Revision of primary sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: indications and outcomes from a high-volume center

Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease after Sleeve Gastrectomy: Effectiveness of Medical, Endoscopic, and Surgical Therapies

Introduction: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has become the most frequently performed bariatric operation in the United States. One of the main disadvantages of this procedure is the risk of developing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) after the operation. We aimed to analyze different approaches for the treatment of GERD after SG. Methods: A literature review was performed to identify all possible treatment options for post-SG GERD. All the studies were assessed for full eligibility by manual assessment of their aims, methodology, results, and conclusions. Records were individually reviewed by the authors comparing outcomes and complications between procedures. Results: Although some studies have shown improvement or even resolution of GERD symptoms after SG, most patients develop or worsen symptoms. Lifestyle modifications along with medical therapy should be started on patients with GERD after SG. For those who are refractory to medication, endoscopic and surgical therapies can be offered. Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is consistently effective in treatment of GERD and is the ideal therapy in patients with associated insufficient weight loss. Endoscopic and alternative surgical procedures are also available and have shown acceptable short-term outcomes. Conclusions: Several treatment options exist for the treatment of GERD after SG. Although conversion to RYGB remains the most effective therapy, other emerging endoscopic and surgical procedures could avoid the potential morbidity of this procedure and should be further evaluated. An evidence-based algorithm for the management of GERD after SG is proposed to guide decision making.

Outcomes following reoperative bariatric surgery following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy at a tertiary care centre

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common bariatric surgical procedure worldwide. Approximately 20%-30% of patients present with weight loss failure or reflux following SG, which might require reoperative surgery. We present the surgical outcomes and complications following reoperative bariatric surgery at a tertiary care centre.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Prospectively collected data of all patients undergoing reoperative bariatric surgery from 2008 to 2021 were analysed retrospectively. Weight loss, resolution of comorbidities and complications following reoperative surgery were evaluated.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients were included in the study. The mean age was 38.8 (10.8) years. The primary procedure performed was laparoscopic SG in all cases. Nine patients underwent Roux en Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (one banded RYGB) and 14 underwent one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) (three-banded OAGB). Three patients underwent resleeve. The most common indication was weight loss failure (65.3%). Fifteen patients were diagnosed to have hiatal hernia intraoperatively and concomitant repair was performed. The mean body mass index before revision surgery was 42.7 (9.8). It was 32.6 (5.7) kg/m2 and 33.0 (6.1) kg/m2 at 1 and 3 years, respectively. Age and pre-revision surgery excess weight correlated with weight loss (r = -0.79 and r = 0.99, respectively). Leak and bleeding occurred in one and two patients, respectively. There were two band-related complications and one 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

Re-operative bariatric surgery following SG has adequate weight loss with acceptable complication rates. Band placement in re-operative surgery might lead to a higher complication rate.

Challenges of Revisional Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: A Comprehensive Guide to Unraveling the Complexities and Solutions of Revisional Bariatric Procedures

Revisional metabolic and bariatric surgery (RMBS) presents unique challenges in addressing weight loss failure or complications arising from initial bariatric procedures. This review aims to explore the complexities and solutions associated with revisional bariatric procedures comprehensively, offering insights into the evolving terrain of metabolic and bariatric surgery. A literature review is conducted to identify pertinent studies and expert opinions regarding RMBS. Methodological approaches, patient selection criteria, surgical techniques, preoperative assessments, and postoperative management strategies are synthesized to provide a comprehensive overview of current practices and advancements in the field, including institutional protocols. This review synthesizes key findings regarding the challenges encountered in RMBS, including the underlying causes of primary procedure failure, anatomical complexities, technical considerations, and assessments of surgical outcomes. Additionally, patient outcomes, complication rates, and long-term success are presented, along with institutional approaches to patient assessment and procedure selection. This review provides valuable insights for clinicians grappling with the complexities of RMBS. A comprehensive understanding of patient selection, surgical techniques, preoperative management, and postoperative care is crucial for enhancing outcomes and ensuring patient satisfaction in the field of metabolic bariatric surgery.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy conversion to gastric bypass: conversion rate over time, predictors of conversion, and weight loss outcomes

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is the most common Bariatric procedure in the United States; however, the frequency of conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim was to determine the conversion rate over time from LSG to RYGB. The secondary objectives were to evaluate factors associated with conversion and postconversion weight loss outcomes.

SETTING

Single Academic Institution, Center of Bariatric Excellence.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all LSG from 2011 to 2020 was done. Kaplan-Meier analysis was utilized to estimate the conversion rate over time after LSG. Cox regression was utilized to identify predictors of future conversion.

RESULTS

Of 875 LSGs, 46 were converted to RYGB from 2011 to 2020. Median follow-up was 2.6 years, and 7-year follow-up rate was 59.9%. The 1-year conversion rate was 1.4%, increasing to 3.8%, 9.0%, and 12.6% at 3, 5, and 7 years respectively. Female gender (hazard ratio [HR] = 4.2, P = .05) and age <55 (HR = 3.5, P = .04) were associated with greater chance of conversion. Preoperative asthma (HR = 1.7, P = .14) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (HR = 1.5, P = .18) trended toward higher conversion but were not significant. Of those with body mass index (BMI) >35 at time of conversion, the mean total body weight loss (TBWL) was 13.0% at the time of conversion. This subgroup had additional 13.6% of TBWL 1-year after conversion.

