Comparison of Outcomes Between Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy in a Lebanese Bariatric Surgical Practice

Purpose

Long-term studies on the outcomes of bariatric surgery are still limited in the Middle East. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) up to 5 years of follow-up.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent LRYGB and LSG was performed. The primary outcome was weight loss. Postoperative complications, operative time, and hospital length of stay were secondary outcomes.

Results

Four hundred patients underwent primary LSG and 175 patients underwent LRYGB between 2008 and 2013. Follow-up rates at 5 years were around 60%. Percent total weight loss was similar after 3, 4, and 5 years in both groups, averaging around 28%. Mean percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) at 5 years was 72.0 ± 31.0% in the LSG group vs. 63.0 ± 21.0% in the LRYGB group (p = 0.03). Patients undergoing LRYGB had a significantly longer operative time as well as a longer hospital stay. No significant difference was found in the rates of short- and long-term complications between the two groups. However, patients undergoing LRYGB were more likely to develop small intestinal obstruction and iron-deficiency anemia.

Conclusions

Both LSG and LRYGB result in satisfactory weight loss within 5 years. Patients’ comorbidities and potential risks must be included in the choice of the appropriate bariatric procedure. LSG appears to give durable weight loss with less risk of major long-term complications.

     

Characterizing Readmissions After Bariatric Surgery

Introduction

Readmissions are an important quality metric for surgery. Here, we compare characteristics of readmissions across laparoscopic Roux­en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and adjustable gastric band (LAGB).

Methods

Demographic, intraoperative, anthropometric, and laboratory data were prospectively obtained for 1775 patients at a single academic institution. All instances of readmissions within 1 year were recorded. Data were analyzed using STATA, release 12.

Results

For the 1775 patients, 113 (6.37 %) were readmitted. Mean time to readmission was 52.1 days. Of all the readmissions, 64.6 % were within 30 days, 22.1 % from 30 to 90 days, 1.77 % from 90 to 180 days, and 11.5 % from 180 to 365 days. Incidence of 30-day readmissions varied across surgeries (LRYGB: 7.17 %; LAGB: 3.05 %; LSG: 4.25 %, p?=?0.04). Time to readmission varied as well, with 90.0 % of LSG and 80.0 % of LABG patients within the first 30 days, versus 60.8 % of LRYGB (p?=?0.02). The most common causes of readmissions were gastrointestinal issues related to index procedure (34.5 %) and did not vary across surgeries. In multivariable logistic regression, index hospital length of stay (LOS) was associated with readmission (OR?=?1.07, 95 % CI 1.02–1.13, p?=?0.01).

Conclusions

Readmissions after bariatric surgery are associated with high index hospital LOS, and a measureable proportion of procedure-related readmissions can occur up to 1 year, especially for LRYGB.

     

Not All Leaks Are Created Equal: a Comparison Between Leaks After Sleeve Gastrectomy and Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass

Introduction

It is commonly stated in bariatric surgical forums that leaks following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) are more difficult to manage than those following laparoscopic roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). However, no previous study has provided a thorough comparison of leak management following these two operations.

Methods

Our database was retrospectively reviewed to identify patients with leak following LSG and LRYGB performed between January 2007 and December 2017.

Results

Postoperative leak was diagnosed in 16/2132 (0.75%) LSG and 9/595 (1.5%) LRYGB patients. More of the LRYGB leaks had undergone revisional surgeries (66.7 vs. 6.3%, p?<?0.001), and were diagnosed in the index admission (77.8 vs. 18.7%, p?=?0.002). The mean time between the bariatric operation and the diagnosis of leak was 6.0 days in LRYGB and 26.2 days in LSG patients (p?=?0.097). Approximately two thirds of each group were initially treated with laparoscopic exploration and drainage. Subsequent endoscopy was utilized more commonly in LSG patients (87.5 vs. 22.2%, p?<?0.001). Drainage alone (laparoscopic or percutaneous) eventually led to leak resolution in more LRYGB patients (66.7 vs. 18.8%, p?=?0.02), while endoscopic intervention led to resolution in more LSG patients (37.5 vs. 0%, p?=?0.04). The mean time between leak diagnosis and its resolution was 57.8 and 44.2 days, for LSG and LRYGB patients, respectively.

Conclusion

The diagnosis of leak tends to be earlier in LRYGB patients. Endoscopic therapies are more frequently required in the management of leaks following LSG, while in those following LRYGB, drainage alone leads to resolution of leak in the majority of cases.

