Dehydration risk factors and impact after bariatric surgery: an analysis using a national database

BackgroundDehydration is a common complication after bariatric surgery and often quoted as the reason for emergency department (ED) visits and readmission.ObjectiveWe sought to investigate risk factors for dehydration after bariatric surgery and evaluate its impact on ED visits and readmission.SettingThe Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database.MethodsWe used the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database to identify patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) from 2016 through 2017. The primary outcome was need for outpatient treatment of dehydration within 30 days postsurgery. Secondary outcomes were association between need for outpatient dehydration therapy and 30-day readmission or ED evaluation not resulting in admission.ResultsOf 256,817 patients, 73% underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and 27% LRYGB. Of 9592 patients who required dehydration treatment, they were more often younger than age 40, female, black, had a ≥3-day length of stay during their index admission, and experienced a postoperative complication. More patients receiving LRYGB than laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy required treatment for dehydration. On multivariable analysis, independent-risk factors for postoperative dehydration treatment included LRYGB, length of stay ≥3 days, gastroesophageal reflux disease, hypertension, previous deep vein thrombosis, chronic steroid/immunosuppression, and a postoperative complication. Patients who developed dehydration requiring treatment compared with those that did not had adjusted odds ratio of 3.7 (95% confidence interval: 3.44–3.96; P < .001) and 22 (95% confidence interval: 21.05–23.06; P < .001) of readmission and ED visit.ConclusionDehydration is a strong risk factor for postoperative ED visits and readmission. Closer surveillance and proactive measures for those at higher risk may prevent the development of postoperative dehydration.     

Primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus gastric bypass: a propensity-matched comparison of 30-day outcomes

BackgroundBariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for obesity. There is uncertainty regarding rates of adverse outcomes between the most common methods: laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).ObjectivesTo compare rates of readmission, reoperation, intervention, unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission, all-cause and procedure-related mortality, and postoperative complications at 30 days between LRYGB and LSG.SettingRetrospective, observational, multicenter registry.MethodsWe identified 611,619 patients from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) data registry between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018 (447,326 [73.1%] LSG; 164,293 [26.9%] LRYGB).ResultsAdverse events were more common after LRYGB (readmission: 3% with LSG versus 5.9% with LRYGB [P < .001; odds ratio {OR}, LSG/LRYGB = .489]; intervention: .9% with LSG versus 2.4% with LRYGB [P < .001; OR, LSG/LRYGB = .357]; reoperation: .8% with LSG versus 2.3% with LRYGB [P < .001; OR, LSG/LRYGB = .363]; unplanned ICU admission: .52% with LSG versus 1.1% with LRYGB [P < .001; OR, LSG/LRYGB = .454]; all-cause mortality: .07% with LSG versus .15% with LRYGB [P < .001; OR, LSG/LRYGB = .489]; procedure-related mortality: .04% with LSG versus .08% with LRYGB [P < .001; OR, LSG/LRYGB = .446]; Clavien-Dindo I: .20% with LSG versus .63% with LRYGB [P < .001; OR, LSG/LRYGB = .317]; Clavien-Dindo II: .70% with LSG versus 1.3% with LRYGB [P < .001; OR, LSG/LRYGB = .527]; Clavien-Dindo III: 3.3% with LSG versus 6.6% with LRYGB [P < .001; OR, LSG/LRYGB = .481]; Clavien-Dindo IV: .36% with LSG versus .76% with LRYGB [P < .001; OR, LSG/LRYGB = .466]; and Clavien-Dindo V: .07% with LSG versus .15% with LRYGB [P < .001; OR, LSG/LRYGB = .488]). Surgery type was among the strongest independent predictors of adverse events, and LRYGB conferred higher adjusted odds of all adverse outcomes (all-cause mortality: OR, LRYGB/LSG = 1.791 [P < .001]; procedure-related mortality: OR, LRYGB/LSG = 1.979 [P < .001]; readmission: OR, LRYGB/LSG = 1.921 [P < .001]; unplanned ICU admission: OR, LRYGB/LSG = 1.870 [P < .001]; intervention: OR, LRYGB/LSG = 2.662 [P < .001]; reoperation: OR, LRYGB/LSG = 2.646 [P < .001]; and Clavien-Dindo grade: OR, LRYGB/LSG = 2.007 [P < .001]).ConclusionThe rates of 30-day adverse outcomes are lower after LSG compared with after LRYGB. LRYGB independently conferred increased odds of adverse outcomes compared with LSG, and surgery type was among the strongest predictors of adverse outcomes.     

Perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy in super-obese and super-super-obese patients: a national database analysis

BackgroundEvidence remains contradictory for perioperative outcomes of super-obese (SO) and super-super-obese (SSO) patients undergoing bariatric surgery.ObjectiveTo identify national 30-day morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) in SO and SSO patients.SettingThe Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database.MethodsAll LSG and LRYGB patients from 2015 through 2017 in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database were grouped based on body mass index (BMI) as follows: morbidly obese (MO; BMI 35.0–49.9 kg/m²), SO (BMI 50.0–59.9 kg/m²), and SSO (BMI ≥60.0 kg/m²). Complications and mortality within 30 days were compared between BMI groups using Pearson X² or Fischer’s exact tests. Multivariate logistic regression was used to adjust for demographic characteristics and co-morbidities, and adjusted odds ratio (AOR) was reported for each outcome.ResultsOf 356,621 patients, 71.6% had LSG and 28.4% LRYGB. A total of 272,195 patients were in the MO group, 65,565 in the SO group, and 18,861 in the SSO group. Higher BMI was associated with increased overall morbidity and mortality. The overall complication rate was significantly higher for SO (AOR = 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13–1.28 for LSG; AOR = 1.08, 95% CI 1.01–1.15 for LRYGB) and SSO (AOR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.31–1.58 for LSG; AOR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.19–1.45 for LRYGB) compared with the MO group. Mortality was also significantly higher for SO (AOR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.10–2.48 for LSG; AOR = 1.85, 95% CI 1.23–2.80 for LRYGB) and SSO (AOR = 3.30, 95% CI 1.98–5.48 for LSG; AOR = 3.32, 95% CI 1.93–5.73 for LRYGB) compared with the MO group.ConclusionsSO and SSO patients are at increased risk of 30-day morbidity and mortality compared with MO patients. Despite this elevated perioperative risk, the overall risk of these procedures remains low and acceptable especially as bariatric surgery is the durable treatment option for obesity.     

Trends in risk factors for readmission after bariatric surgery 2015–2018

BackgroundReadmission after bariatric surgery is multifactorial. Understanding the trends in risk factors for readmission provides opportunity to optimize patients prior to surgery identify disparities in care, and improve outcomes.ObjectivesThis study compares trends in bariatric surgery as they relate to risk factors for all-cause readmission.SettingMetabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) participating facilities.MethodsThe Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database was used to analyze 760,076 bariatric cases from 854 centers. Demographics and 30-day unadjusted outcomes were compared between laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB), sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) performed between 2015 and 2018. A multiple logistic regression model determined predictors of readmission.ResultsA total of 574,453 bariatric cases met criteria, and all-cause readmission rates decreased from 4.2% in 2015 to 3.5% in 2018 (P < .0001). The percentage of non-Hispanic Black adults who underwent bariatric surgery increased from 16.7% of the total cohort in 2015 to 18.7% in 2018 (P < .0001). The percentage of Hispanic adults increased from 12.1% in 2015 to 13.8% in 2018 (P < .0001). The most common procedure performed was the LSG (71.5%), followed by RYGB (26.9%) and 1.6% LAGB (1.6%) (P < .0001). Men were protected from readmission compared with women (odds ratio [OR]: .87; 95% confidence interval [CI]: .84–.90). Non-Hispanic Black (OR: 1.52; 95% CI: 1.47–1.58)] and Hispanic adults (OR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.09–1.19) were more likely to be readmitted compared with non-Hispanic White adults. LSG (OR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.10–1.48) and RYGB (OR: 2.24; 95% CI: 1.93–2.60) were predictive of readmission compared with LAGB.ConclusionReadmission rates decreased over 4 years. Women, along with non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic adults, were more likely to be readmitted. Future research should focus on gender and racial disparities that impact readmission.     