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion of LSG to RYGB increased with time to 12.6% conversion rate at 7-years. Patients with GERD prior to LSG had a nonsignificant trend toward conversion, while younger patients and females had significantly higher rates of conversion. There may be additional weight loss benefit for patients converted to RYGB.

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.

Outcomes of primary versus conversional Roux-En-Y gastric bypass after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Conversional surgery is common after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) because of suboptimal weight loss (SWL) or poor responders and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the most common conversional procedure after LSG.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study analyzed patients who underwent primary RYGB (PRYGB) or conversional RYGB (CRYGB) at three specialized bariatric centers between 2008 and 2019 and tested for weight loss, resolution of GERD, food tolerance (FT), early and late complications, and the resolution of associated medical problems. This was analyzed by propensity score matching (PSM).

RESULTS

In total, 558 (PRYGB) and 155 (CRYGB) completed at least 2 years of follow-up. After PSM, both cohorts significantly decreased BMI from baseline (p < 0.001). The CRYGB group had an initially more significant mean BMI decrease of 6.095 kg/m2 at 6 months of follow-up (p < 0.001), while the PRYGB group had a more significant mean BMI decrease of 5.890 kg/m2 and 8.626 kg/m2 at 1 and 2 years, respectively (p < 0.001). Food tolerance (FT) improved significantly in the CRYGB group (p < 0.001), while CRYGB had better FT than PRYGB at 2 years (p < 0.001). A GERD resolution rate of 92.6% was recorded in the CRYGB (p < 0.001). Both cohorts had comparable rates of early complications (p = 0.584), late complications (p = 0.495), and reoperations (p = 0.398). Associated medical problems at 2 years significantly improved in both cohorts (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CRYGB is a safe and efficient option in non- or poor responders after LSG, with significant weight loss and improvement in GERD. Moreover, PRYGB and CRYGB had comparable complications, reoperations, and associated medical problem resolution rates.

ReSleeve or revisional one anastomosis gastric bypass for failed primary sleeve gastrectomy with dilated gastric tube: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) has been increasingly performed due to weight loss failure (WLF). Many revisional procedures have been proposed after primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (pLSG) failure, including ReSleeve gastrectomy (ReLSG), and laparoscopic one anastomosis gastric bypass (LOAGB). Choosing the RBS post-pLSG failure represents a challenge. WLF without gastric tube (GT) dilation is undoubtedly converted to a malabsorptive procedure, but the presence of GT dilation makes it more difficult to select a RBS. This study aimed to compare two relatively simple revisional procedures after pLSG failure with dilated GT to help decision making on which procedure better done to which patient.

METHODS

Data of 52 patients who completed one year follow-up (FU) after their RBS (ReLSG: 27 or LOAGB: 25) for their failed pLSG were collected, assessed, correlated to weight loss (WL) and compared.

RESULTS

Mean operative time was 97 ± 18.4 min. with revisional LOAGB (RLOAGB) and 62 ± 11 min. with ReLSG. Six patients (11.5%) had seven postoperative procedure-specific complications. Significant hemorrhage occurred in three patients. Two cases of leakage were encountered with each procedure. LOAGB Patients had lower mean final weight (76.2 ± 10.5 vs 85.3 ± 13), lower mean Final BMI (26.4 ± 2.5 vs 29.7 ± 2.9) and higher mean percentage of excess weight loss (EWL%) (83.6 ± 13.5% vs 60.29 ± 14.6%). All RLOAGB patients and 77.8% of ReLSG patients had EWL% > 50%. RLOAGB patients had higher EWL% compared to ReLSG (p < 0.001). Insufficient WL (IWL) patients had higher EWL% compared to weight regain (WR) patients (p = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

Both procedures (RLOAGB and ReLSG) were relatively safe and effective in terms of WL. RLOAGB led to higher WL compared to ReLSG in all types of patients despite higher Caloric intake. IWL patients had more WL compared to WR patients. WL was not related to GT dilation type. Large-scale longer-FU studies are still needed.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PACTR202310644487566 (retrospectively registered).

Concurrent paraesophageal hernia repair in revisional/conversional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: propensity score-matched analysis of the MBSAQIP database

BACKGROUND

Patients requiring concurrent paraesophageal hernia repair (CPHR) have been shown to have favorable outcomes in primary bariatric surgery. However, patients requiring revisional or conversional surgery represent a group of patients with higher perioperative risk. Currently, few reports on concurrent paraesophageal hernia repair utilizing the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database are available. The primary aim of this study was to determine perioperative complications associated with CPHR and the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as a revisional/conversional operation.

METHODS

In this study, patients undergoing revisional/conversional RYGB between 2015 and 2020 were accessed via the MBSAQIP database. Patients were categorized based on the presence of a paraesophageal hernia as a concurrent procedure. Patients who underwent revisional/conversional surgery without additional procedures were utilized for controls. A propensity score-matched cohort was generated and E-analysis utilized to assess unmeasured confounding.