     

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients have an increased lifetime risk of repeat operations when compared to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy patients

Background

Although long-term data have been published on the complications after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is a relatively new procedure without a well-established long-term procedure-related morbidity profile. Our aim was to compare the 6-year data on re-operations occurring after and related to LRYGB versus LSG at a large academic bariatric center.

Methods

Retrospective review of all the bariatric procedures at the Massachusetts General Hospital between 2009 and 2014.

Results

A total of 934 LRYGB and 553 LSG were performed. There were no significant differences in the gender, age, or BMI of the patients at the time of their index operations (p > 0.05 for all). A higher percentage of LRYGB patients required cholecystectomy as compared to LSG patients (5 vs. 2 %, X ² = 8.63, p < 0.01). There was also a significant difference in the proportion of patients requiring re-operations for other reasons following LRYGB as compared to LSG (6.9 vs. 0.9 %, X ² = 27.8, p < 0.01). A total of 32.8 % of these bypass patients underwent more than one re-operation, with a relative risk of 11.5 (95 % CI 4.69–28.5) as compared to those undergoing SG. A total of 9.3 % of secondary operations occurred at a mean of 1 month after the LRYGB for functional obstruction, with most of these cases related to a technical error. Other re-operations occurred in a delayed fashion, without a clearly identifiable intra-abdominal source in 22.2 %, due to adhesive bowel obstruction in 17.6 %, and internal hernia in 15.7 %. Non-healing ulcers and intussusception were responsible for a small percentage of re-operations (3.7 and 2.8 %).

Conclusions

SG is associated with a relatively low rate of re-operations, while patients after LRYGB are at a significant long-term risk for multiple operative procedures.

     

Impact of the Surgical Experience on Leak Rate After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

Introduction

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become one of the most commonly performed bariatric procedures, largely due to several advantages it carries over more complex bariatric procedures. LSG is generally considered a straightforward procedure, but one of the major concerns is a staple line leak.

Objective

The objectives of this study are to evaluate the correlation between surgeon’s experience and leak rate and to assess the different risk factors for developing a gastric leak after LSG.Setting: Private hospital, France.

Methods

The analysis of a single surgeon’s yearly leak rate since the introduction of LSG for possible risk factors was done.

Results

A total of 2012 LSGs were performed in between September, 2005 and December, 2014. Twenty cases (1 %) of gastric leak were recorded. Of these, 17 patients were women (94.4 %) with a mean age of 39.4 years (range 22–61) and mean body mass index (BMI) 41.2 kg/m² (range 34.8–57.1). On a yearly basis, the leak rate was 4.8 % (2006), 5.7 % (2007), 0 (2008), 2.6 % (2009), 2 % (2010), 0.8 % (2011), 0.6 % (2012), 0.2 % (2013), and 0 (2014). In the first 1000 cases (group A), there were 18 cases of gastric leak and in the last 1000 cases, there were 800 with GORE® SEAMGUARD® Bioabsorbable Staple Line Reinforcement (group B) 2 cases of gastric leak (p?=?0.009). A revisional LSG, 395 patients after gastric banding and 61 patients re-sleeve gastrectomy, was performed in 456 cases (22.7 %). There were 3 cases of leak (0.65 %). There were two deaths.

Conclusion

LSG can be performed with a low complication rate. This large series of a single surgeon’s experience demonstrated that the leak rate after LSG could be significantly decreased over time with changes in techniques.

     

Bariatric Surgery in the Elderly Is Associated with Similar Surgical Risks and Significant Long-Term Health Benefits

Purpose

Older age (>?60) has been considered a relative contraindication for bariatric surgery due to increased complication risk. This study examined the risks and benefits of bariatric surgery for patients older than 60 years in Canadian population.

Methods

This was a retrospective cohort study of the Ontario Bariatric Registry: a database recording peri-operative and post-operative outcomes of publicly funded bariatric surgeries across the province. Patients who completed 1 year follow-up, who underwent laparoscopic gastric bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) between January 2010 and May 2013, were divided into older (>?60) and younger (>?60) cohorts, and outcomes were compared.