Operative time as a marker of quality in bariatric surgery

BackgroundFew studies have examined the effect of prolonged operative time (OT) on outcomes in laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Existing studies mostly focus on 30-day complications, whereas serious complications may not occur until well after 30 days from the index operation.ObjectiveTo determine the effect of prolonged OT on 1-year morbidity and mortality after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).SettingThe Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database (BOLD).MethodsData on primary LRYGB and LSG cases performed between 2008 and 2012 in the BOLD were analyzed. Converted cases and cases concurrent with other procedures were excluded. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the association between OT and 1-year morbidity and mortality, with adjustment for preoperative demographic and clinical characteristics.ResultsA total of 93,051 cases were examined, including 74,745 (80.3%) LRYGB and 18,306 (19.7%) LSG cases. For LRYGB, mean OT was 104 minutes (standard deviation [SD] 46.6). Every additional 10 minutes of OT was associated with increased odds of 1-year mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.04; P = .02), leak (AOR 1.07; P < .0001), and any adverse event (AOR 1.03; P < .001). For LSG, mean OT was 78 minutes (SD 37.4). Every additional 10 minutes of OT was associated with increased odds of 1-year leak (AOR 1.07; P = .0002). Data on patients lost to follow-up was unavailable.ConclusionProlonged operative time is associated with a significant increase in the odds of mortality and serious complications after laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Operative time may be a useful marker of quality in primary laparoscopic bariatric surgery.     

Factors that predict 30-day readmission after bariatric surgery: experience of a publicly funded Canadian centre

BackgroundHospital readmissions after bariatric surgery can significantly increase health care costs. Rates of readmission after bariatric surgery have ranged from 0.6% to 11.3%, but the rate of complications and the factors that predict readmission have not been well characterized in Canada. The objective of this study was to characterize readmission rates and the factors that predict 30-day readmission in a Canadian centre.MethodsA retrospective study was performed on all patients who underwent bariatric surgery between 2010 and 2015 in a single Canadian centre. Procedures included laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). Prospectively collected data were extracted from an administrative database. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to determine which factors predict 30-day readmission.ResultsA total of 1468 patients had bariatric surgery (51.0% LRYGB, 40.5% LSG, 8.6% LAGB) during the 6-year study period, with an overall 30-day readmission rate of 7.5%. LRYGB was associated with a higher readmission rate (11.4%) than LSG (3.7%) or LAGB (1.6%). Common reasons for readmission were infection (24.8%), pain (17.4%) and nausea or vomiting (10.1%). Multivariable analysis identified 3 factors that independently predicted readmission: length of stay greater than 4 days (odds ratio [OR] 2.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03–4.63, p = 0.042), LRYGB (OR 5.21, 95% CI 1.19–22.73, p = 0.028) and acute renal failure (OR 14.10, 95% CI 1.07–186.29, p = 0.045).ConclusionReadmissions after bariatric surgery were most commonly caused by potentially preventable factors, such as pain, nausea or vomiting. Strategies to identify and address factors associated with readmission may reduce readmissions and health care costs after bariatric surgery in a publicly funded health care system.     

Validation of the individualized metabolic surgery score for bariatric procedure selection in the merged data of two randomized clinical trials (SLEEVEPASS and SM-BOSS)

BackgroundLSG and LRYGB are globally the most common bariatric procedures. IMS score categorizes T2D severity (mild, moderate, and severe) based on 4 independent preoperative predictors of long-term remission as follows: T2D duration, number of diabetes medications, insulin use, and glycemic control. IMS score has not been validated in a randomized patient cohort.ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility of individualized metabolic surgery (IMS) score in facilitating procedure selection between laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) for patients with severe obesity and type 2 diabetes (T2D).SettingMerged individual patient-level 5-year data of 2 large randomized clinical trials (SLEEVEPASS and SM-BOSS [Swiss Multicenter Bypass or Sleeve Study]).MethodsIMS score was calculated for study patients and its performance was analyzed.ResultsOne hundred thirty-nine out of 155 patients with T2D had available preoperative data to calculate IMS score as follows: mild stage (n = 41/139), moderate stage (n = 77/139), severe stage (n = 21/139). At 5 years, 135 (87.1%, 67 LSG/68 LRYGB) were available for follow-up and 121 patients had both pre- and postoperative data. Diabetes remission rates according to preoperative IMS score were as follows: mild stage 87.5% (n = 14/16) after LSG and 85.7% (n = 18/21) after LRYGB (P = .999), moderate stage 42.9% (n = 15/35) and 45.2% (n = 14/31) (P = .999), and severe stage 18.2% (n = 2/11) and 0% (n = 0/7) (P = .497), respectively. The T2D remission rate varied significantly between the stages as follows: mild versus moderate odds ratio (OR) 8.3 (95% CI, 2.8–24.0; P < .001), mild versus severe OR 52.2 (95% CI 9.0–302.3; P < .001), and moderate versus severe OR 6.3 (95% CI, 1.3–29.8; P = .020).ConclusionsIn our study, remission rates of T2D were not statistically different after LSG and LRYGB among all patients and among patients with mild, moderate, and severe diabetes stratified by the IMS score. However, the study may be underpowered to detect differences due to small number of patients in each subgroup. IMS score seemed to be useful in predicting long-term T2D remission after bariatric surgery.     

