Reoperative bariatric surgery. Lessons learned to improve patient selection and results

Revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass after failed gastric banding: a case-matched study

BACKGROUND

Revisional surgery is technically demanding and is usually associated with higher intraoperative and perioperative risks than primary procedures. The objective of this study is to compare outcomes of patients who had gastric bypass procedures performed as a rescue procedure for failed gastric banding, with those who had a primary gastric bypass.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The group of patients undergoing revisional gastric bypass for failed gastric band was matched in a 1:2 ratio with control patients who underwent a primary RYGB, based on gender, score, preoperative body mass index, and comorbidities. Data were retrospectively retrieved.

RESULTS

Thirty one (33.3%) patients underwent band removal and gastric bypass (group A) and 62 (66.6%) only primary gastric bypass (group B). Nonsignificant differences were seen in operative time, operative bleeding, or length of stay. Complications were more frequent in group A. Postoperative weight at 12-month follow-up was greater in group A, however, not statistically significant. Changes in weight, both absolute, and percentage were not different between groups. This observation was also true for BMI, in which no significant differences were seen. Overall, mean follow-up was 16 ± 3.2 months.

CONCLUSION

Gastric bypass can be performed as revisional bariatric surgery, with low complication rates and acceptable outcomes, though not with the same safety as a primary procedure. Gastric bypass is a satisfactory option for patients with a failed gastric band.

A Matched Cohort Comparison of Long-term Outcomes of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) Versus Single-Anastomosis Duodeno-ileostomy with Sleeve Gastrectomy (SADI-S)

BACKGROUND

The long-term effectiveness of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and single-anastomosis duodeno-ileostomy with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) is unknown.

PURPOSE

Compare the long-term outcomes.

SETTING

Single private institute, USA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from 1254 patients who underwent primary RYGB or SADI-S were used for a retrospective matched cohort. Data were obtained by matching every RYGB patient to a SADI-S patient of the same sex, body mass index (BMI), and weight. Only patients out 5 years and had at least one > 5-year follow-up visit were included.

RESULTS

The matched cohort included 61 RYGB and 61 SADI-S patients. There was no statistical, demographic difference between the two groups. At 5 years, a 100% follow-up was available in each group. The intraoperative outcomes were significantly better with SADI-S. The 30-day readmission, reoperation, emergency department (ED) visits, and complication rates were statistically similar between the two groups. The long-term complication rates, Clavien-Dindo grade IIIb complications, and number of patients with more than one complication were significantly lower with SADI-S. Weight loss was significantly greater in the SADI-S group at 5 years. The long-term weight-loss failure rate was significantly higher in the RYGB group. The SADI-S procedure was associated with fewer reintervention through 6 years (14.7% patients vs. 39.3% patients, p = 0.001). Conversion or reversal of the procedure was required only in the RYGB group. There also was no significant difference in nutritional outcomes between the two procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that problems, including long-term complications, reinterventions, weight-loss failure, and conversion, were more often associated with RYGB than with SADI-S. The SADI-S may be considered one of the viable alternatives to RYGB.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SETTING

Public hospital following SG.

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Conversion of both Versions of Vertical Banded Gastroplasty to Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Analysis of Short-term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Conversional bariatric surgery has relatively high rates of complications. We aimed to analyze our single-center experience with patients requiring conversional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) following a failed primary open or laparoscopic vertical banded gastroplasty (OVBG or LVBG, respectively).

METHODS

The records of patients who underwent LRYGB as a conversional procedure after VBG between November 2004 and December 2017 were reviewed. Characteristics, body mass index (BMI), operation time, intraoperative problems, length of hospitalization, and early (< 30 days) morbidity and mortality were analyzed. Data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation or frequency.

RESULTS

A total of 329 patients (81.76% females) who underwent conversional RYGB were included. For the LVBG group (224 patients) and OVBG group (105 patients), respectively, BMI was 34.15 ± 6.38 and 37.79 ± 6.31 kg/m2 (p < 0.05), the operation time was 96.00 ± 31.40 and 123.15 ± 40.26 min (p < 0.05), hospitalization duration was 2.96 ± 1.13 and 3.20 ± 1.20 days (p = 0.08), the early complication rate was 7.14 and 11.43% (p = 0.19), and the reoperation rate was 2.23 and 2.86% (p = 0.73). There were no major intraoperative problems. Three patients with OVBG were converted to open RYGB (2.86%). There was no mortality.

CONCLUSION

The conversion of OVBG and LVBG to laparoscopic RYGB is technically feasible and provides comparably low early morbidity rates and length of hospitalization. However, compared to LVBG, conversional laparoscopic RYGB following OVBG is technically more challenging and time-consuming, with a slightly higher risk of conversion to open surgery. We support the use of such conversional bariatric surgery in specialized, high-volume bariatric centers.

The Use of the Overstitch for Bariatric Weight Loss

Obesity is a public health pandemic and leading contributor to morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic bariatric therapies have emerged as a viable minimally invasive treatment option to fill the therapeutic gap between conservative and surgical approaches. The ability to reliably place full-thickness sutures throughout the gastrointestinal tract has opened the door to novel endoscopic gastric restrictive procedures. A growing body of literature supports endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty as a safe, effective, and reproducible endoscopic treatment of obesity and metabolic syndrome. In addition, endoscopic sutured revision procedures following gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy are now first-line with demonstrable safety and long-term efficacy.

A Retrospective Comparative Study of Primary Versus Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Long-Term Results

AIMS

To compare the perioperative parameters and excess weight loss between patients operated by laporoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), as a primary operation or a revisional, for insufficient weight loss after vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) or adjustable gastric banding (AGB).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent a LRYGB was performed for the period 2004-2011. Demographics, preoperative body mass index (BMI), co-morbidities, operation time, conversion rate, perioperative complications, hospitalization period, and % of excess BMI loss (%EBMIL) were investigated and compared between groups.