Results

Between January 2010 and May 2013, 3166 registry patients underwent LRYGB or LSG and completed 1-year follow-up. Of these, 204 (6.5%) were older than 60 years, with 175 (85.8%) undergoing LRYGB and 29 (14.2%) LSG. Demographics were similar, except for a higher number of males in the older group (59 (28.9%) versus 452 (15.3%) (p?<?0.001)). No significant difference in complication rate was noted (15% for younger cohort versus 13.8% (p?=?0.889)). The average percentage of excess weight loss was significantly higher in the younger population (60.72% versus 56.25% (p?<?0.05)) overall, however not significantly in the LSG group. Reduction in medication use post-surgery for management of co-morbidities was significantly higher in the older patients (??0.91 versus ??2.03 (p?<?0.001)).

Conclusion

The older cohort who underwent LRYGB or LSG was at no greater risk for intra-operative and post-operative complications and showed greater reduction in medication use post-surgery when compared to the younger cohort.

     

The Association Between Preoperative Symptoms of Obesity in Knee and Hip Joints and the Change in Quality of Life After Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

Background

Weight loss after bariatric surgery is shown to reduce knee and hip pain in the majority of the severely obese. Studies indicate that with a reduction in musculoskeletal symptoms, quality of life (QoL) will improve. The group of severely obese with knee and hip symptoms might therefore have potential for a large improvement in QoL after a bariatric surgery. This study aimed therefore to assess the association between the degree of knee and hip symptoms before a laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and the improvement of QoL, 1 year after the surgery, in severely obese.

Methods

This study is a historical cohort study based on data collected consecutively at the private hospital Mølholm, Denmark. Before LRYGB surgery, 4548 severely obese completed a questionnaire on knee and hip symptoms of obesity and QoL. One year after surgery, 2862 (62.9 %) of the participants answered the same questionnaire again.

Results

Participants with moderate or severe knee or hip symptoms, before the surgery, experienced a statistically significantly larger improvement of their QoL, compared to participants without symptoms before the surgery. Furthermore, an association between the reduction of knee and hip symptoms and the improvement in QoL was found.

Conclusions

Severely obese with moderate or severe preoperative knee and hip symptoms experienced a larger improvement of their QoL after a LRYGB compared to participants without symptoms before the operation.

     

Redo Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass: One-Step or Two-Step Procedure?

Background

The adjustable gastric band (AGB) is a bariatric procedure that used to be widely performed. However, AGB failure—signifying band-related complications or unsatisfactory weight loss, resulting in revision surgery (redo operations)—frequently occurs. Often this entails a conversion to a laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). This can be performed as a one-step or two-step (separate band removal) procedure.

Methods

Data were collected from patients operated from 2012 to 2014 in a single bariatric centre. We compared 107 redo LRYGB after AGB failure with 1020 primary LRYGB. An analysis was performed of the one-step vs. two-step redo procedures. All redo procedures were performed by experienced bariatric surgeons.

Results

No difference in major complication rate was seen (2.8 vs. 2.3 %, p?=?0.73) between redo and primary LRYGB, and overall complication severity for redos was low (mainly Clavien–Dindo 1 or 2). Weight loss results were comparable for primary and redo procedures. The one-step and two-step redos were comparable regarding complication rates and readmissions. The operating time for the one-step redo LRYGB was 136 vs. 107.5 min for the two-step (median, p?<?0.001), excluding the operating time of separate AGB removal (mean 61 min, range 36–110).

Conclusions

Removal of a failed AGB and LRYGB in a one-step procedure is safe when performed by experienced bariatric surgeons. However, when erosion or perforation of the AGB occurs, we advise caution and would perform the redo LRYGB as a two-step procedure. Equal weights can be achieved at 1 year post redo LRYGB as after primary LRYGB procedures.

     

Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy on Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy in Morbidly Obese Patients

Background

In bariatric surgery, there are no guidelines available for intraoperative fluid administration. Goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) is a new concept of perioperative fluid management that has been shown to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing abdominal surgery. The aim of our study is to assess the impact of the implementation of a GDFT protocol in morbidly obese patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

Methods

A before-after intervention study, in morbidly obese patients who underwent LSG, was conducted at the Obesity Unit of the General University Hospital Elche. Data from the GDFT implementation group (January 2014 to December 2015) were prospectively collected and compared with a preimplementation group (January 2012 to December 2013).

Results

Baseline demographic and comorbidity data between the two groups of patients were similar. The length of stay in the hospital was significantly shortened in GDFT group from 4.5 to 3.44 days (p?<?0.001). Intraoperative fluid administration was significantly lower in the GDFT group (1002.4 vs 1687.2 ml in preimplementation group, p?<?0.001). In the postoperative period, there was a statistically significant reduction in postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after GDFT implementation (48 to 14.3 %, p?<?0.001).