Black-versus-White racial disparities in 30-day outcomes at Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program–accredited centers: a needed quality indicator

BackgroundCreating a metric in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) to assess Black-versus-White disparities is critical if we are to ensure equitable care for all.ObjectiveTo investigate Black-versus-White disparities while replicating MBSAQIP methodology with regard to covariates and modeling so that the results can serve as the foundation to create a benchmarked site-level Disparities Metric for MBSAQIP.SettingUnited States and Canada.MethodsAcross the 2015–2019 MBSAQIP cohorts, 543,976 adults underwent primary or revision sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and were reported as either White or Black. Using a set of covariates derived from published MBSAQIP performance models, we performed multivariable logistic modeling with 10-fold cross-validation for the 11 outcomes evaluated in MBSAQIP Semiannual Reports, plus venous thromboembolism (VTE) and death. We analyzed primary and revision cases separately.ResultsAfter risk adjustment, Black patients experienced higher odds of all-occurrence morbidity (odds ratio [OR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19–1.25; P < .001), serious events (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04–1.13; P < .001), all-cause intervention (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.24–1.37; P < .001), related intervention (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.22–1.37; P < .001), all-cause readmission (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.33–1.41; P < .001), related readmission (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.36–1.46; P < .001), venous thromboembolism (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.34–1.65; P < .001), and death (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.34–1.89; P < .001) after primary procedures. Black patients experienced lower odds of morbidity (OR, .94; 95% CI, .91–.98; P = .004) and surgical-site infection (OR, .72; 95% CI, .66–.78; P < .001).ConclusionsBlack patients experienced a higher risk for serious complications and required more readmissions, reoperations, and postoperative interventions. This study supports the creation of a site-level Disparities Metric for the MBSAQIP and provides the framework to do so.     

Nephrolithiasis after bariatric surgery: A comparison of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy

IntroductionLaparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is known to increase risk for calcium oxalate nephrolithiasis due to hyperoxaluria; however, nephrolithiasis rates after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) are not well described. Our objective was to determine the rate of nephrolithiasis after LRYGB versus LSG.MethodsThe electronic medical records of patients who underwent LRYGB or LSG between 2001 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed.Results1,802 patients were included. Postoperative nephrolithiasis was observed in 133 (7.4%) patients, overall, and 8.12% of LRYGB (122/1503) vs. 3.68% of LSG (11/299) patients (P < 0.001). Mean time to stone formation was 2.97 ± 2.96 years. Patients with a history of UTI (OR = 2.12, 95%CI 1.41–3.18; P < 0.001) or nephrolithiasis (OR = 8.81, 95%CI 4.93–15.72; P < 0.001) were more likely to have postoperative nephrolithiasis.ConclusionThe overall incidence of symptomatic nephrolithiasis after bariatric surgery was 7.4%. Patients who underwent LRYGB had a higher incidence of nephrolithiasis versus LSG. Patients with a history of stones had the highest risk of postoperative nephrolithiasis.     

Concurrent bariatric surgery and paraesophageal hernia repair: comparison of sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

Background

Paraesophageal hernia (PEH) is a common condition that bariatric surgeons encounter. Expert opinion is split on whether bariatric surgery and PEH repair should be completed concurrently or sequentially. We hypothesized that concurrent bariatric surgery and PEH repair is safe.

