Laparoscopic single-anastomosis duodenal-jejunal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADJB-SG): Surgical risk and long-term results

Reoperation After Loop Duodenojejunal Bypass with Sleeve Gastrectomy: A 9-Year Experience

PURPOSE

Loop duodenojejunal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (LDJBSG) is effective for weight loss and resolution of obesity-related associated medical problems. However, a description of the reoperative surgery following LDJBSG is lacking.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this retrospective study, we analyzed the surgical complications and reoperation (conversion or revision) following LDJBSG from 2011 to 2019 in a single institution.

RESULTS

A total of 337 patients underwent LDJBSG during this period. Reoperative surgery (RS) was required in 10LDJBSG patients (3%). The mean age and BMI before RS were 47 ± 9 years and 28.9 ± 3.6 kg/m2, respectively. The mean interval between primary surgery and RS for early (n = 5) and late (n = 5)complications was 8 ± 11 days and 32 ± 15.8 months, respectively. The conversion procedures were Roux-en-Y gastric bypass(n = 5), followed by Roux-en-Y duodenojejunal bypass (n = 2) and one-anastomosis gastric bypass (n = 1); other revision procedures were seromyotomy (n = 1) and re-laparoscopy (n = 1). Perioperative complications were observed in four patients after conversion surgery such as multiorgan failure (n = 1), re-laparoscopy (n = 1), marginal ulcer (n = 1), GERD (n = 1), and dumping syndrome (n = 1).

CONCLUSION

LDJBSG has low reoperative rates and conversion RYGB could effectively treat the early and late complications of LDJBSG. Because of its technical demands and risk of perioperative complications, conversion surgery should be reserved for a selected group of patients and performed by an experienced metabolic bariatric surgical team.

Sleeve gastrectomy with one anastomosis bipartition versus one anastomosis gastric bypass: A pilot study

BACKGROUND

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a new recognized metabolic surgery, but the problem that we cannot screen the excluded stomach is a troubling issue in China. The emergence of sleeve gastrectomy plus one anastomosis bipartition (SG + OAB) makes us see a hope to solve this problem.

OBJECTIVES

By comparing the efficacy of the two surgical methods, to evaluate whether SG + OAB surgery can solve the dilemma faced by OAGB that the excluded stomach cannot be screened.

METHODS

A retrospective study to compare the patients who underwent OAGB and SG + OAB was conducted. The main outcome measures were (1) operation risk, (2) weight loss, and (3) diabetes remission at 6 months.

RESULTS

This study was conducted in the bariatric/metabolic surgical center. From November 2021 to February 2022, a total of 30 patients with obesity who received SG + OAB surgery were recruited. Another matched 60 patients undergoing OAGB were recruited as control group. There was no difference in preoperative age (32.15 ± 9.02 vs. 34.47 ± 7.22; p = .224), female ratio (83% vs. 85%; p = .837), and BMI (36.18 ± 5.30 vs. 34.68 ± 5.58; p = .217) between the two groups. OAGB had a shorter mean operation time (121.67 ± 20.41 vs. 143.50 ± 25.07 min; p < .001) and a lower intraoperative blood loss (21.92 ± 12.35 vs. 32.43 ± 22.01 mL; p = .005), but a longer postoperative flatus passage (2.13 ± 0.43 vs. 1.87 ± 0.43 days; p = .007) compared with the SG + OAB group. Two patients (6.7%) developed major surgical complication in SG + OAB group but no major complication developed in OAGB group. At 6 months after surgery, SG + OAB had a higher %total weight loss than OAGB (31.05 ± 3.12 vs. 28.14 ± 5.43%; p = .015), but diabetes remission rate was similarly high in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

SG + OAB operation had a non-inferior or even better weight loss than OAGB, with a similar glycemic control efficacy. However, the high complication rate of SG + OAB is the major drawback that needs attention.