RESULTS

After exclusions, 35,698 patients were available. Patients receiving CPHR were more likely to be female (90.79% vs 87.37%; p < 0.001) and have increased frequency of gastroesophageal reflux disease (69.20% vs 51.69%; p < 0.001). However, these patients had lower frequencies of sleep apnea (24.12% vs 30.13%; p < 0.001), hypertension requiring medication (38.51% vs 42.59%; p < 0.001), and decreased frequency of hyperlipidemia (19.44% vs 21.60%;p < 0.001). After matching, 6,231 patient pairs were developed and showed that patients undergoing CPHR were at increased risk of readmission (9.44% vs 7.58%; p < 0.001), intervention (3.56% vs 2.79%; p = 0.018), increased requirement for outpatient dehydration treatment (5.87% vs 4.67%;p = 0.004), and overall increased operation time (169.3 min ± 76.0 vs 153.5 ± 73.3; p < 0.001). However, there were no significant increases in the rates of reoperation, death, postoperative leak complications, or bleeding complications after CPHR.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing revisional/conversional RYGB with CPHR may be at higher risk for a small number of rare postoperative complications. CPHR is a safe procedure in patients undergoing revisional/conversional RYGB in the short-term postoperative period.

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.

Revisional surgery after restrictive surgery: midterm outcomes of a tertiary center

INTRODUCTION

Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) is a challenging type of procedure for the surgeons due to its specific morbidity and efficiency. The RBS has a higher prevalence nowadays and this study may help to improve scarce data upon this specific topic.

METHODS

Data from 252 patients undergoing RBS after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) between 2005 and 2019, were analyzed at 2 years of follow up. A subgroup analysis of third procedure was also performed.

RESULTS

Overall morbidity occurred in 35 patients (37%) in the LSG group and 40 patients (25%) in the LAGB group (p = 0.045). At 2 years of RBS, mean weight was 92.8 ± 26.7 kg, BMI was 33.1 ± 8.56 kg/m2 for patients who had RBS after LSG. When RBS was performed after LAGB, mean weight at 2 years was 90.1 ± 20.7 kg and BMI was 32.5 ± 6.45 kg/m2. TWL for RBS performed after LSG was 12.7 ± 16.4% versus 25.5 ± 10.3% after LAGB (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

RBS after LSG seems to lead to higher overall morbidity whereas RBS after LAGB lead to more perioperative issues.

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.

Revision Endoscopic Gastroplasty: An Overview and Review of Literature

The main aim of this paper was to examine the efficacy and safety of revision endoscopic gastroplasty and some of the adverse events likely to arise from the procedure, as well as the implications for future scholarly research. The study is a systematic review in which the PRISMA protocol was used to govern the article's inclusion and exclusion criteria. The selected studies include those on revising endoscopic gastroplasty's effectiveness and safety. The studies were selected based on multiple parameters. The outcome included weight recidivism, excessive BMI loss, and absolute, total, or percentage weight loss. The outcome of this review confirmed that revision endoscopic gastroplasty is effective and safe. Mainly, revision endoscopic gastroplasty (R-EG) was found to counter-weight recidivism, especially short-term and mid-term. However, there is a need for additional scholarly investigations that would last several years to decades to inform the long-term efficacy of R-EG with precision.

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.

Conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Indications, Prevalence, and Safety

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) frequently requires conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) due to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or weight recurrence. Current evidence evaluating the safety of conversion from SG to RYGB and its indications is limited to single centers.

METHODS

The objective was to determine the rate of serious complications and mortality of conversion of SG to RYGB (SG-RYGB) compared to primary RYGB (P-RYGB). This was a retrospective analysis of the MBSAQIP database which includes 30-day outcomes. Individuals undergoing P-RYGB or SG-RYGB were included. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine if revisional surgery was an independent predictor of serious complications or mortality.

RESULTS

In 2020 and 2021, 84,543 (86.3%) patients underwent P-RYGB and 13,432 (13.7%) underwent SG-RYGB. SG-RYGB cohort had lower body mass index, lower rates of diabetes and hypertension, and higher rates of GERD. GERD was the most common indication for revision (55.3%) followed by weight regain (24.4%) and inadequate weight loss (12.7%). SG-RYGB had longer operative times (145 vs. 125 min, p < 0.001) and a higher rate of serious complications (7.2 vs. 5.0%, p < 0.001). This included higher rates of anastomotic leak (0.5 vs. 0.4%, p = 0.002), bleeding (2.0 vs. 1.6%, p < 0.001), and reoperation (3.0 vs. 1.9%, p < 0.001) but not death (0.1 vs. 0.1%, p = 0.385). On multivariable analysis, SG-RYGB was independently predictive of serious complications (OR 1.21, 95%CI 1.12 to 1.32, p < 0.001) but not mortality (p = 0.316).

CONCLUSIONS

While SG-RYGB is safe with a low complication rate, SG-RYGB was associated with a higher rate of serious complications compared to P-RYGB.

Laparoscopic Conversion of Single-Anastomosis Duodenal Switch (SADI-S) to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass With Concurrent Paraesophageal Hernia Repair for Refractory Biliary Reflux and Paraesophageal Hernia

Single-anastomosis duodenal switch (SADI-S) is effective for weight loss with low reported rates of complications. Bile reflux into the stomach or esophagus is an uncommonly reported complication but can lead to significant symptoms for patients suffering from this complication. Concurrent paraesophageal hernia can exacerbate the symptoms of biliary reflux gastritis. We present a case report describing the management of biliary reflux gastritis with concurrent paraesophageal hernia, our decision-making process, and technical pearls and possible pitfalls.

