 1046 patients were included, covering five revisional procedures. There were no randomised controlled trials, and 10 studies had a critical risk of bias. Significant variations in inclusion criteria, therapy benchmarks, follow-up schemes, and outcome measurements were observed, preventing meaningful comparison of results. Evidence-based treatment strategies for weight non-response after sleeve gastrectomy cannot be deduced from the current literature. Prospective studies with well-defined indications, standardised techniques, and strict adherence to outcome measurements are needed.

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.

Clinical influence of conversion of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy to one anastomosis gastric bypass on gastroesophageal reflux disease

PURPOSE

Assess the subjective impact of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms on patients undergoing revision from laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) to one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) using the Reflux Disease Questionnaire for GERD (RDQ) and the GERD-health related quality of life score (GERD-HRQL), prior to- and following conversion.

METHODS

Patients undergoing revision from LSG to OAGB were prospectively followed between May 2015 and December 2020. Data retrieved included demographics, anthropometrics, previous bariatric history, time interval between LSG and OAGB, weight loss, and co-morbidities. Pre- and post-OAGB RDQ and GERD-HRQL questionnaires were obtained. In the case of sleeve dilatation, sleeve resizing was performed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 37 patients underwent revision from LSG to OAGB. Mean ages at LSG and pre-OAGB were 38 ± 11.74 and 46 ± 12.75, respectively. Median follow-up time was 21.5 months (range 3-65). All patients underwent sleeve resizing. RDQ and GERD-HRQL scores were obtained at a median of 14 months (range 3-51) between pre- and post-OAGB. Median RDQ score pre-OAGB vs post-OAGB was significantly reduced (30 (range 12-72) vs 14 (range 12-60), p = 0.007). All 3 parts of the GERD- HRQL questionnaires were significantly reduced between pre-OAGB and post-OAGB: Symptoms (20; 62.5% vs 10; 31.3%, p = 0.012), overall score (15 (0-39) vs 7 (0-28), p = 0.04) and subjective improvement (10; 31% vs 20; 62.5%, p = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

Conversion of LSG to OAGB showed subjective improvement of GERD symptoms both in RDQ and in GERD-HRQL.

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 to Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass: a successful means of mitigating reflux after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become the most common bariatric procedure due to the technical ease and weight loss success of the operation. However, there has been concern that LSG contributes to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) postoperatively with a proportion of patients requiring conversion to a Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB). The objective of this study was to characterize the patients who underwent revision in our hospital system and to better understand pre-operative predictors of GERD and revision.

METHODS

After IRB approval, a retrospective review was conducted assessing for patients who had conversion of LSG to RYGB at three hospitals within the University of Pennsylvania Health System from January 2015 to December 2021. The patients' charts were then reviewed to evaluate for demographics, BMI, operative findings, imaging and endoscopic reports, and post-operative outcomes.

RESULTS

97 patients were identified who underwent conversion of LSG to RYGB between January 2015 and December 2021. The cohort was predominantly female (n = 89, 91.7%) with an average age of 42.7 ± 10.6 years at the time of conversion. The most common indications for revision were GERD (72.2%) and obesity/insufficient weight loss (24.7%). Patients lost an average of 11.1 ± 12.9 kg after revision to RYGB. Of the patients who underwent revision for GERD, 80.2% noted global symptomatic improvement after revision and 19.4% were able to stop their proton pump inhibitor (PPI) postoperatively, with most patients decreasing the frequency of the PPI use postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

The majority of patients who underwent conversion from LSG to RYGB due to GERD and saw marked improvements in GERD symptoms and outcomes. These findings illuminate the real-world practices and outcomes of bariatric revisional procedures for reflux and the need for more research on standardized practice.

Conversion of gastric sleeve to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: overall outcomes and predictors of below-average weight loss

BACKGROUND

Conversion of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) has been utilized to promote further weight loss, but results are variable in available literature.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate outcomes of SG to RYGB conversion for weight loss and to identify predictors of below-average weight loss.

SETTING

University-affiliated hospital, United States.

METHODS

Chart review was performed of our patients who underwent SG to RYGB conversion from November 1, 2013, to November 1, 2020. Primary outcomes were below-average percent excess weight loss (%EWL) at 1 and 2 years. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for preconversion demographics to evaluate their relationship to the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients underwent conversion from SG to RYGB with weight loss as a goal. One-year data was available for 47 patients. The average %EWL at 1 year was 41.5%. Twenty-six patients had below-average %EWL at 1 year. Interval to conversion <2 years (OR = 4.41, 95% CI [1.28,15.17], P = .019) and preconversion body mass index (BMI) >40 (OR = 4.00, 95% CI [1.17,13.73], P = .028) were statistically significant predictors of below-average 1-year %EWL. Two-year data was available for 36 patients. The average %EWL at 2 years was 30.8%. Seventeen patients had below-average %EWL at 2 years. Evaluated demographics were not statistically significant predictors of below-average 2-year %EWL.