RESULTS

Three hundred forty-two laparoscopic gastric bypass operations were performed, 245 were primary, and 97 revisional. Median follow-up was 30 months (range 0-108 months). Mean BMI (kg/m²) before bypass was 45.2 for primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (pLRYGB) and 41.1 for revisional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (rLRYGB). Median operative time and length of stay were longer for rLRYGB 157.5 versus 235 min (p < 0.001) and 6 versus 6.5 days (p = 0.05). Conversion to laparotomy was performed in eight patients, 0.4% of primary and 7.2% of revisional. Morbidity rate was 6.5% in pLRYGB versus 10% in rLRYGB (NS). There was one death in the primary group. Percentage of EBMIL was significantly lower in the revisional group at 12, 18, and 24 months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Revisional and primary gastric bypass have no statistical differences in terms of morbidity. The % of excess BMI loss is lower after revisional gastric bypass during the first 2 years of follow-up. The trend of weight loss or weight regain was similar in both groups.

Endoscopic management of weight regain following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

INTRODUCTION

With the cumulative increase in the number of patients undergoing bariatric surgery, postoperative weight regain has become a considerable challenge. Mechanisms for weight regain are not fully understood and the process is likely multifactorial in many cases. Endoluminal revisions that reduce gastric pouch size and diameter of the gastrojejunal anastomosis may offer an effective and less invasive management strategy for this population.

AREAS COVERED

We critically review data from case series, retrospective and prospective studies, and meta-analyses pertaining to weight regain after gastric bypass. A variety of endoscopic revision approaches are reviewed, including technique details, procedural safety and efficacy, and post-procedure care.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

Given the proliferation of endoluminal therapies with evidence showing safety and efficacy in the treatment of weight regain, it is likely that endoscopic revision will be the gold standard to treat weight regain in patients with gastric bypass.

Revision of Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass for Weight Regain: a Systematic Review of Techniques and Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Weight regain has led to an increase in revision of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) surgeries. There is no standardized approach to revisional surgery after failed RYGB. We performed an exhaustive literature search to elucidate surgical revision options. Our objective was to evaluate outcomes and complications of various methods of revision after RYGB to identify the option with the best outcomes for failed primary RYGB.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was conducted using the following search tools and databases: PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Clinical Trials Database, Cochrane Review Database, EMBASE, and Allied and Complementary Medicine to identify all relevant studies describing revision after failed RYGB. Inclusion criteria comprised of revisional surgery for weight gain after RYGB.

RESULTS

Of the 1200 articles found, only 799 were selected for our study. Of the 799, 24 studies, with a total of 866 patients, were included for a systematic review. Of the 24 studies, 5 were conversion to Distal Roux-en-y gastric bypass (DRYGB), 5 were revision of gastric pouch and anastomosis, 6 were revision with gastric band, 2 were revision to biliopancreatic diversion/duodenal switch (BPD/DS), and 6 were revision to endoluminal procedures (i.e., stomaphyx). Mean percent excess body mass index loss (%EBMIL) after revision up to 1 and 3-year follow-up for BPD/DS was 63.7 and 76 %, DRYGB was 54 and 52.2 %, gastric banding revision 47.6 and 47.3 %, gastric pouch/anastomosis revision 43.3 and 14 %, and endoluminal procedures at 32.1 %, respectively. Gastric pouch/anastomosis revision resulted in the lowest major complication rate at 3.5 % and DRYGB with the highest at 11.9 % when compared to the other revisional procedures. The mortality rate was 0.6 % which only occurred in the DRYGB group.

CONCLUSION

All 866 patients in the 24 studies reported significant early initial weight loss after revision for failed RYGB. However, of the five surgical revision options considered, BPD/DS, DRYGB, and gastric banding resulted in sustained weight loss, with acceptable complication rate.

Indications and Operative Outcomes of Gastric Bypass Reversal

BACKGROUND

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is one of the best-known and most commonly performed bariatric procedures. However, this procedure carries infrequent but serious long-term complications, which may require revisional procedures. This study reports the indications and outcomes of gastric bypass reversal that have not been described well in the literature.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective study of 50 patients who underwent reversal of RYGB conducted between 2006 and 2015 was reviewed to describe the usual indications and outcomes of gastric bypass reversal surgeries.

RESULTS

Of 50 patients, 7 (14 %) were males and 43 (86 %) were females. The mean age of the patient population was 40.4 ± 11.6 years (range 19-66). Reasons for reversal included anastomotic ulcers (n = 27), anastomotic complications (n = 9), malnutrition (n = 2), and functional disorder (n = 12). The mean BMI before the reversal was 29 ± 9.4 kg/m(2) (range 16-60). The mean time between the primary procedure and reversal was 60 ± 65.5 months (range 2-300). Fourteen of the reversals were done via laparotomy. Mean hospital stay was 8.4 ± 7.3 days (range 3-34 days). There was no peri-operative death 30 days after reversal. Following gastric bypass reversal, 92.6 % (n = 25) of the patient population had resolution from ulcers, 77.8 % (n = 7) of the patient population had resolution from anatomic complications, 100 % (n = 2) of the patient population had resolution from malnutrition, and 66.7 % (n = 8) of the patient population had resolution from functional disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastric bypass reversal is a reasonable and safe treatment for complications arising from the GBP surgery. A laparoscopic approach is feasible in select patients.

"Candy cane syndrome:" an underappreciated cause of abdominal pain and nausea after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery

BACKGROUND

"Candy cane" syndrome (a blind afferent Roux limb at the gastrojejunostomy) has been implicated as a cause of abdominal pain, nausea, and emesis after Roux-n-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) but remains poorly described.

OBJECTIVES

To report that "candy cane" syndrome is real and can be treated effectively with revisional bariatric surgery SETTING: All patients underwent "candy cane" resection at University Hospitals of Cleveland.

METHODS

All patients who underwent resection of the "candy cane" between January 2011 and July 2015 were included. All had preoperative workup to identify "candy cane" syndrome. Demographic data; pre-, peri-, and postoperative symptoms; data regarding hospitalization; and postoperative weight loss were assessed through retrospective chart review. Data were analyzed using Student's t test and χ² analysis where appropriate.

