Does Accreditation Matter? An Analysis of Complications of Bariatric Cases Using the MBSAQIP and NSQIP Databases

Bariatric surgery is as safe as other common operations: an analysis of the ACS-NSQIP

BACKGROUND

Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (MBS) is the most effective management for patients with obesity and weight-related medical conditions. Nonetheless, some primary care physicians (PCPs) and surgeons from other specialties are reluctant to refer patients for MBS due to safety concerns.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the outcomes of patients who underwent MBS with those who underwent other common operations.

SETTING

American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP).

METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), classified as MBS, were compared to nine frequently performed procedures including hip arthroplasty and laparoscopic cholecystectomy, appendectomy, colectomy, hysterectomy, and hernia repairs, among others. A multivariable logistic regression was constructed to compare outcomes including readmission, reoperation, extended length of stay (ELOS) (>75th percentile or ≥3 days) and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 1.6 million patients were included, with 11.1% undergoing MBS. The odds of readmission were marginally lower in the cholecystectomy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = .88, 95% confidence interval (CI) [.85, .90]) and appendectomy (aOR = .88, 95% CI [.85, .90]) cohorts. Similarly, odds of ELOS were among the lowest, surpassed only by same-day procedures such as cholecystectomies and appendectomies. The MBS group had significantly low odds of mortality, comparable to safe anatomical procedures such as hernia repairs. Infectious and thrombotic complications were exceedingly rare and amongst the lowest after MBS.

CONCLUSIONS

MBS demonstrates a remarkably promising safety profile and compares favorably to other common procedures in the short-term. PCPs and surgeons from other specialties can confidently refer patients for these low-risk, lifesaving operations.

Cumulative Incidence of Venous Thromboembolic Events In-Hospital, and at 1, 3, 6, and 12 Months After Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: Systematic Review of 87 Studies and Meta-analysis of 2,731,797 Patients

Systematic review/meta-analysis of cumulative incidences of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) after metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS). Electronic databases were searched for original studies. Proportional meta-analysis assessed cumulative VTE incidences. (PROSPERO ID:CRD42020184529). A total of 3066 records, and 87 studies were included (N patients = 4,991,683). Pooled in-hospital VTE of mainly laparoscopic studies = 0.15% (95% CI = 0.13-0.18%); pooled cumulative incidence increased to 0.50% (95% CI = 0.33-0.70%); 0.51% (95% CI = 0.38-0.65%); 0.72% (95% CI = 0.13-1.52%); 0.78% (95% CI = 0-3.49%) at 30 days and 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Studies using predominantly open approach exhibited higher incidence than laparoscopic studies. Within the first month, 60% of VTE occurred after discharge. North American and earlier studies had higher incidence than non-North American and more recent studies. This study is the first to generate detailed estimates of the incidence and patterns of VTE after MBS over time. The incidence of VTE after MBS is low. Improved estimates and time variations of VTE require longer-term designs, non-aggregated reporting of characteristics, and must consider many factors and the use of data registries. Extended surveillance of VTE after MBS is required.

A Matched Comparative Analysis of Type-2 Diabetes Mellitus Remission Between Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy

OBJECTIVE

Multiple scores validate long-term type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remission after metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS). However, studies comparing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) have not adequately controlled for certain parameters, which may influence procedure selection.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective review of patients with T2DM who underwent RYGB or SG between 2008 and 2017. Data on demographics, clinical, laboratory, and metabolic values were collected annually for up to 14 years. Each eligible RYGB patient was individually matched to an eligible SG patient based on diabetes severity, weight loss, and follow-up duration.

RESULTS

Among 1149 T2DM patients, 467 were eligible for matching. We found 97 matched pairs who underwent RYGB or SG. RYGB showed significantly higher T2DM remission rates (46.4%) compared to SG (33.0%) after matching. SG patients had higher insulin usage (35.1%) than RYGB patients (20.6%). RYGB patients also experienced greater decreases in HbA1c levels and diabetes medication usage than SG patients.

CONCLUSIONS

RYGB demonstrates higher efficacy for T2DM remission compared to SG, regardless of baseline characteristics, T2DM severity, weight loss, and follow-up duration. Further studies are needed to understand the long-term metabolic effects of MBS and the underlying pathophysiology of T2DM remission after MBS.

Third time's a charm: band to sleeve to bypass

BACKGROUND

Adjustable gastric bands (AGB) are frequently converted to sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) due to weight recurrence or band complications. Such conversions carry a higher-risk than primary procedures. Some patients undergo two conversions-from AGB to SG, and subsequently from SG to RYGB. This presents a unique situation with limited literature on indications and complication rates associated with these double conversions.

METHODS

We examined the 2020-2021 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Participant Use File to evaluate conversions from AGB to SG and then to RYGB. Patient and operative characteristics, along with outcomes, were evaluated. Descriptive statistics were applied.