CONCLUSIONS

Following SG to RYGB conversion, %EWL outcomes are lower at 1 year (41.5%) and 2 years (30.8%) than reported values for primary RYGB. Interval to conversion <2 years and preconversion BMI >40 are predictors of below-average 1-year weight loss after conversion.

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.

Definition, Mechanisms and Predictors of Weight Loss Failure After Bariatric Surgery

It has been proven that surgery is more effective than non-surgical treatment in obese patients. However, this approach has several disadvantages, especially long-term weight loss. Weight loss failures can be broadly classified into two categories; insufficient weight loss (poor responder) and weight regain. However, a unified definition has not been established yet for each category, and there is no clear standard for the post-surgery time point to be used to assess weight loss failure. In addition, analyzing factors that contribute to weight loss failure will lead to strategies for reducing it. Therefore, many researchers have been interested in this subject and have published conflicting results. This review presents a definition for and describes the mechanisms and predictors of weight loss failure after bariatric surgery.

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.

One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass as Revisional Surgery After Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

The demand for revisional bariatric surgery after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has increased, but the ideal procedure remains unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare the outcomes of weight loss and safety of one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as revisional procedures for failed SG. Four retrospective comparative studies were included, comprising 499 individuals. Patients submitted to OAGB had a more significant total weight loss (TWL) (MD =  - 5.89%; 95% CI - 6.80 to - 4.97) after revisional surgery. Overall early complication rate was similar between procedures (RD = 0.04; 95% CI: - 0.05 to 0.12). Limited and heterogeneous data prevent meaningful conclusions, but the present analysis suggests that OAGB has a better TWL after revisional surgery.

Bariatric Surgery Conversions in MBSAQIP Centers: Current Indications and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The demand for revisional bariatric surgery has increased, and bariatric conversions (BC) to a different procedure represent most of the revisional cases. The 2020 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditfnation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database was expanded to include additional variables on BC. This study aims to analyze the indications and outcomes of BC.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the 2020 MBSAQIP database was performed. Patients who underwent BC were included in the analysis. Index procedures, rates, and indications for BC of the different bariatric operations were described. Outcomes of the most frequent BC were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 168,548 bariatric surgeries were done; 20,387 (12.1%) were revisional, and from those 15,031 (73.7%) were BC. The most converted index operations were sleeve gastrectomy (SG) (49.3%) and adjustable gastric banding (AGB) (45.9%). The most frequent conversions were SG to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (40.3%) for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (54.2%) and weight loss failure (WLF) (35.8%), AGB to SG (27%) or RYGB (16.2%) for WLF (67% and 61.3%, respectively), and SG to biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (3.2%) or single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (2%) for WLF (91.2% and 92.4%, respectively). Postoperative overall morbidity, serious morbidity, reoperation, and mortality rates ranged from 5.3 to 20.8%, 2.3 to 19.2%, 1.5 to 10%, and 0 to 0.8%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

BC represents the most frequent revisional bariatric procedure. GERD and WLF are the main causes for BC. Further research is needed to define the ideal BC according to the index procedure and indication.

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.

Preoperative Prediction of Body Mass Index of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes at 1 Year After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Cross-Sectional Study

Background: Very few models predict weight loss among type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) patients after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). This retrospective study undertook such a task. Materials and Methods: We identified all patients >18 years old with T2D who underwent primary LSG at our institution and had complete data. The training set comprised 107 patients operated upon during the period April 2011 to June 2014; the validation set comprised 134 patients operated upon during the successive chronological period, July 2014 to December 2015. Sex, age, presurgery BMI, T2D duration, number of T2D medications, insulin use, hypertension, and dyslipidemia were utilized as independent predictors of 1-year BMI. We employed regression analysis, and assessed the goodness of fit and "Residuals versus Fits" plot. Paired sample t-tests compared the observed and predicted BMI at 1 year. Results: The model comprised preoperative BMI (β = 0.757, P = 0.026) + age (β = 0.142, P < 0.0001) with adjusted R² of 0.581 (P < 0.0001), and goodness of fit showed an unbiased model with accurate prediction. The equation was: BMI value 1 year after LSG = 1.777 + 0.614 × presurgery BMI (kg/m²) +0.106 × age (years). For validation, the equation exhibited an adjusted R² 0.550 (P < 0.0001), and the goodness of fit indicated an unbiased model. The BMI predicted by the model fell within -3.78 BMI points to +2.42 points of the observed 1-year BMI. Pairwise difference between the mean 1-year observed and predicted BMI was not significant (-0.41 kg/m², P = 0.225). Conclusions: This predictive model estimates the BMI 1 year after LSG. The model comprises preoperative BMI and age. It allows the forecast of patients' BMI after surgery, hence setting realistic expectations which are critical for patient satisfaction after bariatric surgery. An attainable target motivates the patient to achieve it.