RESULTS

Nineteen patients had resection of the "candy cane" (94% female, mean age 50±11 yr), within 3 to 11 years after initial RYGB. Primary presenting symptoms were epigastric abdominal pain (68%) and nausea/vomiting (32%), particularly with fibrous foods and meats. On upper gastrointestinal study and endoscopy, the afferent blind limb was the most direct outlet from the gastrojejunostomy. Only patients with these preoperative findings were deemed to have "candy cane" syndrome. Eighteen (94%) cases were completed laparoscopically. Length of the "candy cane" ranged from 3 to 22 cm. Median length of stay was 1 day. After resection, 18 (94%) patients had complete resolution of their symptoms (P<.001). Mean body mass index decreased from 33.9±6.1 kg/m² preoperatively to 31.7±5.6 kg/m² at 6 months (17.4% excess weight loss) and 30.5±6.9 kg/m² at 1 year (25.7% excess weight loss). The average length of latest follow-up was 20.7 months.

CONCLUSION

"Candy cane" syndrome is a real phenomenon that can be managed safely with excellent outcomes with resection of the blind afferent limb. A thorough diagnostic workup is paramount to proper identification of this syndrome. Surgeons should minimize the size of the blind afferent loop left at the time of initial RYGB.

Endoscopic Treatments Following Bariatric Surgery

Weight regain after bariatric surgery is common and can be managed with surgical interventions or less morbid endoscopic techniques. These endoscopic approaches target structural postoperative changes that are associated with weight regain, most notably dilation of the gastrojejunal anastomosis aperture. Purse string suture placement, as well as argon plasma coagulation application to the anastomosis, may result in significant and durable weight loss. Furthermore, various endoscopic approaches may be used to safely and effectively manage other complications of bariatric surgery that may result in poor weight loss or weight regain after surgery, including fistula formation.

Revisional Bariatric Surgery

Revisional bariatric procedures are increasingly common. With more primary procedures being performed to manage severe obesity and its complications, 5% to 8% of these procedures will fail, requiring revisional operation. Reasons for revisional bariatric surgery are either primary inadequate weight loss, defined as less than 25% excess body weight loss, or weight recidivism, defined as a gain of more than 10 kg based on the nadir weight; however, each procedure also has inherit specific complications that can also be indications for revision. This article reviews the history of each primary bariatric procedure, indications for revision, surgical options, and subsequent outcomes.

Conversion of Open Vertical Banded Gastroplasty to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Single-Center, Single-Surgeon Experience with 6 Years of Follow-up

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to assess feasibility, relief of complications and mid- and long-term weight loss results following the conversion of open vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing conversion of open VBG to RYGB (open and laparoscopic) between 1 April 2000 and 1 January 2015 was performed. (Post)operative complications were listed. Weight loss was assessed using excess weight (EW), percentage excess weight loss (%EWL) and body mass index (BMI) at 1-year intervals after surgery. Ideal weight was determined by recalculating individual lengths to a BMI of 25 kg/m(2). Application of polynomial regression models was used to quantify weight loss over time.

RESULTS

Ninety patients were identified in the database. Mean time between bariatric interventions was 9.6 years. Reasons for conversion were insufficient weight loss (82.2%) and outlet obstruction (17.8%). Early complications were encountered in eight patients of which three were reoperated. Patients who underwent conversion for inadequate weight loss after VBG were retrospectively analyzed regarding weight loss: 78.0% EWL after 1 year, 71.4% after 2 years, 62.1% after 3 years, 64.1% after 4 years, 70.2% after 5 years, and 68.9% after 6 years. Outlet obstruction was relieved in 94%. Patient satisfaction was assessed by telephone: 86.4% would repeat the conversion.

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion of open VBG to RYGB is feasible and safe and can be performed with an acceptable complication rate. It gives excellent weight loss results and relief of outlet obstruction.

Psychosocial presentation of female bariatric surgery patients after multiple revisional surgeries: A qualitative study

Bariatric surgery is currently the most viable and cost-effective treatment for obesity. This study aimed to understand, from a female patient’s perspective, what contributed to not achieving or maintaining excess weight loss from a primary laparoscopic adjustable gastric band surgery, leading to subsequent multiple revisional bariatric surgeries. The purposive sample of participants ( N = 17 females) were over 18 years, had a primary failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric band and had more than three revisional procedures. Participants were individually interviewed and data were analysed from a grounded theory methodology to build a causal model with the core category of unrealistic expectations of bariatric surgery and other important conceptual categories.

Mid-term outcomes of gastric bypass weight loss failure to duodenal switch

BACKGROUND

The Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is a very effective treatment for obesity and its related co-morbidities. However, some patients fail to achieve>50% of their excess weight loss (EWL), and others regain much of the weight that they lost.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to analyze early outcomes after conversion of RYGB to duodenal switch (DS) in terms of weight loss, change in co-morbidities, and complications.

SETTING

This is a retrospective analysis from 1 surgeon at a single private institution.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 32 obese patients retrospectively who underwent revision for failed RYGB. Nine patients underwent DS with Roux-en-Y reconstruction (RYDS), and 23 patients underwent single anastomosis DS between October 2012 and December 2015. Regression analyses were performed for all follow-up weight-loss data.

RESULTS

The patients experienced mean EWL of 16.2% over an average of 16 years (range: 0-38) with their primary RYGB surgery. Of 32 patients who underwent revision DS, 22 patients are beyond the 1-year postoperative mark (follow-up 81.8%), and 15 patients are beyond the 2-year postoperative mark (follow-up 73.3%). One patient was lost to follow-up. The patients experienced mean EWL of 31.2%, 45.1%, 51%, 54.2%, 56%, and 56.4% at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months, respectively, after their revisional surgery. Mean total weight loss achieved at 12 and 24 months was 27.7% and 29.2%, respectively. There was no statistical significant difference in mean %EWL at 12 months (P = .468) and 24 months (P = .266) between RYDS and single anastomosis DS.

CONCLUSION

A laparoscopic revision from RYGB to DS is an effective weight-loss operation with midterm follow-up of 2 years. Though long-term follow-up is warranted to measure recidivism, the initial data seem favorable.