Comparison of cholecystectomy cases after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass,sleeve gastrectomy,and gastric banding

BackgroundRapid weight loss after bariatric surgery has been a factor of inducing gallstones postoperatively. Many studies have reported increased gallstone formation after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). However, not many studies have compared symptomatic gallstone frequencies between LRYGB, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). The aim of our study is to evaluate symptomatic cholelithiasis cases requiring cholecystectomy after each bariatric procedure.MethodsBetween January 2009 and August 2011, a total of 937 patients underwent bariatric surgery at our institution. Of these patients, 598 had primary LRYGB, 197 had LSG, and 142 had LAGB. We excluded patients with previous cholecystectomy or concomitant cholecystectomy at the time of bariatric procedure. A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database was performed for all patients.ResultsOf 367 LRYGB patients, 5.7% (n = 21) had symptomatic gallstones. Of 115 LSG patients, 6.1% (n = 7) required cholecystectomy, and of 104 LAGB patients, .0% (n = 0) developed symptomatic gallstones. The differences in the occurrences of symptomatic gallstones between LRYGB and LSG were not statistically significant (P>.88). However, statistical significance was present between LRYGB and LAGB (P<.02), as well as between LSG and LAGB (P<.02). Mean percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) at 24 months was 85.7%, 58.8%, and 38.3% in LRYGB, LSG, and LAGB patients, respectively. There was no complication related to the cholecystectomy procedure.ConclusionsFrequency of symptomatic gallstones after LRYGB and LSG was not significantly different and after LAGB was significantly lower. Slow and less amount of weight loss would have contributed to the low rate of symptomatic gallstone formation in the LAGB patients. (Surg Obes Relat Dis 2013;0:000–00.) © 2013 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. All rights reserved.     

Comparison of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity in a military institution

BackgroundLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is gaining acceptance in the bariatric community as a definitive weight loss procedure; however, longitudinal data remain limited. The objective of this study was to compare weight loss results of LSG with laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) up to 5 years postoperatively using anthropometric measurements.MethodsProspectively collected bariatric database at the Naval Medical Center San Diego was retrospectively reviewed from 2005–2011 . Anthropometric factors, including weight and hip circumference were measured during standard yearly follow-up appointments. Surgical outcomes were tested by the Student t test and demographic variables by Fisher’s exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests.ResultsFollow-up was achieved in 147/226 LRYGB versus 130/208 LSG at year 1, 92/195 versus 81/151 at year 2, 64/145 versus 50/100 at year 3, 32/81 versus 18/54 at year 4, and 12/42 versus 14/15 at year 5. The excess weight loss (EWL) for LRYGB versus LSG was 72% versus 64.7% at 1 year (P = .002), 71.3% versus 65.5% at 2 years (P = .113), and 68.3% versus 57.4% at 5 years (P = .252), respectively. Similarly, the body mass index (BMI) decrease was statistically significant at 1 year (P = .001) but not on subsequent annual visits. Mean percent body adiposity index (BAI) decrease was 28.4% for LRYGB versus 26.8% for LSG at 1 year (P = .679) and 21.8% versus 29.8% at 2 years (P = .134), respectively. Weight loss measured in terms of %EWL and decrease in BMI and BAI did not show significance between LRYGB and LSG 2 years after surgery.ConclusionOur study provides similar long-term weight loss between LSG and LRYGB, and therefore, LSG is a viable option as a definitive bariatric procedure.     

Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on bariatric surgery in North America: a retrospective analysis of 834,647 patients

BackgroundCOVID-19 has transformed surgical care, yet little is known regarding implications for bariatric surgery.ObjectiveWe sought to characterize the effect of COVID-19 on bariatric surgery delivery and outcomes.SettingThe Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) collects data from 885 centers in North America.MethodsThe MBSAQIP database was evaluated with 2 cohorts described: the COVID-19 and the pre–COVID-19, with patients receiving surgery in 2020 and 2015–2019, respectively. Yearly operative trends were characterized, and bivariate analysis compared demographics and postoperative outcomes. Multivariable modeling evaluated 30-day readmission, reintervention, and reoperation rates and factors associated with undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.ResultsWe evaluated 834,647 patients, with 155,830 undergoing bariatric surgery during the 2020 pandemic year. A 12.1% reduction in total cases (177,208 in 2019 versus 155,830 in 2020; P < .001) and 13.8% reduction in cases per center occurred (204.2 cases per center in 2019 versus 176.1 cases per center in 2020; P < .001). Patients receiving bariatric surgery during the pandemic were younger and had fewer co-morbidities. Use of sleeve gastrectomy increased (74.5% versus 72.5%; P < .001), and surgery during COVID-19 was associated with reduced Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedure selection (odds ratio = .83; 95% CI: .82–.84; P < .001). Length of stay decreased significantly (1.4 ± 1.4 days versus 1.6 ± 1.4 days; P < .001), yet postoperative outcomes were similar. After adjusting for co-morbidities, patients during COVID-19 had decreased 30-day odds of readmission and reintervention and a small increase in odds of reoperation.ConclusionThe COVID-19 pandemic dramatically changed bariatric surgery delivery. Further studies evaluating the long-term effects of these changes are warranted.     