Bariatric Surgery and Osteoporosis

It has been increasingly acknowledged that bariatric surgery adversely affects skeletal health. After bariatric surgery, the extent of high-turnover bone loss is much greater than what would be expected in the absence of a severe skeletal insult. Patients also experience a significant deterioration in bone microarchitecture and strength. There is now a growing body of evidence that suggests an association between bariatric surgery and higher fracture risk. Although the mechanisms underlying the high-turnover bone loss and increase in fracture risk after bariatric surgery are not fully understood, many factors seem to be involved. The usual suspects are nutritional factors and mechanical unloading, and the roles of gut hormones, adipokines, and bone marrow adiposity should be investigated further. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) was once the most commonly performed bariatric procedure worldwide, but sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has now become the predominant bariatric procedure. Accumulating evidence suggests that RYGB is associated with a greater reduction in BMD, a greater increase in markers of bone turnover, and a higher risk of fracture than SG. These findings should be taken into consideration in determining the most appropriate bariatric procedure for patients, especially those at higher fracture risk. Before and after all bariatric procedures, sufficient calcium, vitamin D and protein intake, and adequate physical activity, are needed to counteract negative impacts on bone. There are no studies to date that have evaluated the effect of osteoporosis treatment on high-turnover bone loss after bariatric surgery. However, in patients with a diagnosis of osteoporosis, anti-resorptive agents may be considered.

Safety of Primary Versus Revisional Biliopancreatic Diversion with Duodenal Switch in Patients with Super Obesity Using the MBSAQIP database

INTRODUCTION

For patients with super obesity (BMI > 50 kg/m²), biliopancreatic diversion/duodenal switch (BPD/DS) can be an effective bariatric operation. Technical challenges and patient safety concerns, however, have limited its use as a primary procedure. This study sought to assess the safety of primary versus revisional BPD/DS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The MBSAQIP database was queried for primary and revisional BPD/DS (2015-2018). Inclusion criteria were patients ≥ 18 years of age, BMI > 50 kg/m², and with no concurrent procedures. Preoperative variables were compared using a chi-square test or Wilcoxon two-sample tests. Multivariate logistic or robust linear regression models were used to compare outcomes.

RESULTS

There were 3,378 primary BPD/DS and 487 revisional BPD/DS patients. Primary BPD/DS patients had higher BMI (56.5 [IQR4.4] versus 54.8 [IQR4] kg/m², p < 0.0001) and had more diabetes mellitus type II (29.1% versus 17.2%, p < 0.0001). Intraoperatively, revisional BPD/DS had longer operative time (165 [IQR47] min versus 139 [IQR100] min, p < 0.0001). After adjusting for preoperative characteristics, there was no difference in 30-day readmission or ED visits (primary 12.9% versus revisional 14.6%), reoperation or reintervention (primary 5.7% versus revisional 7.8%), or mortality (primary 0.4% versus revisional 0.6%). In contrast, the revisional BPD/DS patients had higher odds of major morbidity (primary 3.4% versus revisional 5.3%, OR 1.9, CI 1.1-3.2, p = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

Revisional BPD/DS is associated with higher morbidity than primary BPD/DS in patients with super obesity. These patients should thus be counselled appropriately when choosing a primary or revisional bariatric procedure.

Long-Term Weight Outcome After Bariatric Surgery in Patients with Melanocortin-4 Receptor Gene Variants: a Case-Control Study of 105 Patients

INTRODUCTION

Pathogenic heterozygous MC4R variants are associated with hyperphagia and variable degrees of obesity. Several research groups have reported short-term weight loss outcomes after bariatric surgery in a few patients with MC4R variants, but lack of longer-term data prevents evidence-based clinical decision-making.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Bariatric surgery patients with heterozygous (likely) pathogenic MC4R variants, from three collaborating centers in the Netherlands, France, and the UK, were compared to matched controls (matched 2:1 for age, sex, preoperative BMI, surgical procedure, and diabetes mellitus, but without MC4R mutations). Weight loss and regain outcomes up to 6 years of follow-up were compared.