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease as an Indication of Revisional Bariatric Surgery-Indication and Results-a Systematic Review and Metanalysis

This systematic review evaluates the indications and results of revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). A systematic literature search and meta-analysis was performed for articles published by April 1, 2021. After examining 722 papers involving 17,437 patients, 48 studies were included (n = 915 patients). RBS for GERD was mostly reported after sleeve gastrectomy (n = 796, 87%) and one anastomosis gastric bypass (n = 62, 6.8%) and was performed due to intractable GERD (71.6%), GERD and weight issues (16%), and biliary reflux (6.2%). Mean follow-up of the studies was 31.5 (3-84) months. Pooled estimation of a meta-analysis of studies reported 7% of GERD following primary surgery needing RBS, in which 99% of the patients experienced remission.

East Asian perspectives in metabolic and bariatric surgery

The prevalence of diabetes and obesity continues to rise in East Asia. As the risk of diabetes increases at a lower body mass index (BMI) in East Asians than in Europeans, the threshold of BMI values for metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is lower in East Asians. MBS is considered upon reaching a BMI of 27.5 kg/m2 and is recommended at a BMI of ≥ 32.5 kg/m2 , depending on the status of glucose homeostasis. The most commonly performed MBS in East Asia is sleeve gastrectomy, followed by Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Because the incidence of gastric cancer is higher in East Asia than in other regions, concerns regarding surveillance for gastric cancer might be related to a preference for sleeve gastrectomy over RYGB in this region. Even though there is a paucity of data on direct comparisons of the efficacy of MBS among different ethnic groups, the degree of weight reduction in East Asians is not inferior to other ethnic groups. Moreover, studies suggest that the diabetes remission rate in East Asians seemed to be higher than in other ethnic groups. Future studies involving multiethnic groups are necessary to identify possible ethnic differences in diabetes remission and to determine the appropriate BMI threshold for MBS according to ethnicity.

Single-Anastomosis Duodenal Switch: Conceptual Difference between East and West

Single-anastomosis duodenal switch (SADS) has become increasingly popular. This review compared the conceptual difference between Eastern (SADS-E) and Western (SADS-W) countries. After searching for SADS through PubMed and high-impact journals, 19 articles with 2280 patients were included for analysis. We found SADS-W was reserved for patients with a high body mass index (BMI) without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Surgeons performing SADS-W used larger bougies and preferred shorter common channels. However, SADS-E was mainly preferred in T2DM patients with a low BMI. SADS-E bypassed less bowel and used smaller bougies. The spectra of major postoperative complications, nutritional deficiencies, and gastrointestinal disorders were different between SADS-E and SADS-W. SADS-W yielded better weight loss and better T2DM remission than SADS-E. SADS are effective bariatric and metabolic procedures with promising therapeutic outcomes and acceptable safety.

Efficacy of Different Procedures of Metabolic Surgery for Type 2 Diabetes in Asia: a Multinational and Multicenter Exploratory Study

INTRODUCTION

Asian patients with diabetes exhibit different characteristics from Western patients. However, limited large-scale data are available on metabolic surgery procedures in Asia. We compared the short-term efficacies of metabolic surgery procedures for the management of Asian patients with different severities of diabetes.

METHODS

We included patients undergoing metabolic surgery in five Asian institutions from January 2008 to December 2015 with at least 1-year postoperative follow-up. Outcomes of weight loss and diabetes control were determined. Diabetes remission rates in different ABCD scores and factors affecting diabetes remission were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 1016 patients (mean BMI, 39.0 ± 7.2 kg/m²; HbA1c, 8.3% ± 1.7%) underwent metabolic surgery (197, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass [RYGB]; 171, one anastomosis gastric bypass [OAGB]; 437, sleeve gastrectomy [SG]; 130, SG with duodenal-jejunal bypass [SG-DJB]; and 81, single anastomosis duodenal-jejunal bypass with SG [SA-DJBSG]). The OAGB group exhibited significantly higher 1-year total weight loss (30.5%) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remission (78.4%) rates than did the other groups (p < .001). The patients with higher preoperative ABCD scores exhibited higher T2DM remission rates (81.8-100% and 9.5-46.2% in ABCD score subgroups of 9-10 and 1-2, respectively). In multivariate analysis, bypass was found to be an independent predictor of T2DM remission compared with SG (odds ratio of OAGB vs SG, 3.72; RYGB vs SG, 1.96; SG-DJB vs SG, 2.73; SA-DJBSG vs SG, 2.12).