Revisional surgery after failed gastric banding: results of one-stage conversion to RYGB in 195 patients

BACKGROUND

The most performed restrictive bariatric procedure is the laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB). With many patients still receiving a LAGB in Europe and the United States, inevitably, the number of complications also increases. For many complications revisional bariatric surgery is necessary. In this study, the outcomes of one-stage LAGB conversion to a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) at our institution are presented. The objective of this study was to investigate the safety and efficiency of RYGB performed as a one-stage procedure after failed LAGB.

METHODS

Patients were retrospectively selected using a prospectively collected database. The gastric band had to be in situ for at least 1 year and minimum postoperative follow-up was 12 months. The revisional RYGB had to be performed as a 1-step procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 195 patients were included while 3 were lost to follow up. Overall, 178 (91%) procedures were performed without perioperative complications, and only 8 (4%) patients required reoperation within 30 days. The mean follow-up was 40 months (±24) after RYGB. Mean excess weight loss (EWL) increased from 25% (±26/-50- 120%) to 60% (±21.2/0- 130), 65% (±23.5/0- 131), 63% (±24.2/2- 132), 60% (±24.1/0- 111) and 53% (±28.7/-39- 109) in the first 5 postoperative years.

CONCLUSION

Converting a gastric band to a RYGB in a one-stage procedure is safe and feasible, with acceptable complication rates when performed in a specialized institution. The RYGB conversion results in a good EWL of 65% after 2 years. However, proper patient selection is of the utmost importance.

Causes and outcomes of revisional bariatric surgery: initial experience at a single center

Purpose

Bariatric surgery has become more prevalent owing to the worldwide obesity epidemic. With the growing number of bariatric procedures performed annually, the requirement for revisional and secondary operations is increasing accordingly. This study aimed to evaluate the initial experience of revisional bariatric surgery at a single specialized center.

Methods

A retrospective review of the prospectively established database identified all patients who underwent revisional bariatric surgery between January 2008 and August 2013. The causes, surgical outcomes, and efficacy of the revisional surgeries were analyzed.

Results

Twenty-two revisional surgeries were performed laparoscopically during the study period (13 laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding, 9 laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy). The most common indication for revision was weight regain or insufficient weight loss (12/23, 52.2%), and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) was the most commonly performed secondary procedure (17/23, 73.9%, including four resectional RYGB procedures). Gastric pouch leak occurred in one patient following revisional RYGB, which required reoperation on the first postoperative day. The mean body mass index decreased from 35.9 to 28.8 kg/m² at a mean follow-up period of 10 months after revision. The percent excess weight losses at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively were 18.8%, 41.1%, 40.1%, and 47.4%, respectively.

Conclusion

Revisional bariatric surgery can be successfully performed via a laparoscopic approach with acceptable risk. Deliberate selection for the proper revisional procedure can efficiently manage undesirable results from the primary surgery.

Operative strategies for patients with failed primary bariatric procedures

Bariatric surgery is the most effective therapy to treat obesity and its sequelae. With the increasing incidence of obesity, the number of bariatric procedures has dramatically increased in recent years. The perioperative morbidity reached a very low level, and nearly all revisional bariatric procedures are primarily minimally invasive today. About 10-25% of the patients undergoing bariatric surgery require a revision at some point after their initial operation. Consequently, revisional bariatric surgery has emerged as a distinct practice, performed mainly at tertiary centers, to resolve complications caused by the primary operation and to provide satisfactory weight loss. In this review, our personal experience with revisional bariatric surgery is discussed against the background of the available literature. We further attempt to define major indications for revisional bariatric surgery and balance them with perioperative and long-term morbidity as well as the surgical outcome.

Short- and long-term outcomes of vertical banded gastroplasty converted to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

BACKGROUND

Vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) often necessitates revisional surgery for weight regain or symptoms related to gastric outlet obstruction. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is considered as the revisional procedure of choice. However, revisional bariatric surgery is associated with relatively higher rates of complications. The aim of the current study is to analyse our single-centre experience with patients requiring revisional RYGB following primary VBG.

METHODS

Retrospective review of the prospectively collected database identified 153 patients who underwent RYGB as a revisional procedure after VBG from Feb 2004-Feb 2011. Early and late complications, weight data and resolution of symptoms related to gastric outlet obstruction were analysed.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-three females and 30 males underwent revisional RYGB post VBG. Mean age was 44.4 (15-74) years with a mean pre-operative body mass index (BMI) of 34.2 (23.5-65.5) kg/m(2). Mean hospital stay was 4.3 days. Early complication rate was 3.9 % with a 30-day re-operation rate of 1.3 %. Mortality and leak rate were zero. After a mean follow-up of 48 months, the mean BMI decreased significantly to 28.8 kg/m(2) and a complete resolution of the obstructive symptoms was achieved in nearly all patients. Late complications developed in 11 (7.7 %) of the patients of which seven (4.9 %) required surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Revisional RYGB following VBG is technically challenging but safe with low rates of morbidity and mortality, comparable to primary RYGB. It produces a significant reduction in body weight and in symptoms resolution. We recommend RYGB as the procedure of choice in patients requiring revisional surgery following VBG.

Endoscopic suturing for transoral outlet reduction increases weight loss after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Weight regain or insufficient loss after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is common. This is partially attributable to dilatation of the gastrojejunostomy (GJ), which diminishes the restrictive capacity of RYGB. Endoluminal interventions for GJ reduction are being explored as alternatives to revision surgery. We performed a randomized, blinded, sham-controlled trial to evaluate weight loss after sutured transoral outlet reduction (TORe).