RESULTS

At 60 months of follow-up after RYGB, cases with MC4R variants showed weight regain with a mean of 12.8% (± 10.4 SD) total weight loss (TWL) from nadir, compared to 7.9% (± 10.5 SD) in the controls (p = 0.062). Among patients receiving SG, the cases with MC4R variants experienced inferior weight loss (22.6% TWL) during the first year of follow-up compared to the controls (29.9% TWL) (p = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

This multicenter study reveals inferior mid-term weight outcomes of cases with MC4R variants after SG, compared to RYGB. Since adequate weight loss outcomes were observed after RYGB, this procedure would appear to be an appropriate surgical approach for this group. However, the pattern of weight regain seen in cases with MC4R variants after both RYGB and SG highlights the need for pro-active lifelong management to prevent relapse, as well as careful expectation management.

Roux-en-Y Versus One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass as Redo-Operations Following Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

Aim of this study was to improve knowledge about the best conversional bariatric procedure following sleeve gastrectomy (SG).

METHODS

Data of conversional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) after SG were collected prospectively and analyzed retrospectively. Weight loss parameters, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and comorbidities outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

Total of 123 patients (90 female, mean age 44 ± 0.9 years, mean body mass index (BMI) 42 ± 0.8 kg/m²) had either RYGB (n = 68) or OAGB (n = 55). Perioperative mortality was zero. Mean surgery time was significantly shorter for OAGB (168 ± 7.2 vs. 201 ± 6.8 min). Perioperative complication rates were not significantly (ns) different between RYGB and OAGB. Total body weight loss (TBWL) in RYGB and OAGB was 18 ± 2.2% and 18 ± 1.9% (12 months) and 18 ± 3.0% and 23 ± 2.6% (24 months; ns), respectively. Length of (individualized) biliopancreatic limb (BPL) correlated significantly with weight loss. Remission rates after 12 months of RYGB and OAGB for arterial hypertension (aHt) were 89% and 92%, for obstructive sleep apnea (OSAS) 56% and 82%, for Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) 100% and 92%, for osteoarthritis 64% and 85% and for GERD 89% versus 87% (ns), respectively. Nutritional deficiencies were comparable in RYGB (n = 11) and OAGB (n = 14) group (ns).

CONCLUSION

Both RYGB and OAGB are effective conversional procedures after SG, leading to comparable TBWL, BMI-loss and high remission rates of comorbidities including GERD. Significantly shorter operation times were in favor of OAGB. BPL, which was longer in OAGB was significantly related to higher %TBWL and %BMI-loss compared to RYGB.

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.

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.

Efficacy and safety of bariatric revisions in patients older than 65 years old

BACKGROUND

Bariatric surgery in advanced age patients (>65-years-old) has been proven safe and effective. Revisional bariatric surgery is infrequently required for cases of refractory obesity. However, there is a paucity of data regarding revisional surgery for the elderly. We hypothesize that revisional bariatric surgery is viable and safe in elderly patients.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review of all bariatric revisions performed at two high-volume bariatric centers of excellence between 2011 and 2018. Perioperative and long-term outcomes were compared between patients >65 and those <65-years-old.

RESULTS

145 bariatric revisions were performed for weight loss. 10% (N = 15) were >65 years old. There were no differences in mortality between the two groups There was a longer median length of stay in the younger cohort (2 vs 1 day, p = 0.001). Percent excess weight loss was similar at 12-months, as was resolution of comorbidities.

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric revisions in elderly patients appears to be safe and effective. Revisional surgery in this population was not shown to have increased morbidity or mortality with similar excess body weight loss when compared to a younger cohort.

Sleeve Gastrectomy Failure-Revision to Laparoscopic One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass or Roux-n-Y Gastric Bypass: a Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is the most popular bariatric procedure performed worldwide. However, many patients undergo secondary surgery due to either weight-related and complication-related reasons or both. Conversional options vary with one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and Roux-n-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) being the most common. The aim of the study was to assess the safety and efficacy of converting failed LSG to either OAGB or RYGB, and compare weight-related results and post-conversion complications.

METHODS

Retrospective review of hospital records of patients who underwent conversion from LSG to either RYGB or OAGB due to insufficient weight loss or weight regain in 7 bariatric centers between 2013 and 2019. Data retrieved included demographics, anthropometrics, comorbidities, indication for conversion, conversion type, complications, and weight loss.