CONCLUSION

The metabolic surgeries are highly effective in T2DM treatment. However, SG may not be as effective as gastric bypass and duodenal-jejunum bypass.

Twenty years' experience of laparoscopic 1-anastomosis gastric bypass: surgical risk and long-term results

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic 1- (single-) anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) was developed as a simplified technique of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), but super long-term data are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the risks and long-term results of OAGB over a period of 20 years.

SETTING

Tertiary teaching hospital.

METHODS

A total of 2223 patients underwent OAGB from 2001 to 2020; the mean age was 35.3 ± 11.4 years (range, 14-71 yr), 70.2% were female, and the mean body mass index was 40.2 ± 11.9 kg/m². All data were kept in a prospective bariatric database. Patients were divided into 4 groups, based on the 5-year period in which their surgery was performed, and a retrospective analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

The means for operating time, intraoperative blood loss, and length of hospital stay after OAGB were 131.9 ± 40.1 minutes, 38.5 ± 30.7 mL, and 4.5 ± 4.0 days, respectively. There were 27 patients (1.2%) with 30-day postoperative major complications overall, but the group rate decreased to .4% in the last 5-year period. At postoperative years 5, 10, and 15, the percentages of total weight loss were 31.9%, 29.6%, and 29.5%, respectively, and the percentages of excess weight loss were 77.2%, 68.4%, and 65.5%, respectively. Among 739 patients (33.2%) with type 2 diabetes (T2D), the rates of complete remission (glycated hemoglobin < 60%) at 5, 10, and 15 years were 67.3%, 73.8%, and 66.7%, respectively. The weight loss and antimetabolic effects were similar in each 5-year period, but a significant malnutrition effect was observed. A total of 113 (5.1%) patients needed revision surgery at follow-up, due to malnutrition (n = 51), weight regain (n = 24), acid or bile reflux (n = 22), marginal ulcer (n = 8), ileus (n = 3), and other causes (n = 5). At 15 years, the overall revision rate was 11.9% (27/226), and 80% of the patients were very satisfied with their procedures.

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that OAGB is a safe and durable primary bariatric procedure, with sustained weight loss and a high resolution of T2D up to 20 years post surgery in Taiwan, although malnutrition is a major side effect.

Single Anastomosis Duodenal-Ileal Bypass with Sleeve Gastrectomy/One Anastomosis Duodenal Switch (SADI-S/OADS) IFSO Position Statement-Update 2020

PreambleThe International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) has played an integral role in educating both the metabolic surgical and the medical communities at large about the role of innovative and new surgical and or endoscopic interventions in treating adiposity-based chronic diseases. The single anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy/one anastomosis duodenal switch (SADI-S/OADS) is a relatively new procedure that has been proposed as an alternative to the conventional duodenal switch (DS) procedure. The IFSO published a position paper on SADI-S/OADS in 2018 with which concluded that this procedure was likely to be a safe and efficacious treatment for adiposity and its related diseases. However, it noted that there was insufficient long-term data and minimal high-level evidence available. The position statement called for patients to be enrolled in long-term multidisciplinary care encouraged the registration of patients in national registries, and called for more randomized controlled trials (RCT) (Obes Surg 28:1207-16, 2018) involving the procedure. The following position statement is an update of the previous position statement. It is issued by the IFSO SADI-S/OADS task force and has been reviewed and approved by both the IFSO Scientific Committee and Executive Board. This statement is based on current clinical knowledge, expert opinion, and published peer-reviewed scientific evidence. It will be reviewed again in 2 years.