Y Not Roux-en-Y?: Resolution of Barrett's Esophagus After Surgical Conversion of Gastric Sleeve in Two Patients

Esophageal lesions ranging from erosive esophagitis to Barrett's esophagus (BE) eventually develop months-years after sleeve gastrectomy (SG), representing a significant post-surgical issue in GI practice. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) conversion is a widespread and effective method of managing reflux and esophageal complications following SG. Although some studies using a limited sample size have demonstrated that RYGB performed as a primary procedure may regress BE presumably by reducing reflux, whether the same may apply to RYGB performed as revision surgery after SG has scarcely been addressed in the literature. Though histological regression of BE following primary RYGB occurs in 51.9% of patients, with regression of Barrett's dysplasia in 50% of cases, revisional RYGB yields a remission rate as high as 81.8% for Barrett's metaplasia and 100% for dysplastic lesions, although the number of subjects in the published studies are very small. We report two patients who developed GERD and BE following SG with complete regression 12 months after conversion to RYGB in both subjects, confirming the substantially greater proportion of BE resolution in patients undergoing RYGB as revision surgery following SG.

Reflux disease following primary sleeve gastrectomy: risk factors and possible causes

INTRODUCTION

One of the most severe side effects of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the development or aggravation of reflux disease. This study investigates the effect of SG on the development of reflux disease and the variables that may impact this development. In addition, trends in revision surgery, weight, and comorbidity are examined among patients with reflux disease and SG and those without reflux disease and SG. This study includes 3379 individuals without reflux disease who had primary SG and were followed for three years. The demographic characteristics, comorbidities, technical features, and complications of SG were analyzed. Data were collected by the German Bariatric Surgery Registry (GBSR). 860 (25.45%) Group A patients had reflux disease following SG (Group B: no reflux after SG; 74.55%). Patients with reflux disease had longer operating times (83.8 min vs. 77.5 min, p < 0.001) and longer postoperative hospital admissions (6 days vs. 5.5 days). In group A, the %EWL was substantially greater than in group B (64.1 vs. 61.1%). 42 patients were converted from SG to RYGB (4.88%), 2 had hiatoplasty, and 5 got Endostim. There is no significant variation in perioperative complications (p value > 0.05). The incidence of complete remission of sleep apnea was higher in group A than in group B (p = 0.013; 50% vs. 44.8%). Other comorbidities were not substantially different. Reflux illness after SG is still poorly understood, despite much research. Technical and preoperative variables may promote its development. However, these assumptions remain theoretical and are not confirmed by scientific data. The majority of patients may be successfully treated using non-invasive methods, although sometimes further surgery is necessary. Despite our results and the literature, this subject is intriguing for further research.

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.

Predictors of morbidity in revisional bariatric surgery and bariatric emergencies at an MBSAQIP-accredited community hospital

Introduction

Bariatric surgery revisions and emergencies are associated with higher morbidity and mortality compared to primary bariatric surgery. No formal outcome benchmarks exist that distinguish MBSAQIP-accredited centers in the community from unaccredited institutions.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted on 53 bariatric surgery revisions and 61 bariatric surgical emergencies by a single surgeon at a high-volume community hospital accredited program from 2018 to 2020. Primary outcomes were complications or deaths occurring within 30-days of the index procedure. Secondary outcomes included operative time, leaks, surgical site occurrences (SSOs), and deep surgical site infections.

Results

There were no significant differences in the demographic characteristics of the study groups. Mean operative time was significantly longer for revisions as compared to emergency operations (149.5 vs. 89.4 min). Emergencies had higher surgical site infection (5.7% vs. 21.3%, p < 0.05) and surgical site occurrence (SSO) (1.9% vs. 29.5%, p < 0.05) rates compared to revisions. Logistic regression analysis identified several factors to be predictive of increased risk of morbidity: pre-operative albumin < 3.5 g/dL (p < 0.05), recent bariatric procedure within the last 30 days (p < 0.05), prior revisional bariatric surgery (p < 0.05), prior duodenal switch (p < 0.05), and pre-operative COPD (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Bariatric surgery revisions and emergencies have similar morbidity and mortality, far exceeding those of the primary operation. Outcomes comparable to those reported by urban academic centers can be achieved in community hospital MBSAQIP-accredited centers.

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

Secondary Bariatric Surgery-Does the Type of Index Procedure Affect Outcomes After Conversion?

BACKGROUND

Although revisions account for 17% of cases performed at bariatric centers of excellence, scarce data exists on whether index operation type influences outcomes after secondary operations.

OBJECTIVE

We designed a study investigating the effect of primary procedure type on weight loss and perioperative complications after conversion bariatric surgery.

SETTING

Tertiary Referral Hospital, USA.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients undergoing conversion from sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or adjustable gastric band (AGB) to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) from 2009 to 2019. Post-operatively, we measured short- and medium-term complications and changes in body weight at various time points. Univariate and regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Forty-two (SG) patients and 116 (AGB) patients underwent conversion to RYGB, most commonly for GERD (57.1%) in SG patients vs. weight regain (77.6%) in AGB patients. Mean pre-conversion BMI was 36.7 kg/m² (SG) vs 43.8 kg/m² (AGB). Mean time to conversion (months) was 52.9 (SG) vs 94.7 (AGB). Complication rate was 9.5% (SG) vs 6% (AGB) at 30 days (p = 0.48) and 31%(SG) vs 14.5% (AGB) (p = 0.02) at 2 years. Mean post conversion %TWL was 11.6% (SG) vs 24.6% (AGB) in patients with GERD/dysphagia (p = 0.014) and 20.7% (SG) vs 27.6% (AGB) in patients converted for weight-related reasons (p = 0.027) at 1 year. Overall mean %TWL was 13.2% (SG) vs 24.7% (AGB) at 2 years (p < 0.0035).