RESULTS

We identified 276 patients who underwent a conversion from AGB to SG and then to RYGB. The primary reason for the second conversion (SG to RYGB) was gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) at 55.1%, followed by inadequate weight loss or weight regain (IWL/WR) at 36.9%. The remaining reasons included dysphagia, nausea, vomiting, or others. Patients converted for IWL/WR demonstrated a higher baseline body mass index and prevalence of sleep apnea compared to other cohorts (both p < 0.001). Meanwhile, patients in the "other reasons" group had the highest rate of open surgical approaches (9.1%) and concurrent lysis of adhesions (p = 0.001 and p = 0.022), with correspondingly higher rates of anastomotic leak, reoperations, serious complications, and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing double conversions (AGB to SG to RYGB) do so primarily for GERD or IWL/WR. Further research is required to better define the optimal primary operation for each patient, aiming to reduce the necessity for multiple conversions.

Bariatric surgery and left ventricular assist device in patients with heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), in synergy with left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, in the scope of end-stage heart failure management for patients with severe obesity is not well elucidated.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis using Cochrane, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus databases to include articles from their inception to November 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 271 patients who underwent MBS during or after the LVAD implantation were included from eleven separate studies. After surgery, 67.4% of patients were listed on the heart transplant waitlist with 32.5% undergoing a successful transplant. We reported a mean listing time of 13.8 months. Finally, the pooled postoperative complication rate, 30-day readmission rate, and one-year mortality rate were 47.6%, 23.6% and 10.2% respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

MBS and LVAD is a safe and effective approach to bridge patients with severe obesity and end-stage heart failure for definitive heart transplantation.

Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Bariatric Surgery Compared to Standard Laparoscopic Approach Using a Standardized Definition: First Look at the 2020 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality Improvement Project (MBSAQIP) Data

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of robotic-assisted (RA-) approach compared to the standard laparoscopic (L-) approach using the 2020 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) registry Public Use File (PUF). Our secondary objective is to establish standards for the reporting of outcomes using PUF.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using the PUF database (n = 168,568), patients were divided into sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), revisions, and conversions and then analyzed separately. We created balanced covariate through propensity score matching and inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW). We also conducted multivariable relative risk regression to confirm our results.

RESULTS

For RYGB, the incidence of "transfusion" was significantly lower in the RA-RYGB compared to the L-RYGB. There was no significant difference in the rate of Serious Event Occurrences (SEOs) or rate of intervention at 30 days. For SG, there was a higher rate of "transfusion" in the RA group. Incidence of SEOs was also significantly higher in the RA-group. There was no significant difference in SEOs for conversions; however, revisions had a trend toward a lower rate of SEOs favoring the robotic approach. Operative times were significantly higher for all RA-groups.

CONCLUSION

RA- approach in metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) remains controversial because of differences in outcomes. The use of SEOs as reported by MBSAQIP in its semi-annual report can be used as a composite score to assess outcomes while using PUF. Further studies are needed to compare RA- to L- MBS.

History and Role of Quality Accreditation

Accreditation has played a major role in the evolution of health care quality as well as the structure and organization of American medicine. In its earliest iterations, accreditation aimed to set a minimum standard of care, and now more prominently sets standards for high quality, optimal patient care. There are several institutions that provide accreditations that are relevant to colorectal surgery including the American College of Surgeons (ACS) Commission on Cancer, National Cancer Institute Cancer Center Designation, National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer, and the ACS Geriatrics Verification Program. While each program has unique criteria, the aim of accreditation is to assure high-quality evidenced-based care. In addition to these benchmarks, these programs provide avenues for collaboration and research between centers and programs.

Postoperative pneumonia after bariatric surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: A NSQIP study

Background

During the COVID-19 pandemic, surgical centers had to weigh the benefits and risks of conducting bariatric surgery. Obesity increases the risk of developing severe COVID-19 infections, and therefore, bariatric surgery is beneficial. In contrast, surgical patients who test positive for COVID-19 have higher mortality rates.

Objective

This study investigates the national prevalence of postoperative pneumonia during the COVID-19 pandemic in the bariatric surgery population.

Setting

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) database.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional study using the ACS-NSQIP database. The population of concern included patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedures. Information was extracted on rate of postoperative pneumonia and other 30-day complications between 2018 and 2020.

Results

All baseline characteristics were similar among patients who underwent bariatric surgery between 2018 and 2020. However, there was a 156% increase in postoperative pneumonia in 2020 compared with the previous year. Furthermore, despite the similar postoperative complication rates across the years, there was a statistically significant increase in all-cause mortality in 2020. The multivariate analysis showed that having surgery in 2020 was a statistically significant risk factor for pneumonia development postoperatively.

Conclusions

This study showed a statistically significant increase in the prevalence of postoperative pneumonia during the COVID-19 pandemic among bariatric surgery patients. Surgical centers must continuously evaluate the risks associated with healthcare-associated exposure to COVID-19 and weigh the benefits of bariatric surgery.