RESULTS

During the study period, 396 patients were included in the study. Eighty-four (21%) patients were lost to follow-up. RYGB and OAGB were performed in 119 and 144 patients, respectively. Mean age and body mass index (BMI) at revision were 44.2 years (range 19-72) and 40.6 ± 5.9 kg/m² (range 35-71), respectively. Of these, 191 (73%) were female. Percent total body weight loss (%TWL) was 16% ± 1% for the RYGB group vs. 23% ± 12% for the OAGB group (p = 0.0007) at a median follow-up of 29 months (range 7-78 months) following conversion. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) was significantly higher 1 year following conversion to OAGB vs. RYGB occurring in 25 (17.4%) and 9 (7.6%) patients, respectively (p = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion of LSG to OAGB, compared to RYGB, results in increased weight loss but a higher rate of GERD and potential nutritional deficiencies.

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.

Revisional Surgeries of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

Bariatric surgery has become increasingly common due to the worldwide obesity epidemic. A shift from open to laparoscopic surgery, specifically, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), has occurred in the last two decades because of the low morbidity and mortality rates of LSG. Although LSG is a promising treatment option for patients with morbid obesity due to restrictive and endocrine mechanisms, it requires modifications for a subset of patients because of weight regain and tough complications, such as gastroesophageal reflux, strictures, gastric leak, and persistent metabolic syndrome., Revision surgeries have become more and more indispensable in bariatric surgery, accounting for 7.4% in 2016. Mainstream revisional bariatric surgeries after LSG include Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, repeated sleeve gastrectomy, biliopancreatic diversion, duodenal switch, duodenal-jejunal bypass, one-anastomosis gastric bypass, single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SAID) and transit bipartition. This review mainly describes the revisional surgeries of LSG, including the indication, choice of surgical method, and subsequent effect.

Impact of weight loss predictors in severe-morbid obesity patients in the Saudi population

Universally, obesity has been affected more than 650 million and converts as global health problem. Obesity is equally affecting starting from children to elder population. Obese subjects are converting into severe obese and then into morbid obesity. Body mass index is proning from 30 to 50 kg/m2 in the adult population. Obesity is connected with the future complications of hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular, stroke, osteoarthritis, obstructive sleep apnea and liver diseases. Loosing of body fat is the only option to avoid obesity and this could be achieved with routine physical activity and diet modifications. Obesity subjects may fail to achieve the daily routine activities or insufficient activity may be involved and finally fail to lose the body fat after the medical course. Then these severe or morbidity obese can be lose with the existing surgery. Currently, Bariatric Surgery (BS) has become the active treatment for long-term weight loss. Various types (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy and duodenal switch and the jejunoileal bypass) of BS are performed on the gastrointestinal tract. Throughout the world population, BS has found to be safe in losing the weight and avoiding the future and long-term complications. The prevalence of overweight and obesity in Saudi Arabia is an issue in terms of incidence and health consequences. Maximum obesity studies involved in Saudi Arabia has proven to be develop the long-term complications in the future involving from child to morbid obesity. Limited bariatric studies carried out in the Saudi subjects confirmed as effective tool in lowering the body fat and avoiding the life-threatened complications of human diseases. So, this review recommends BS as effective and safe surgical treatment to lose body fat in the Saudi population. However, post-operative monitoring is mandatory to follow-up.

Bariatric revisional surgery: What are the challenges for the patient and the practitioner?

Bariatric revisional surgery represents an important new issue for obese patients because of the considerable rate of failure and complications following bariatric surgery. As the frequency of bariatric procedures increases, so too does the incidence of revisional surgery, which has become becoming increasingly important. The surgeon must know the indications and the results of the various revisional procedures in order to best guide the therapeutic decision. The current challenge is to correctly select the patients for revisional surgery and to choose the appropriate procedure in each case. Multidisciplinary management is essential to patient re-assessment and to prepare the patient for a re- intervention. The objective of this update, based on data from all the most recent studies concerning revisional surgery, is to guide the surgeon in the choice of the revisional procedure, depending on patient characteristics, co-morbidities, the previously performed procedure, the type of failure or complication observed, but also on the surgeon's own habits and the center's expertise. The collected results show that revisional surgery is difficult, with higher complication rates and weight-loss results that are often lower than those of first-intent surgery. For these reasons, patient selection must be rigorous and multidisciplinary and the management in expert centers of these difficult situations must be encouraged.

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.