CONCLUSION

After conversion to RYGB, patients with AGB experience better short- and medium-term weight loss than those with SG, even after accounting for conversion indications. SG to RYGB conversions have a higher resolution of reflux disease.

Twisted Gastric Tube after Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy-An Unusual but Effective Surgical Approach to Achieve Full Recovery

Sleeve gastrectomy is at present the most practiced bariatric intervention for patients suffering from severe obesity. Although rare, post-operative complications such as leakages and strictures may represent a challenging issue for bariatric surgeons and cause impaired quality of life for patients. Gastric twist is even more rare. This complication is a functional obstruction rather than a stricture of the gastric remnant most likely due to technical mistakes at index surgery. If endoscopy usually allows diagnosis and constitutes the first-line treatment for this condition, surgery is mandatory when endoscopy is not successful. The conversion of the sleeve to a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is the usually chosen intervention but a wide range of reconstruction has been proposed. In this report, we discuss the surgical technique we employed to achieve a full resolution of a gastric twist.

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.

Comparative Safety of Sleeve Gastrectomy and Gastric Bypass Up to 5 Years After Surgery in Patients With Severe Obesity

Importance

Sleeve gastrectomy is the most widely used bariatric operation; however, its long-term safety is largely unknown.

Objective

To compare the risk of mortality, complications, reintervention, and health care use 5 years after sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study included adult patients in a national Medicare claims database who underwent sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2018. Instrumental variables survival analysis was used to estimate the cumulative incidence of outcomes up to 5 years after surgery.

Exposures

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was risk of mortality, complications, and reinterventions up to 5 years after surgery. Secondary outcomes were health care use after surgery, including hospitalization, emergency department (ED) use, and total spending.

Results

Of 95 405 patients undergoing bariatric surgery, 57 003 (60%) underwent sleeve gastrectomy (mean [SD] age, 57.1 [11.8] years), of whom 42 299 (74.2%) were women; 124 (0.2%) were Asian; 10 101 (17.7%), Black; 1951 (3.4%), Hispanic; 314 (0.6%), North American Native; 43 194 (75.8%), White; 534 (0.9%), of other race or ethnicity; and 785 (1.4%), of unknown race or ethnicity. A total of 38 402 patients (40%) underwent gastric bypass (mean [SD] age, 55.9 [11.7] years), of whom 29 050 (75.7%) were women; 109 (0.3%), Asian; 6038 (15.7%), Black; 1215 (3.2%), Hispanic; 278 (0.7%), North American Native; 29 986 (78.1%), White; 373 (1.0%), of other race or ethnicity; and 404 (1.1%), of unknown race or ethnicity. Compared with patients undergoing gastric bypass, at 5 years after surgery, patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy had a lower cumulative incidence of mortality (4.27%; 95% CI, 4.25%-4.30% vs 5.67%; 95% CI, 5.63%-5.69%), complications (22.10%; 95% CI, 22.06%-22.13% vs 29.03%; 95% CI, 28.99%-29.08%), and reintervention (25.23%; 95% CI, 25.19%-25.27% vs 33.57%; 95% CI, 33.52%-33.63%). Conversely, patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy had a higher cumulative incidence of surgical revision at 5 years (2.91%; 95% CI, 2.90%-2.93% vs 1.46%; 95% CI, 1.45%-1.47%). The adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of all-cause hospitalization and ED use was lower for patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy at 1 year (hospitalization, aHR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.80-0.86; ED use, aHR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.90) and 3 years (hospitalization, aHR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.90-0.98; ED use, aHR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.97) after surgery but similar between groups at 5 years (hospitalization, aHR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.94-1.04; ED use, aHR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.92-1.01). Total health care spending among patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy was lower at 1 year after surgery ($28 706; 95% CI, $27 866-$29 545 vs $30 663; 95% CI, $29 739-$31 587), but similar between groups at 3 ($57 411; 95% CI, $55 239-$59 584 vs $58 581; 95% CI, $56 551-$60 611) and 5 years ($86 584; 95% CI, $80 183-$92 984 vs $85 762; 95% CI, $82 600-$88 924).

Conclusions and Relevance

In a large cohort of patients undergoing bariatric surgery, sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a lower long-term risk of mortality, complications, and reinterventions but a higher long-term risk of surgical revision. Understanding the comparative safety of these operations may better inform patients and surgeons in their decision-making.

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.