METHODS

Patients with weight regain or inadequate loss after RYGB and GJ diameter greater than 2 cm were assigned randomly to groups that underwent TORe (n = 50) or a sham procedure (controls, n = 27). Intraoperative performance, safety, weight loss, and clinical outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Subjects who received TORe had a significantly greater mean percentage weight loss from baseline (3.5%; 95% confidence interval, 1.8%-5.3%) than controls (0.4%; 95% confidence interval, 2.3% weight gain to 3.0% weight loss) (P = .021), using a last observation carried forward intent-to-treat analysis. As-treated analysis also showed greater mean percentage weight loss in the TORe group than controls (3.9% and 0.2%, respectively; P = .014). Weight loss or stabilization was achieved in 96% subjects receiving TORe and 78% of controls (P = .019). The TORe group had reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure (P < .001) and a trend toward improved metabolic indices. In addition, 85% of the TORe group reported compliance with the healthy lifestyle eating program, compared with 53.8% of controls; 83% of TORe subjects said they would undergo the procedure again, and 78% said they would recommend the procedure to a friend. The groups had similar frequencies of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

A multicenter randomized trial provides Level I evidence that TORe reduces weight regain after RYGB. These results were achieved using a superficial suction-based device; greater levels of weight loss could be achieved with newer, full-thickness suturing devices. TORe is one approach to avoid weight regain; a longitudinal multidisciplinary approach with dietary counseling and behavioral changes are required for long-term results. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00394212.

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric bypass after failed vertical banded gastroplasty: a multicenter experience with 203 patients

BACKGROUND

Vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) has long been the main restrictive procedure for morbid obesity but has many long-term complications for which conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) is often considered the best option.

METHODS

This series regroups patients operated on by three different surgeons in four different centers. All data were collected prospectively, then pooled and analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Out of 2,522 RYGBP performed between 1998 and 2010, 538 were reoperations, including 203 laparoscopic RYGBP after VBG. There were 175 women and 28 men. The mean BMI before VBG was 43.2 ± 6.3, and the mean BMI before reoperation was 37.4 ± 8.3. Most patients had more than one indication for reoperation and/or had regained significant weight. There was no conversion to open surgery. A total of 24 patients (11.8 %) developed complications, including nine (4.5 %) who required reoperation and one death. With a follow-up of 88.9 % after 8 years, the mean BMI after 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9 years was 29.1, 28.8, 28.7, 29.9, and 28.8, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of this experience, the largest with laparoscopic reoperative RYGBP after failed VBG, we conclude that this procedure can safely be performed in experienced hands, with weight loss results similar to those observed after primary RYGBP. In patients with too difficult an anatomy below the cardia, dividing the esophagus just above the esophago-gastric junction and performing an esophagojejunostomy may be a safe alternative to converting to a Scopinaro-type BPD, obviating the additional long-term risks associated with malabsorption.

Case-matched analysis comparing outcomes of revisional versus primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is one of the most common approaches used to revise post-bariatric patients with inadequate weight loss or significant weight regain. Previous studies have analyzed the outcomes of open revisional RYGB versus primary RYGB, but no case-control matched analysis comparing revisional LRYGB versus primary LRYGB has been performed.

METHODS

Our cohort includes 37 consecutive patients who underwent revisional LRYGB because of unsatisfactory weight loss or weight regain matched in a 1:2 ratio with 74 control patients who underwent primary LRYGB. Matching included the following parameters: age, gender, preoperative body mass index and comorbidities (diabetes, obstructive sleep apnea, and hypertension).

RESULTS

The revisional group had longer length of stay compared with the primary group (3.8 vs. 2.4 days, P = 0.02) and a higher conversion to laparotomy rate (10.8 vs. 0 %, P = 0.01). The revisional group had a higher 30-day morbidity compared with the primary group (27 vs. 8.1 %, P = 0.02). There were no deaths in both groups. The two groups had similar 30-day readmission and 30 day reoperation rates. At 3, 6, and 12 months of follow-up, the revisional LRYGB group had significantly lower percent of excess weight loss (EWL) than the primary LRYGB group (3 months, 30 vs. 38.4, P = 0.001; 6 months, 36.3 vs. 52.9, P = 0.001; 12 months, 46.5 vs. 68.2, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Revisional LRYGB is characterized by lower EWL and higher morbidity than primary LRYGB. However, our data suggest that revisional LRYGB is still capable of providing significant weight loss in these high-risk patients.

Revision of failed bariatric procedures to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB)

Bariatric surgery for morbid obesity has been established as an effective treatment method and has been shown to be associated with resolution of co-morbidities. Despite its success, some patients may require revision because of weight regain or mechanical complications. From September 2005 to December 2009, 42 patients underwent revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). All procedures were performed by one surgeon. Demographics, indications for revision, complications, and weight loss were reviewed. Thirty-seven patients were treated with laparoscopic (n = 36) or open (n = 1) RYGB after failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding. Four patient were treated with laparoscopic (n = 3) or open (n-1) RYGB after failed vertical banded gastroplasty, and one patient underwent open redo RYGB due to large gastric pouch. Conversion rate from laparoscopy to open surgery was 2.5% (one patient). Mean operative time was 145.83 ± 35.19 min, and hospital stay was 3.36 ± 1.20 days. There was no mortality. Early and late complications occurred in six patients (14.2%). The mean follow-up was 15.83 ± 13.43 months. Mean preoperative body mass index was 45.15 ± 7.95 that decreased to 35.23 ± 6.7, and mean percentage excess weight loss was 41.19 ± 20.22 after RYGB within our follow-up period. RYGB as a revisional bariatric procedure is effective to treat complications of restrictive procedures and to further reduce weight in morbidly obese patients.

Indications, safety, and feasibility of conversion of failed bariatric surgery to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a retrospective comparative study with primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

BACKGROUND

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is considered the "gold standard" revision procedure. The purpose of this study was to compare the surgical outcome of primary laparoscopic RYGB (pLRYGB) to revisional open or laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery (rRYGB).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent pLRYGB or rRYGB from January 2003 to December 2009 has been performed. Demographics, indications for revision, and complications have been reviewed. The rRYGB and pLRYGB patients have been compared.