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a case-control study and 3 years of follow-up

BackgroundLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become a popular surgical procedure among bariatric surgeons. Few studies have compared the efficacy of the procedure to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). We performed a case-control study to assess the surgical results, weight progression, and remission of co-morbid conditions.MethodsFrom January 2006 to September 2009, we selected 811 patients undergoing LSG as a primary procedure. These patients were matched by age, body mass index, and gender to 786 patients undergoing LRYGB. The complication rate, mortality, and percentage of excess weight loss after 1, 2, and 3 years were analyzed.ResultsThe mean age for the LRYGB and LSG groups was 37.0 ± 10.3 and 36.4 ± 11.7 years, respectively (P = .120). Most of the patients were women (LRYGB 76.6% versus LSG 76.2%; P = .855). The preoperative body mass index before surgery was similar in both groups (LRYGB 38.0 ± 3.2 versus LSG 37.9 ± 4.6 kg/m²; P = .617). The mean operative time was longer for LRYGB (106.2 ± 33.2 versus 76.6 ± 28.0 min; P <.001), and the hospital stay was longer for LRYGB (3.4 ± 4.4 versus 2.8 ± .8 for LSG; P <.001). The early complication rate was 7.1% for LRYGB and 2.9% for LSG (P <.001), and the suture leak rate was .7% for LRYGB and .5% for LSG (P = NS). The percentage of excess weight loss for LRYGB versus LSG at 1, 2, and 3 years was 97.2% ± 24.3% versus 86.4% ± 26.4% (P <.001), 94.6% ± 30.2% versus 84.1% ± 28.3% (P <.001), and 93.1% ± 25.0% versus 86.8% ± 27.1% (P = .082), respectively. The total cholesterol level at 1 year for LRYGB versus LSG was 169.0 ± 32.9 versus 193.6 ± 38.7 mg/dL, respectively (P <.001), and the rate of diabetes remission was similar in both groups (LRYGB 86.6% versus LSG 90.9%).ConclusionLSG has become an acceptable primary bariatric procedure for obesity, with results comparable to LRYGB in this population.     

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in the pediatric population: a MBSAQIP analysis

BackgroundThe growing prevalence of childhood obesity has resulted in an increased number of children and adolescents who undergo bariatric surgery. The safety of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) remains controversial in the pediatric population.ObjectiveTo assess the safety of LSG compared with LRYGB in patients aged ≤21 years.SettingA retrospective analysis of the 2016 to 2017 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database.MethodsPatients aged ≤21 years who underwent LSG or LRYGB were identified in the 2016 to 2017 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database. A logistic regression model was used to create a 1:1 propensity-score matched cohort adjusting for age, sex, body mass index, and obesity-related co-morbidities. Unmatched and propensity-score matched analyses were performed to compare baseline characteristics and outcome data between LSG and LRYGB procedure groups. Primary outcomes of interest included 30-day major complications, such as death, reoperation, and anastomotic leak.ResultsOf 3571 patients included in our study, 2911 (81.52%) underwent LSG and 660 (18.48%) underwent LRYGB. Patients who underwent LRYGB had an increased body mass index and a higher rate of obesity-related co-morbidities. The LRYGB group had a significantly increased rate of major complications within the first 30 days in both the unmatched cohort (4.55% versus 1.34%, P < .001) and the propensity-score matched cohort (4.57% versus .91%, P < .001).ConclusionsLSG and LRYGB are both relatively safe to perform in the pediatric population with acceptable complication rates and low mortality. However, LSG demonstrated a significantly decreased rate of major complications in the first 30 days compared with LRYGB.     