The Panoramic View of Revisional Bariatric Surgery

Introduction: Obesity remains a major public chronic disease, and the multifactorial components of its relapse in many patients remain inevitable. Methods: This article provides a panoramic view of the most commonly performed revisional bariatric surgery (RBS). RBS is a complex procedure; thus, primary procedures should be well chosen and performed to avoid the increasing number of RBS cases. Results: Bariatric surgery is the only successful long-term treatment for obesity. However, a proportion of primary bariatric surgeries has failed during the follow-up period. In recent decades, the solution for these complications is by performing RBS. It is mandatory to understand obesity as a chronic disease to appropriately treat patients. Treatment strategies are needed to determine the indications for revision. RBS requires a meticulous evaluation to facilitate good long-term results. Conclusions: Treatment strategies will be a fundamental pillar to wisely determine the indications for revision and identify the factors influencing failure by prudently and rationally evaluating the revisional procedure that the patient will benefit from and acquiring a high level of surgical skills.

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.

WHEN SHOULD BE CONVERTED LAPAROSCOPIC SLEEVE GASTRECTOMY TO LAPAROSCOPIC ROUX-EN-Y GASTRIC BYPASS DUE TO GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX?

Background:

Gastroesophageal reflux (GER) is one of the most common indications for conversion of sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGBP). Objective evaluations are necessary in order to choose the best definitive treatment for these patients.

Aim:

To present and describe the findings of the objective studies for gastroesophageal reflux disease performed before LSG conversion to LRYGBP in order to support the indication for surgery.

Method:

Thirty-nine non-responder patients to proton pump inhibitors treatment after LSG were included in this prospective study. They did not present GER symptoms, esophagitis or hiatal hernia before LSG. Endoscopy, radiology, manometry, 24 h pH monitoring were performed.

Results:

The mean time of appearance of reflux symptoms was 26.8+24.08 months (8-71). Erosive esophagitis was found in 33/39 symptomatic patients (84.6%) and Barrett´s esophagus in five. (12.8%). Manometry and acid reflux test were performed in 38/39 patients. Defective lower esophageal sphincter function was observed independent the grade of esophagitis or Barrett´s esophagus. Pathologic acid reflux with elevated DeMeester´s scores and % of time pH<4 was detected in all these patients. more significant in those with severe esophagitis and Barrett´s esophagus. Radiologic sleeve abnormalities were observed in 35 patients, mainly cardia dilatation (n=18) and hiatal hernia (n=11). Middle gastric stricture was observed in only six patients.

Conclusion:

Patients with reflux symptoms and esophagitis or Barrett´s esophagus after SG present defective lower esophageal sphincter function and increased acid reflux. These conditions support the indication of conversion to LRYGBP.

Revisional endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: an international, multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) facilitates significant and durable weight loss; however, weight recidivism and need for revisional surgery occur in a subset of patients. Reduction of a dilated LSG using the revisional endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (R-ESG) approach is an appealing and minimally invasive alternative to surgical revision that is congruent with obesity as a chronic relapsing disease model. In this study, we examine the safety and efficacy of the technique in a large multicenter international cohort.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data from 9 centers for 82 consecutive adults who underwent R-ESG for weight regain after LSG using the OverStitch device (Apollo Endosurgery, Austin, Tex, USA) from March 2014 to November 2019 were reviewed. Total body weight loss (TBWL) and adverse events were reported up to 12 months. Univariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of response at 12 months.

RESULTS

Eighty-two adults (92.7% female) experienced 27.9 ± 20.7 kg weight regain from post-LSG nadir weight, prompting R-ESG (mean age, 42.8 ± 10.4 years) at a mean weight of 128.2 ± 57.5 kg. Mean R-ESG procedure duration was 48.3 ± 20.5 minutes, and the median number of sutures used was 4 (interquartile range, 3-4). After R-ESG, TBWL (follow-up %) was 6.6% ± 3.2% at 1 month (81.7%), 10.6% ± 4.4% at 3 months (74.4%), 13.2% ± 10.1% at 6 months (63.4%), and 15.7% ± 7.6% at 12 months (51.2%). In a per-protocol analysis, ≥10% TBWL was achieved by 37 of 51 patients (72.5%) at 6 months and 34 of 42 patients (81.0%) at 12 months; ≥15% TBWL was achieved by 20 of 46 patients (43.5%) at 6 months and 22 of 42 patients (52.4%) at 12 months. Only 1 moderate adverse event occurred in the form of a narrowed gastroesophageal junction, which resolved after a single endoscopic dilation.

CONCLUSIONS

R-ESG is a safe and effective means of facilitating weight loss for weight recidivism after LSG, with sustained results at 1 year. R-ESG should be considered before pursuing more-invasive surgical revisional options.

Interventions and Operations 5 Years After Bariatric Surgery in a Cohort From the US National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network Bariatric Study

Importance

Additional data comparing longer-term problems associated with various bariatric surgical procedures are needed for shared decision-making.

Objective

To compare the risks of intervention, operation, endoscopy, hospitalization, and mortality up to 5 years after 2 bariatric surgical procedures.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Adults who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) between January 1, 2005, and September 30, 2015, within the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network. Data from 33 560 adults at 10 centers within 4 clinical data research networks were included in this cohort study. Information was extracted from electronic health records using a common data model and linked to insurance claims and mortality indices. Analyses were conducted from January 2018 through October 2019.

Exposures

Bariatric surgical procedures.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was time until operation or intervention. Secondary outcomes included endoscopy, hospitalization, and mortality rates.