RESULTS

Seventy-two patients underwent rRYGB, and 652 patients underwent pLRYGB. Mean follow-up was 35 and 45 months, respectively. Fifty-six rRYGB procedures were performed laparoscopically. The primary operations had consisted of laparoscopic gastric banding (n = 28), laparoscopic vertical banded gastroplasty (n = 19), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (n = 6), laparoscopic RYGB (n = 3), and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (n = 16). Indications included weight regain (n = 29), malabsorption (n = 16), gastrogastric fistula (n = 5), band-associated problems (n = 3), and refractory stomal ulceration (n = 1). There was no significant difference in early or late postoperative complications when comparing rRYGB to pLRYGBP patients (11.1% vs. 5.52%, P = 0.069 and 19.4% vs. 24.2%, P = 0.465 respectively). Five rRYGB patients (7.04%) required reintervention (3 internal hernias, 1 ventral hernia, 1 laparoscopic exploration) compared with 101 pLRYGB patients (15.71%; P = 0.051). None of the patients died. Mean hospital stay was not significantly longer in the rRYGB group (5.38 vs. 4.95 days, P = 0.058).

CONCLUSIONS

In our series, hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality of rRYGB were not significantly higher compared with pLRYGB. Furthermore, we believe that this type of revisional bariatric surgery should be performed in high-volume bariatric centers.

Endoscopic solutions for weight loss

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Gastroenterologists will likely play a critical role in the treatment of obesity and its comorbidities, as novel endoluminal approaches demonstrate their safety and efficacy over the coming years. Understanding the relative advantages and shortcomings of the endoscopic tools and procedures currently under investigation will provide the gastroenterologist with valuable insight into the future of endoscopic procedures for weight loss.

RECENT FINDINGS

Endoscopic restrictive procedures, intestinal sleeves, and intragastric balloons have demonstrated short-term efficacy in inducing weight reduction and in reversing the comorbidities of obesity with an acceptable risk profile. Several endoscopic tools have also demonstrated effectiveness as revisional tools for reversing weight gain after bariatric surgery.

SUMMARY

A plethora of endoscopic tools and procedures are under investigation for primary and revisional obesity management, and these may offer new weight loss options to a variety of different patient populations.

Laparoscopic "gastrojejunal sleeve reduction" as a revision procedure for weight loss failure after roux-en-y gastric bypass

BACKGROUND

Weight regain after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is increasingly reported in the bariatric literature. Laparoscopic sleeve reduction of the gastrojejunal complex is a surgical option to revise a dilated gastric pouch. We report our short-term results.

METHODS

Sleeve reduction entails serial firing of a linear stapler along the jejunal alimentary limb, across the gastric pouch and towards the left crus, with a bougie in place, thus, creating a new 20-25-cm reduced gastrojejunal complex. Data analyzed included age, body mass index (BMI), excess weight loss (EWL), comorbidity resolution, and any other simultaneous operative procedures.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients were identified, all done laparoscopically. Nine underwent gastrojejunal sleeve reduction alone and five underwent additional lengthening of the Roux limb. There were no mortalities. Mean age at revision was 43 years (31-59). Mean BMI and EWL prior to revision were 35.5 ± 4.0 kg/m² and 48.9 ± 15.8%, respectively. Nine of 14 patients (64%) had obesity-related comorbidities prior to the revision. Average BMI decrease was 2.7 kg/m². Post-revision mean BMI and %EWL were 32.9 ± 4.7 kg/m² and 12.0 ± 13.9%, respectively, with mean follow-up of 12 months. Three of nine patients (33%) experienced improvement and/or resolution of comorbidities. We did not find a significant difference between pre-and post-revision mean BMI and %EWL (p = 0.13) even after separately evaluating those patients who underwent Roux limb lengthening (p = 0.16).

CONCLUSION

For RYGB patients who regained weight, laparoscopic gastrojejunal sleeve reduction does not seem to offer a major therapeutic benefit. Additional malabsorptive Roux lengthening also does not provide a significant benefit. Other options should be considered, such as placing a band on the gastric pouch or conversion to duodenal switch.

Abdominal pain after gastric bypass: suspects and solutions

BACKGROUND

Gastric bypass remains the mainstay of surgical therapy for obesity. Abdominal pain after gastric bypass is common and accounts for up to half of all postoperative complaints and emergency room visits. This article reviews the most important causes of abdominal pain specific to gastric bypass and discusses management considerations.

METHODS

The current surgical literature was reviewed using PubMed, with a focus on abdominal pain after gastric bypass and the known pathologies that underlie its pathogenesis.

RESULTS

The etiologies of abdominal pain after gastric bypass are diverse. A thorough understanding of their pathogenesis impacts favorably on clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The differential diagnosis for abdominal pain after gastric bypass is large and includes benign and life-threatening entities. Its diverse causes require a broad evaluation that should be directed by history and clinical presentation. In the absence of a clear diagnosis, the threshold for surgical exploration in patients with abdominal pain after gastric bypass should be low.

Laparoscopic revision of vertical banded gastroplasty to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: outcomes of 105 patients

BACKGROUND

Although vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) was endorsed by the 1991 National Institutes of Health Consensus Conference for the treatment of morbid obesity, it has largely been abandoned owing to the poor long-term weight loss and band-related complications. The objective of the present study was to review the outcomes of patients who had undergone laparoscopic conversion of VBG to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for weight loss or dysphagia and gastroesophageal reflux.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data from all patients who had undergone revision of VBG to RYGB was performed. The data on the symptoms, weight loss, co-morbidities, and complications were collected.

RESULTS

From July 1999 to April 2010, 2397 bariatric procedures were performed. Of these, 105 (4.4%) were laparoscopic revisions of previous VBG to RYGB. Of the 105 patients, 103 had undergone open VBG and 2 laparoscopic VBG. Of the 105 patients, 97 were women and 8 were men. The average patient age was 49 years (range 23-71). The median preoperative body mass index was 42 kg/m(2) (range 20-72). Short- and long-term complications occurred in 40 patients (38%). No patients died. The median length of stay was 2 days. At an average follow-up of 31 months (range 1-96), the median percentage of excess weight loss was 47% (range -24% to 138%). The median decrease in body mass index was 8 kg/m(2) (range -6 to 30). Dysphagia had improved or resolved in 100%. Gastroesophageal reflux disease had improved or resolved in 95%. Diabetes had improved or went into remission in 90%. Hypertension had improved or resolved in 62%. Obstructive sleep apnea had improved or resolved in 96%.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study have shown that laparoscopic revision of VBG to RYGB is a feasible procedure that can provide acceptable weight loss and reversal of weight-related co-morbidities. Complications were common after revisional bariatric surgery.