Conclusions

Implementation of GDFT protocols can prevent intraoperative fluid overload in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. It could improve outcomes, for example decreasing PONV or even hospital stay.

     

Prevalence of Cholelithiasis and Choledocholithiasis in Morbidly Obese South Indian Patients and the Further Development of Biliary Calculus Disease After Sleeve Gastrectomy,Gastric Bypass and Mini Gastric Bypass

Background

Evaluation of the prevalance of cholelithiasis, choledocholithiasis and there management after sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass and mini gastric bypass in Indian bariatric patients.

Methods

We did a retrospective analysis of our bariatric patient from January 2007 to December 2013 (n?=?1397), for prevalence of cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis. We did synchronous cholecystectomy in all patients planned for bariatric surgery found to have cholelithiasis on USG. Post-operatively, we followed all the patients with gallbladder in situ for minimum of 18–88 months (mean ?32.4) and reviewed data for subsequent development of cholelithiasis/choledocholithiasis. Only those patients who were symptomatic underwent intervention.

Results

Prevalence of cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis in our study was 21.76 and 9.63 %, respectively. The incidence of post-bariatric surgery development of cholelithiasis was 10.53 %; individually, it was 8.42 % in LSG group, 13.4 % in LRYGB group and 12.7 % in MGB patients. The incidence of symptomatic cholelithiasis requiring surgery was 1.94 % after LSG, 4.54 % after LRYGB and 4.25 % after MGB. Post-surgery, six patients developed choledocholithiasis. In our post-bariatric group, the 33 patients who developed symptomatic stones had percentage total weight loss of 30.99?+?4.1 (P?<?0.001). The average time period for readmission of symptomatic patient was 11.26?+?2.67 months.

Conclusions

We recommend routine synchronous cholecystectomy with bariatric procedure. In spite of synchronous cholecystectomy, incidence of cholelithiasis in our post-bariatric patient is 10.53 % of which up to one third were symptomatic and required surgery, and incidence of choledocholithiasis is comparable to that of general population.

     

Fully Ambulatory Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: 328 Consecutive Patients in a Single Tertiary Bariatric Center

Background

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is becoming one of the most popular bariatric procedures because of its short operative time, good resolution of comorbidities, excellent weight loss, and low complications rate. However, the safety of LSG as a day-surgery procedure has not yet been widely documented.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected bariatric database, in a single institution, between August 2012 and February 2015, yielded 980 patients who underwent LSG; 328 patients (33.5 %) responded to established criteria and were operated on a 1-day surgery basis (length of stay?<?12 h).

Results

There were 258 (78 %) primary LSG and 70 revisional LSG (22 %) performed on 284 females and 44 males, with a mean age (±SD) of 38?±?9 years. Mean (±SD) preoperative body mass index (BMI) was 45?±?6 kg/m². Operative time was 68?±?17 min (mean?±?SD). There were no deaths. A total of 322 patients (98.2 %) were discharged home the day of surgery. There were 6 (1.8 %) unplanned overnight hospitalization, and 28 patients (8.5 %) were readmitted between days 1 and 30. Most patients (25/34, 73 %) were hospitalized for minor problems, such as pain, nausea, and/or vomiting. There were two cases of (0.6 %) gastric staple line leaks, three (0.9 %) of intra-abdominal hematomas, two (0.6 %) of pneumonia, one (0.3 %) of acute pancreatitis, and one (0.3 %) of urinary tract infection. All patients recovered well.

Conclusions

LSG can be performed as an outpatient procedure in selected patients, with acceptable results in terms of retention, readmission, and complication rates.

     

Increased Metabolic Benefit for Obese,Elderly Patients Undergoing Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass vs Sleeve Gastrectomy

Purpose

We sought to assess outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) vs laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) in a cohort of morbidly obese, elderly patients.

Materials and Methods

Retrospective review was conducted of all patients age 60 years or greater undergoing LSG or LRYGB at our institution between 2007 and 2014.