Results

Of 33 560 adults, 18 056 (54%) underwent RYGB, and 15 504 (46%) underwent SG. The median (interquartile range) follow-up for operation or intervention was 3.4 (1.6-5.0) years for RYGB and 2.2 (0.9-3.6) years for SG. The overall mean (SD) patient age was 45.0 (11.5) years, and the overall mean (SD) patient body mass index was 49.1 (7.9). The cohort was composed predominantly of women (80%) and white individuals (66%), with 26% of Hispanic ethnicity. Operation or intervention was less likely for SG than for RYGB (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.65-0.79; P < .001). The estimated, adjusted cumulative incidence rates of operation or intervention at 5 years were 8.94% (95% CI, 8.23%-9.65%) for SG and 12.27% (95% CI, 11.49%-13.05%) for RYGB. Hospitalization was less likely for SG than for RYGB (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.78-0.87; P < .001), and the 5-year adjusted cumulative incidence rates were 32.79% (95% CI, 31.62%-33.94%) for SG and 38.33% (95% CI, 37.17%-39.46%) for RYGB. Endoscopy was less likely for SG than for RYGB (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.43-0.52; P < .001), and the adjusted cumulative incidence rates at 5 years were 7.80% (95% CI, 7.15%-8.43%) for SG and 15.83% (95% CI, 14.94%-16.71%) for RYGB. There were no differences in all-cause mortality between SG and RYGB.

Conclusions and Relevance

Interventions, operations, and hospitalizations were relatively common after bariatric surgical procedures and were more often associated with RYGB than SG.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02741674.

Comparative Safety of Sleeve Gastrectomy and Gastric Bypass: An Instrumental Variables Approach

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety of sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass in a large cohort of commercially insured bariatric surgery patients from the IBM MarketScan claims database, while accounting for measurable and unmeasurable sources of selection bias in who is chosen for each operation.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Sleeve gastrectomy has rapidly become the most common bariatric operation performed in the United States, but its longer-term safety is poorly described, and the risk of worsening gastroesophageal reflux requiring revision may be higher than previously thought. Prior studies comparing sleeve gastrectomy to gastric bypass are limited by low sample size (in randomized trials) and selection bias (in observational studies).

METHODS

Instrumental variables analysis of commercially insured patients in the IBM MarketScan claims database from 2011 to 2018. We studied patients undergoing bariatric surgery from 2012 to 2016. We identified re-interventions and complications at 30 days and 2 years from surgery using Comprehensive Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Disease (ICD)-9/10 codes. To overcome unmeasured confounding, we use the prior year's sleeve gastrectomy utilization within each state as an instrumental variable-exploiting variation in the timing of payers' decisions to cover sleeve gastrectomy as a natural experiment.

RESULTS

Among 38,153 patients who underwent bariatric surgery between 2012 and 2016, the share of sleeve gastrectomy rose from 52.6% (2012) to 75% (2016). At 2 years from surgery, patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy had fewer re-interventions (sleeve 9.9%, bypass 15.6%, P < 0.001) and complications (sleeve 6.6%, bypass 9.6%, P = 0.001), and lower overall healthcare spending ($47,891 vs $55,213, P = 0.003), than patients undergoing gastric bypass. However, at the 2-year mark, revisions were slightly more common in sleeve gastrectomy than in gastric bypass (sleeve 0.6%, bypass 0.4%, P = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In a large cohort of commercially insured patients, sleeve gastrectomy had a superior safety profile to gastric bypass up to 2 years from surgery, even when accounting for selection bias. However, the higher risk of revisions in sleeve gastrectomy merits further exploration.

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.

Do we understand the pathophysiology of GERD after sleeve gastrectomy?

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), a prevalent problem among obese individuals, is strongly associated with obesity and weight loss. Hence, bariatric surgery effectively improves GERD for many patients. Depending on the type of bariatric procedure, however, surgery can also worsen or even cause a new onset of GERD. As a consequence, GERD remains a relevant problem for many bariatric patients, and especially those who have undergone sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Affected patients report not only a decrease in physical functioning but also suffer from mental and emotional problems, resulting in poorer social functioning. The pathomechanism of GERD after SG is most likely multifactorial and triggered by the interaction of anatomical, physiological, and physical factors. Contributing factors include the shape of the sleeve, the extent of injury to the lower esophageal sphincter, and the presence of hiatal hernia. In order to successfully treat post-sleeve gastrectomy GERD, the cause of the problem must first be identified. Therapeutic approaches include lifestyle changes, medication, interventional treatment, and/or revisional surgery.

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.

Recommendations Based on Evidence by the Andalusian Group for Nutrition Reflection and Investigation (GARIN) for the Pre- and Postoperative Management of Patients Undergoing Obesity Surgery

In order to develop evidence-based recommendations and expert consensus for nutrition management of patients undergoing bariatric surgery and postoperative follow-up, we conducted a systematic literature search using PRISMA methodology plus critical appraisal following the SIGN and AGREE-II procedures. The results were discussed among all members of the GARIN group, and all members answered a Likert scale questionnaire to assess the degree of support for every recommendation. Patients undergoing bariatric surgery should be screened preoperatively for some micronutrient deficiencies and treated accordingly. A VLCD (Very Low-Calorie Diet) should be used for 4-8 weeks prior to surgery. Postoperatively, a liquid diet should be maintained for a month, followed by a semi-solid diet also for one month. Protein requirements (1-1.5 g/kg) should be estimated using adjusted weight. Systematic use of specific multivitamin supplements is encouraged. Calcium citrate and vitamin D supplements should be used at higher doses than are currently recommended. The use of proton-pump inhibitors should be individualised, and vitamin B12 and iron should be supplemented in case of deficit. All patients, especially pregnant women, teenagers, and elderly patients require a multidisciplinary approach and specialised follow-up. These recommendations and suggestions regarding nutrition management when undergoing bariatric surgery and postoperative follow-up have direct clinical applicability.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease complicating laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: current knowledge and surgical therapies

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is currently the most commonly performed bariatric procedure worldwide. However, the incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) after LSG is high.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this systematic review was to identify the optimal surgical strategy for treating GERD after LSG.