Midterm results for gastric banding as salvage procedure for patients with weight loss failure after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

BACKGROUND

Studies reporting the revisionary options for weight loss failure after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) have been complex, underpowered, and lacking long-term data. We have previously shown that short-term (12-month) weight loss is achievable with laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) for failed RYGB. To report the midterm outcomes of LAGB after RYGB failure.

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively collected data before and after RYGB, when available, and before and after LAGB was performed at the New York Langone University Hospital (New York, NY). The data collected included weight, height, body mass index (BMI), gender, race, age, operative time, length of stay, postoperative complications, and the percentage of excess weight loss.

RESULTS

A total of 43 patients (9 men and 34 women) underwent LAGB after weight loss failure with RYGB. Of the 43 patients, 27 patients had undergone RYGB at other institutions, and preoperative RYGB data were available for 23 total patients. The average interval to LAGB was 6.6 years. The mean BMI before RYGB was 50.4 kg/m(2) and before LAGB was 43.3 kg/m(2) (%EWL was 17% after RYGB). At follow-up after LAGB, the average BMI was 35.2 kg/m(2), with a %EWL of 38% (calculated from LAGB only) at 26 months (range 6-66). At the 1- and 2-year follow-up visit, the BMI had decreased by 8.7 kg/m(2). The reoperation rate for complications related to LAGB was 10% and included 2 band erosions, 1 band slip, and 1 port flip.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study have shown that LAGB had good midterm data as a revisionary procedure for weight loss failure after RYGB.

Revisional bariatric surgery: who, what, where, and when?

BACKGROUND

Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) outcomes have been poorly characterized. We compared the RBS and primary bariatric surgery (PBS) outcomes at the Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center in the United States.

METHODS

A total of 72 RBS cases from 2000 to 2007 were reviewed and grouped by indication: failure of weight loss, gastrojejunal complications, or other. The RBS patients were compared with the 856 PBS patients who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The mean follow-up time was 12.6 ± 1.2 months for the RBS group and 16 ± 0.5 months for the PBS group. Weight loss was analyzed as the kilograms lost and patients with ≥ 50% excess body weight loss (EBWL). Outcomes included mortality, leaks, surgical site infections, and length of stay.

RESULTS

The weight loss was 23 ± 2.8 kg after RBS and 41.3 ± 0.7 kg after PBS (P <.05 versus PBS). The post-RBS weight loss varied by surgical indication: failure of weight loss, 27.1 ± 2 kg; gastrojejunal complications, 8.7 ± 3.4 kg; and other 23.5 ± 10.6 kg. Also, 29% of the RBS patients had ≥ 50% excess body weight loss (versus the prerevision weight) and 61% (versus the initial weight) compared with 52.7% after PBS. Only age ≤ 50 years was associated with ≥ 50% excess body weight loss after RBS for the failure of weight loss group. No RBS patients died. However, leaks, surgical site infections, and length of stay were increased after RBS.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study have shown that weight loss after RBS varies with the surgical indication and is affected by age >50 years. Although the RBS patients had decreased weight loss and increased complications compared with the PBS patients, ≥ 50% EBWL was achieved by a significant number of RBS patients.

Prospective single-site case series utilizing an endolumenal tissue anchoring system for revision of post-RYGB stomal and pouch dilatation

INTRODUCTION

Interventional therapy for weight regain after gastric bypass surgery has been tempered by higher complications associated with revisional surgery. Endolumenal reduction of post-bypass stomal and pouch dilatation offers the promise of a safer approach. Questions still remain regarding safety and efficacy with these procedures. We report intra- and postoperative results to date utilizing an endolumenal suturing platform for this patient subset.

METHODS

Patients who had regained significant weight 2+ years after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) after losing ≥ 50% of excess body weight (EBW) post RYGB underwent endolumenal stomal and pouch reduction if they endoscopically displayed post-bypass stomal and/or pouch dilatation. The platform was utilized to endolumenally reduce stoma size by creating circumferential folds with a tissue anchoring system. Anchors were also utilized to approximate gastric pouch tissue. Information regarding patient baseline status and data on procedural safety, intraoperative performance, postoperative weight loss, and anchor durability were recorded to date with use of this system.

RESULTS

In 20/21 subjects we were able to successfully place anchors (one patient had occult G-G fistula which impaired visualization). Weight regain post RYGB averaged 59 lbs (N = 20). Stomal diameter was reduced on average by 53%, with pouch reduction averaging 41%. The number of anchors placed on average per case was 5.3. Operating room (OR) time averaged 91 min. There were no significant complications. Three- and 12-month esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) results revealed preservation of most of the intraoperative stoma and pouch reduction, and presence of fibrotic tissue folds with continued presence of anchors at their original locations. Mean percentage excess weight loss (%EWL) at 6 months was 18% to date (N = 18). Mean weight loss at 6 months was 17.3 ± 15 lbs.

CONCLUSION

Clinical study of this endolumenal tissue approximation system has shown intraoperative safety and efficacy in reducing stoma and pouch dilatation post RYGB. Follow-up anchor durability to date is encouraging. Continuing weight loss is being tracked through ongoing endoscopic and clinical follow-up.

Bariatric Revisionary Surgery for Failed or Complicated Vertical Banded Gastroplasty (VBG): Comparison of VBG Reoperation (re-VBG) versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass-on-VBG (RYGB-on-VBG)

Background. Revision of failed bariatric procedures is a significant challenge for bariatric surgeons, because of the increasing number of recurring morbid obesity or complications, especially in patients with a previous Vertical Banded Gastroplasty (VBG). Methods. Since November 1998, 109 patients with failed or complicated VBG were followed in a retrospective study. 49 patients underwent re-VBG and, since 2004, 60 underwent Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass-on-Vertical Banded Gastroplasty (RYGB-on-VBG). Results. At 3 years follow-up, mean BMI decreased from 37.4 to 31.2 Kg/m(2) in the first group, and from 35.0 to 28.4 Kg/m(2) in the second. Early complications were 7 (14.3%) in the first group and 4 (6.5%) in the second; late complications were 33 (59.1%) and 11 (18.3%), respectively. Conclusion. Although both operations seem to be effective as bariatric revision procedures in terms of BMI, the mid-term outcomes of RYGB-on-VBG demonstrate the lowest rate of complications and better quality of life.