Results

A total of 134 patients who underwent LSG (n = 65) or LRYGB (n = 69) were identified. Groups were similar with respect to age (64 years, range 60–75 years), BMI (44.0 ± 6.1), and ASA score (91% ≥ ASA 3). There were no differences in major post-operative complications (3, 4.7% LSG vs 4, 5.8% LRYGB, p = 0.75). Median follow-up was 39 months (IQR 14–64 months) with no patients lost to follow-up. Patients undergoing LRYGB had improvement in each of diabetes mellitus 2 (DM2), hypertension (HTN), hyperlipidemia (HL), and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) as well as a significant decrease in insulin use (16/47, 34.0% pre-operatively vs 7/47, 15.2% post-operatively; p = 0.03). Patients undergoing LSG had improvement in DM2 and HTN but not in HL or GERD; there was no reduction in insulin dependence. Weight loss was not significantly different between groups; mean percent total weight loss at 36 months was 26.9 ± 9.0% in the LSG group and 23.9 ± 9.3% in the LRYGB group, p = 0.24.

Conclusions

Both LSG and RYGB can be safely performed on morbidly obese, elderly adults. At intermediate follow-up, there is an increased metabolic benefit for elderly patients undergoing LRYGB over LSG.

     

Glycemic Control after Sleeve Gastrectomy and Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass in Obese Subjects with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Background

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) has weight-independent effects on glycemia in obese type 2 diabetic patients, whereas sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is less well characterized. This study aims to compare early weight-independent and later weight-dependent glycemic effects of LRYGB and LSG.

Methods

Eighteen LRYGB and 15 LSG patients were included in the study. Glucose, insulin, GLP-1, and GIP levels were monitored during a modified 30 g oral glucose tolerance test before surgery and 2 days, 3 weeks, and 12 months after surgery. Patients self-monitored glucose levels 2 weeks before and after surgery.

Results

Postoperative fasting blood glucose decreased similarly in both groups (LRYGB vs. SG; baseline—8.1?±?0.6 vs. 8.2?±?0.4 mmol/l, 2 days—7.8?±?0.5 vs. 7.4?±?0.3 mmol/l, 3 weeks—6.6?±?0.4 vs. 6.6?±?0.3 mmol/l, respectively, P <?0.01 vs. baseline for both groups; 12 months—6.6?±?0.4 vs. 5.9?±?0.4, respectively, P <?0.05 for LRYGB and P <?0.001 for LSG vs. baseline, P =?ns between the groups at all times). LSG, but not LRYGB, showed increased peak insulin levels 2 days postoperatively (mean?±?SEM; LSG +?58?±?14%, P <?0.01; LRYGB ??8?±?17%, P =?ns). GLP-1 levels increased similarly at 2 days, but were higher in LRYGB at 3 weeks (AUC; 7525?±?1258 vs. 4779?±?712 pmol?×?min, respectively, P <?0.05). GIP levels did not differ. Body mass index (BMI) decreased more after LRYGB than LSG (??10.1?±?0.9 vs. ??7.9?±?0.5 kg/m², respectively, P <?0.05).

Conclusion

LRYGB and LSG show very similar effects on glycemic control, despite lower GLP-1 levels and inferior BMI decrease after LSG.

     

Changes in Bile Acid Profile After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy are Associated with Improvements in Metabolic Profile and Fatty Liver Disease

Background

Bile acids (BA) modulate lipid and glucose metabolism in a feedback loop through production of fibroblast growth factor (FGF) 19 in the terminal ileum. Changes in BA after bariatric surgery may lead to improvements in the metabolic syndrome, including fatty liver disease. This study investigated the relationship between BA and metabolic and inflammatory profiles after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

Methods

Patients undergoing LSG had fasting blood samples taken pre-operatively and 6 months post-surgery. Liver injury was measured using cytokeratin (CK) 18 fragments. BA were measured using liquid chromatography tandem-mass spectrometry. FGF-19 was measured using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

Results

The study included 18 patients (12 females), with mean age 46.3 years (SEM?±?2.9) and BMI 60.1 kg/m² (±2.6). After 6 months, patients lost 39.8 kg (±3.1; p?<?0.001). Fourteen patients (78 %) had steatosis. FGF-19 increased from median 128.1 (IQR 89.4–210.1) to 177.1 (121.8–288.9, p?=?0.045) at 6 months. Although total BA did not change, primary glycine- and taurine-conjugated BA, cholic acid decreased, and secondary BA, glycine-conjugated urodeoxycholic acid increased over the study period. These changes are associated with reduction in insulin resistance, pro-inflammatory cytokines and CK-18 levels.

Conclusions

The profile of individual BA is altered after LSG. These changes occur in the presence of reductions in inflammatory cytokines and markers of liver injury. This study supports evidence from recent animal models that LSG may have an effect on fatty liver through changes in BA metabolism.

