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

INTRODUCTION

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Less precise motor control leads to increased agonist-antagonist muscle activation during stick balancing

Human motor control has constraints in terms of its responsiveness, which limit its ability to successfully perform tasks. In a previous study, it was shown that the ability to balance an upright stick became progressively more challenging as the natural frequency (angular velocity without control) of the stick increased. Furthermore, forearm and trunk agonist and antagonist muscle activation increased as the natural frequency of the stick increased, providing evidence that the central nervous system produces agonist-antagonist muscle activation to match task dynamics. In the present study, visual feedback of the stick position was influenced by changing where subject focused on the stick during stick balancing. It was hypothesized that a lower focal height would degrade motor control (more uncertainty in tracking stick position), thus making balancing more challenging. The probability of successfully balancing the stick at four different focal heights was determined along with the average angular velocity of the stick. Electromyographic signals from forearm and trunk muscles were also recorded. As expected, the probability of successfully balancing the stick decreased and the average angular velocity of the stick increased as subjects focused lower on the stick. In addition, changes in the level of agonist and antagonist muscle activation in the forearm and trunk was linearly related to changes in the angular velocity of the stick during balancing. One possible explanation for this is that the central nervous system increases muscle activation to account for less precise motor control, possibly to improve the responsiveness of human motor control.

Limits in motor control bandwidth during stick balancing

Why can we balance a yardstick but not a pencil on the tip of our finger? As with other physical systems, human motor control has constraints, referred to as bandwidth, which restricts the range of frequency over which the system can operate within some tolerated level of error. To investigate control bandwidth, the natural frequency of a stick used during a stick-balancing task was modified by adjusting the height of a mass attached to the stick. The ability to successfully balance the stick with the mass positioned at four different heights was determined. In addition, electromyographic signals from forearm and trunk muscles were recorded during the trials. We hypothesized that 1) the probability of successfully balancing would decrease as mass height decreased; and 2) the level of muscle activation in both agonist and antagonist would increase as the natural frequency of the stick increased. Results showed that as the mass height decreased the probability of successfully balancing the stick decreased. Changes in the probability of success with respect to mass height showed a threshold effect, suggesting that limits in human control bandwidth were approached at the lowest mass height. Also, the level of muscle activation in both the agonist and antagonist of the forearm and trunk increased linearly as the natural frequency of the stick increased. These changes in muscle activation suggest that the central nervous system adapts muscle activation to task dynamics, possibly to improve control bandwidth.