American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The Obesity Society, and American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery medical guidelines for clinical practice for the perioperative nutritional, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of the bariatric surgery patient

American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The Obesity Society, and American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery Medical Guidelines for Clinical Practice are systematically developed statements to assist health-care professionals in medical decision making for specific clinical conditions. Most of the content herein is based on literature reviews. In areas of uncertainty, professional judgment was applied. These guidelines are a working document that reflects the state of the field at the time of publication. Because rapid changes in this area are expected, periodic revisions are inevitable. We encourage medical professionals to use this information in conjunction with their best clinical judgment. The presented recommendations may not be appropriate in all situations. Any decision by practitioners to apply these guidelines must be made in light of local resources and individual patient circumstances. The American Society for Parenteral & Enteral Nutrition fully endorses sections of these guidelines that address the metabolic and nutritional management of the bariatric surgical patient.

Clinical application of laparoscopic bariatric surgery: an evidence-based review

BACKGROUND

Approximately one-third of U.S. adults are obese. Current evidence suggests that surgical therapies offer the morbidly obese the best hope for substantial and sustainable weight loss, with a resultant reduction in morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive methods have altered the demand for bariatric procedures. However, no evidence-based clinical reviews yet exist to guide patients and surgeons in selecting the bariatric operation most applicable to a given situation.

METHODS

This evidenced-based review is presented in conjunction with a clinical practice guideline developed by the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES). References were reviewed by the authors and graded as to the level of evidence. Recommendations were developed and qualified by the level of supporting evidence available at the time of the associated SAGES guideline publication. The guideline also was reviewed and co-endorsed by the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.

RESULTS

Bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for severe obesity, producing durable weight loss, improvement of comorbid conditions, and longer life. Patient selection algorithms should favor individual risk-benefit considerations over traditional anthropometric and demographic limits. Bariatric care should be delivered within credentialed multidisciplinary systems. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RGB), adjustable gastric banding (AGB), and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD + DS) are validated procedures that may be performed laparoscopically. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) also is a promising procedure. Comparative data find that procedures with more dramatic clinical benefits carry greater risks, and those offering greater safety and flexibility are associated with less reliable efficacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic RGB, AGB, BPD + DS, and primary LSG have been proved effective. Currently, the choice of operation should be driven by patient and surgeon preferences, as well as by considerations regarding the relative importance placed on discrete outcomes.

Revision of vertical banded gastroplasty complicated by a large para-esophageal hernia

Patients who have undergone bariatric surgery and present with upper abdominal symptoms pose a diagnostic and management challenge. This is a case report of a 53-year-old lady who presented a number of years after vertical banded gastroplasty with upper abdominal pain and weight gain. Radiological investigation demonstrated a large para-esophageal hernia including the stapled area of the stomach, but with a staple-line dehiscence. She successfully underwent repair of the hiatus hernia and conversion to a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass resulting in resolution of the abdominal pain and weight loss.

Revisional bariatric surgery

BACKGROUND

Revisional surgery is required in a significant number of patients because of failure to lose weight, loss of quality of life, weight regain, or complications of the previous procedure. It has traditionally been associated with higher complication rates, and there appears to be no standardized surgical approach to revisional surgery. The aim of the study was to review the revisional procedures performed at St George Private Hospital and analyze the outcomes of the different types of revisional surgery.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 75 patients who underwent revisional surgery between December 2003 and October 2007. Demographic, anthropometric, perioperative, and clinical follow-up data were collected, and statistical analyses were performed using SPSS version 14.0.

RESULTS

Sixty-six of the 75 patients were female. The mean age at the time of revision was 46.32 (22-68) years. Mean initial weight was 119.08 kg, and body mass index (BMI) was 43.42 kg/m(2). The lowest BMI and excess weight loss (EWL) recorded after primary surgery was 36.9% and 53.5%, respectively. At the time of revision, the mean EWL was 24.79. The EWL at 3 months and 6 months were 41.7% and 47.8%, respectively. Revision was performed laparoscopically in 51 patients and via laparotomy in 24 patients. There was no mortality in the cohort, but there were 17.3% minor and 4.0% major perioperative morbidities.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that revision can be performed safely. Weight loss is satisfactory, and complications of the previous operations were all reversed. Furthermore, revisions may be done laparoscopically, including those who had previous open procedures.

American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The Obesity Society, and American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery Medical Guidelines for Clinical Practice for the perioperative nutritional, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of the bariatric surgery patient

American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The Obesity Society, and American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery Medical Guidelines for Clinical Practice are systematically developed statements to assist healthcare professionals in medical decision making for specific clinical conditions. Most of the content herein is based on literature reviews. In areas of uncertainty, professional judgment was applied. These guidelines are a working document that reflects the state of the field at the time of publication. Because rapid changes in this area are expected, periodic revisions are inevitable. We encourage medical professionals to use this information in conjunction with their best clinical judgment. The presented recommendations may not be appropriate in all situations. Any decision by practitioners to apply these guidelines must be made in light of local resources and individual patient circumstances. The American Society for Parenteral & Enteral Nutrition fully endorses sections of these guidelines that address the metabolic and nutritional management of the bariatric surgical patient.

Small bowel bypass as treatment for functional gastric obstruction

Multiple bariatric operations performed on the same patient can cause loss of normal peristaltic function of the stomach. Bariatric revisions, especially when combined with previous truncal vagotomy, can lead to functional gastric obstruction. These patients complain of severe nausea and intractable vomiting. This can cause excessive weight loss and malnutrition, requiring at times total parenteral nutrition (TPN) or forms of enteral feeding. These patients frequently require a total or subtotal gastric resection with an esophago-jejunal anastomosis to relieve symptoms. We present two patients with a functional gastric obstruction treated by a small bowel bypass, which successfully relieved all symptoms of obstruction and allowed normal food intake.