     

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Bariatric Surgery for Morbid Obesity

Background

In the USA, three types of bariatric surgeries are widely performed, including laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). However, few economic evaluations of bariatric surgery are published. There is also scarcity of studies focusing on the LSG alone. Therefore, this study is evaluating the cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery using LRYGB, LAGB, and LSG as treatment for morbid obesity.

Methods

A microsimulation model was developed over a lifetime horizon to simulate weight change, health consequences, and costs of bariatric surgery for morbid obesity. US health care prospective was used. A model was propagated based on a report from the first report of the American College of Surgeons. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained were used in the model. Model parameters were estimated from publicly available databases and published literature.

Results

LRYGB was cost-effective with higher QALYs (17.07) and cost ($138,632) than LSG (16.56 QALYs; $138,925), LAGB (16.10 QALYs; $135,923), and no surgery (15.17 QALYs; $128,284). Sensitivity analysis showed initial cost of surgery and weight regain assumption were very sensitive to the variation in overall model parameters. Across patient groups, LRYGB remained the optimal bariatric technique, except that with morbid obesity 1 (BMI 35–39.9 kg/m²) patients, LSG was the optimal choice.

Conclusion

LRYGB is the optimal bariatric technique, being the most cost-effective compared to LSG, LAGB, and no surgery options for most subgroups. However, LSG was the most cost-effective choice when initial BMI ranged between 35 and 39.9 kg/m².

     

Comparative Effectiveness of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy on Morbidly Obese,Super-Obese,and Super-Super Obese Patients for the Treatment of Morbid Obesity

Backgrounds

The management of super-super obese patients is challenging for bariatric surgeons. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is feasible as two-stage treatment for high-risk patients. However, its efficacy as a stand-alone procedure in super-super obese (SSO) patients is controversial. The study objective was to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of LSG in super-obese (SO) and SSO patients.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed of consecutive patients undergoing LSG. The patients were classified into three groups: morbidly obese (MO), SO, and SSO. The patients’ data, including each patient’s characteristics, body mass index (BMI), preoperative comorbidities, postoperative complications, the resolution of comorbidities, percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL), and total weight loss (%TWL) were compared between groups.

Results

Of the 186 patients, 163 (87.6%) were followed up for 41.2?±?7.3 months (range 33–54 months). The mean BMI was 52.6 kg/m². Eighty-three patients (50.9%) were MO, 52 (31.9%) were SO, and 28 (17.2%) were SSO. The groups were similar in terms of preoperative characteristics and postoperative complications. The mean %TWL were lower for the SSO group with no significant difference. The mean %TWL at 12, 24, 36, and 41.2 months postoperatively was 34.7, 34.4, 31.4, and 29.6% in SSO group, respectively. Also, the %EWL for the SSO group was significantly lower (48.3%) at the end of the follow-up period. However, the rate of significant improvement or complete resolution of comorbidities was similar in all groups.

Conclusion

Although %EWL was lower in the SSO group, LSG was a feasible and safe stand-alone bariatric surgical procedure for the resolution of comorbidities in MO, SO, and SSO patients.

     

Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty,Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy,and Laparoscopic Band for Weight Loss: How Do They Compare?

Background

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a novel endobariatric procedure. Initial studies demonstrated an association of ESG with weight loss and improvement of obesity-related comorbidities. Our aim was to compare ESG to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB).

Methods

We included 278 obese (BMI > 30) patients who underwent ESG (n = 91), LSG (n = 120), or LAGB (n = 67) at our tertiary care academic center. Primary outcome was percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Secondary outcome measures included adverse events (AE), length of stay (LOS), and readmission rate.

Results

At 12-month follow-up, LSG achieved the greatest %TBWL compared to LAGB and ESG (29.28 vs 13.30 vs 17.57%, respectively; p < 0.001). However, ESG had a significantly lower rate of morbidity when compared to LSG or LAGB (p = 0.01). The LOS was significantly less for ESG compared to LSG or LAGB (0.34 ± 0.73 vs 3.09 ± 1.47 vs 1.66 ± 3.07 days, respectively; p < 0.01). Readmission rates were not significantly different between the groups (p = 0.72).

Conclusion

Although LSG is the most effective option for weight loss, ESG is a safe and feasible endobariatric option associated with low morbidity and short LOS in select patients.