SETTING

West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify studies on surgical treatments for GERD after LSG. The effectiveness and safety profile of surgical management on GERD after LSG were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 40 articles enrolling 2049 patients were included in this review. Surgical strategies to prevent GERD after LSG were mainly of 2 types: concomitant LSG + antireflux procedures (hiatal hernia repair or fundoplication) and secondary procedures (conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass [RYGB] or repeat sleeve gastrectomy). The short-term remission or improvement rate of GERD was 34.6%-100% after concomitant LSG + antireflux procedures. The postoperative complication rate was the same (3.0%) for both LSG + antireflux procedures and LSG alone. The remission or improvement rate of GERD was 57.1%-100% after conversion to RYGB and 100% after repeat sleeve gastrectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

The effectiveness and safety profile of concomitant LSG + antireflux procedures is uncertain. However, secondary operations after LSG, such as conversion to RYGB, appear to provide good results. The data overall are heterogeneous, with imprecise methods of documenting and defining GERD complicating LSG. More cohort studies or RCT studies of high quality with long-term follow-up are needed in the future.

Robotic-assisted approaches to GERD following sleeve gastrectomy

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common bariatric operation in the United States but increases the incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of our study was to describe our experience with robotic-assisted management of intractable GERD after SG.

METHODS

A systematic review of a prospectively maintained database was performed of consecutive patients undergoing robotic-assisted magnetic sphincter augmentation placement after sleeve gastrectomy (MSA-S group) or conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB group) for GERD from 2015 to 2019 at our tertiary- care bariatric center. These were compared to a consecutive group of patients undergoing robotic-assisted magnetic sphincter augmentation placement (MSA group) for GERD without a history of bariatric surgery from 2016 to 2019. The primary outcome was perioperative morbidity. Secondary outcomes were operative time (OT), 90-day re-intervention rate, length of stay, symptom resolution and weight change.

RESULTS

There were 51 patients included in this study; 18 patients in the MSA group, 13 patients in the MSA-S group, and 20 patients in the RYGB group. There was no significant difference in age, gender, ASA score, preoperative endoscopic findings, or DeMeester scores (P > 0.05). BMI was significantly higher in patients undergoing RYGB compared to MSA or MSA-S (P < 0.0001). There were significant differences in OT between the MSA and RYGB groups (P < 0.0001) and MSA-S and RYGB groups (P = 0.009), but not MSA group to MSA-S group (P = 0.51). There was no significant difference in intraoperative and postoperative morbidity (P = 1.0 and P = 0.60, respectively). 30-day morbidity: 5.6% (MSA), 15.4% (MSA-S) and 15% (RYGB). There was no difference on PPI discontinuation among groups, with more than 80% success rate in all.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the robotic platform in the different approaches available for treatment of GERD after SG appears to be a feasible option with low morbidity and high success rate. Further data is needed to support our findings.

Feasibility and safety of robot-assisted bariatric conversions and revisions

BACKGROUND

Conversions and revisions after bariatric procedures are inevitable and associated with longer operative time and higher complication rates. Because robot-assisted procedures allow better dissection, robotic conversions and revisions may be more beneficial to the patients than laparoscopic ones.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare the feasibility and safety of robot-assisted conversions and revisions to laparoscopic procedures.

SETTING

Academic Hospital, United States.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed on 94 consecutive patients who underwent a bariatric conversion or revision (revision of gastrojejunostomy, conversions of vertical sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, adjustable gastric banding to sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass to sleeve gastrectomy, adjustable gastric banding to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass to duodenal switch, and adjustable gastric banding to duodenal switch) between January 1, 2017, and February 28, 2019. Of these, 30 underwent a robot-assisted conversion or revision.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent a robot-assisted approach were more likely to be older (45.4-versus 38.8-yr old) and lighter (44.6 versus 50.3 kg/m²) than patients who underwent a laparoscopic approach. The mean operative time was longer in the robot-assisted group (155.5 min) than in the laparoscopic group (113.3 min). No difference was observed between the 2 groups in the mean length of hospital stay, 30-day readmission rate, or 30-day reoperation rate. Results were similar when the baseline difference in age and body mass index were accounted for.

CONCLUSIONS

Robot-assisted conversions and revisions were as feasible and safe as laparoscopic procedures. However, operative time was longer in robot-assisted conversions.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Perioperative Nutrition, Metabolic, and Nonsurgical Support of Patients Undergoing Bariatric Procedures - 2019 Update: Cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

OBJECTIVE

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists.

METHODS

Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts.

RESULTS

New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest).

CONCLUSIONS

Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.