     

Approach to Poor Weight Loss After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Re-sleeve Vs. Gastric Bypass

Background

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is increasing worldwide; however, long-term follow-up results included insufficient weight loss and weight regain. This study aims at assessing the outcomes of converting LSG to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic re-sleeve gastrectomy (LRSG).

Methods

A total of 1300 patients underwent LSG from 2009 to 2012, of which 12 patients underwent LRYGB and 24 patients underwent LRSG in Al-Amiri Hospital alone. Data included length of stay, percentage excessive weight loss (EWL%), and body mass index (BMI).

Results

Twenty-four patients underwent conversion from LSG to LRSG, and 12 patients underwent conversion from LSG to LRYGB due to insufficient weight loss and weight regain. Eighty-five percent were females. The mean weight and BMI prior to LSG for the LRYGB and LRSG patients were 136.5 kg and 52, and 134 kg and 50, respectively. The EWL% after the initial LSG was 37.9 and 43 %, for LRYGB and LRSG, respectively. There were no complications recorded. Results of conversion of LSG to LRYGB involved a mean EWL% 61.3 % after 1 year (p value 0.009). Results of LRSG involved a mean EWL% of 57 % over interval of 1 year (p value 0.05). Comparison of the EWL% of LRYGB and LRSG for failed primary LSG was not significant (p value 0.097).

Conclusion

Following our algorithm, revising an LSG with an LRSG or LRYGB for poor weight loss is feasible with good outcomes. Larger and longer follow-up studies are needed to verify our results.

     

Nutritional Status Prior to Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy Surgery

Background

Two main causes for nutrient deficiencies following bariatric surgery (BS) are pre-operative deficiencies and favoring foods with high-energy density and poor micronutrient content. The aims of this study were to evaluate nutritional status and gender differences and the prevalence of nutritional deficiencies among candidates for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) surgery.

Methods

A cross-sectional analysis of pre-surgery data collected as part of a randomized clinical trial on 100 morbidly obese patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) admitted to LSG surgery at Assuta Medical Center between February 2014 and January 2015. Anthropometrics, food intake, and fasting blood tests were evaluated during the baseline visit.

Results

One-hundred patients completed the pre-operative measurements (60 % female) with a mean age of 41.9?±?9.8 years and a mean BMI of 42.3?±?4.7 kg/m². Pre-operatively, deficiencies for iron, ferritin, folic acid, vitamin B1, vitamin B12, vitamin D, and hemoglobin were 6, 1, 1, 6, 0, 22, and 6 %, respectively. Pre-surgery, mean energy, protein, fat, and carbohydrate intake were 2710.7?±?1275.7 kcal/day, 114.2?±?48.5, 110.6?±?54.5, and 321.6?±?176.1 gr/day, respectively. The intakes for iron, calcium, folic acid, vitamin B12, and vitamin B1 were below the Dietary Reference Intake (DRI) recommendations for 46, 48, 58, 14, and 34 % of the study population, respectively.

Conclusion

We found a low prevalence of nutritional deficiencies pre-operatively except for vitamin D. Most micronutrient intake did not reach the DRI recommendations, despite high-caloric and macronutrient intake indicating a poor dietary quality.

     

A Different Kind of Craving: Incidence and Treatment of Pica After Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

Background

Iron deficiency can occur in patients after Roux-en-y gastric bypass due to altered absorption. Pica, the compulsive craving and intake of non-nutritive substances, is a rare and poorly understood presentation of iron deficiency. To our knowledge, the rate of pica after RYGB has never been reported.

Methods

The medical records of patients who underwent laparoscopic RYGB from 2001 to 2011 were reviewed. Patients with pica or other abnormal cravings were identified.

Results

Pica was identified in 16/959 (1.7%) patients who underwent RYGB during the study period. The most common presenting sign was pagophagia. All patients with pica were female and had multiple risk factors for iron deficiency with 13/16 being premenopausal and 7/16 non-compliant with oral iron supplementation. Pica symptoms presented at a mean of 3.9 ± 1.9 years after RYGB. Iron deficiency was identified in all 16 patients, with a median ferritin level of 5.0 ng/mL (range 2–27). All 16 patients received intravenous iron and pica symptoms resolved.

Conclusions

Pica is a rare phenomenon associated with iron deficiency and can occur despite oral iron supplementation. In our experience, intravenous iron can relieve symptoms. Patients considering bariatric surgery should be counseled on pica. Patients with unusual cravings should be evaluated for iron deficiency.