Bariatric surgery in the elderly: a randomized prospective study comparing safety of sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (BASE Trial)

BackgroundThe aging population along with the obesity epidemic has increased the number of older patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Nevertheless, there is still conflicting data regarding surgical safety in this population.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare the surgical morbidity of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) for older patients.SettingUniversity hospital, São Paulo, Brazil.MethodsWe performed a prospective randomized clinical trial from September 2017 to May 2019. Obese patients aged ≥65 years were randomized to LSG or LRYGB. Data collection included demographic information, body mass index (BMI), and co-morbidities. We assessed readmission, postoperative complications, and mortality. Complications were scored according to Clavien-Dindo classification.ResultsA total of 36 patients, with a BMI between 35.5 and 52.8 kg/m² were randomized to either LSG (18 patients) or LRYGB (18 patients). The overall complication rate was similar between LSG and LRYGB (3 versus 7, P = .13). Severe complication was more prevalent in LRYGB patients but had no statistically significant difference (0 versus 3, P = .07). Each group had 1 readmission and there was no mortality in 90-day follow-up.ConclusionsMorbidity and mortality rates of bariatric surgery are low in elderly obese patients. Despite not statistically significant, LSG had a lower rate of severe complications compared with LRYGB in this population setting.     

Obstructive sleep apnea remission following bariatric surgery: a national registry cohort study

BackgroundObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is strongly associated with metabolic syndrome. Bariatric surgery is an effective available treatment for OSA; however, limited research predicts which patients undergoing bariatric surgery will undergo OSA resolution.ObjectivesTo determine perioperative predictors for OSA resolution following bariatric surgery using a national database.SettingUnited Kingdom national bariatric surgery database.MethodsThe UK National Bariatric Surgery Registry (NBSR) was interrogated to identify all patients with OSA that underwent primary bariatric surgery between January 2009 and June 2017. Those with at least 1 follow-up recording postoperative OSA status were selected for further analysis. Demographic, pre- and postoperative outcomes were collected and analyzed. Poisson multivariate regression was conducted to identify predictors of OSA remission.ResultsA total of 4015 bariatric cases were eligible for inclusion: 2482 (61.8%) patients underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), 1196 (29.8%) sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and 337 (8.4%) adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). Overall, the mean excess weight loss (EWL) % for the whole group was 61.2 (SD ± 27.2). OSA resolution was recorded in 2377 (59.2%) patients. Following Poisson regression, LRYGB (risk ratio [RR], 1.49 confidence interval [CI] 1.25–1.78) and LSG (RR, 1.46 [CI 1.22–1.75] were associated with approximately 50% increased likelihood of OSA remission compared with LAGB. Greater weight loss following intervention was associated with greater likelihood of OSA remission, while both greater age and greater preoperative body mass index (BMI) were associated with reduced likelihood of OSA remission (P < .001).ConclusionThis study demonstrated that metabolic surgery results in OSA remission in the majority of patients with obesity. Younger age, lower BMI preprocedure, greater %EWL and the use of LSG or LRYGB positively predicted OSA remission.     

Hypoalbuminemia as a risk factor for complications in revisional/conversional bariatric surgery: an MBSAQIP analysis

BackgroundHypoalbuminemia (HA) is a risk factor for serious complications after elective bariatric surgery. Patients undergoing revisional/conversional bariatric surgery may represent a higher-risk group who often have underlying co-morbid medical illnesses and more complex surgery.ObjectivesThis study investigated the postoperative complications in patients with HA undergoing revisional/conversional bariatric surgery.SettingMetabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP), years 2015–2019.MethodsThe MBSAQIP database was used to evaluate patients undergoing non-banding revisional/conversional bariatric surgery between 2015 and 2019. Patients were categorized by serum albumin (≤3.5 g/dL). Variables were assessed via bivariate analysis and multivariable regression. Propensity score matching was conducted to compare gastric bypass (RYGB) to sleeve gastrectomy (VSG).ResultsOne hundred forty-seven thousand four hundred thirty patients underwent revisional/conversional procedures. After applied exclusions, 58,777 patients were available for analysis. The HA group had a significantly (P < .05) higher prevalence of being black (22.95% versus 17.76%), renal insufficiency (1.08% versus .36%), smoking history (9.47% versus 6.91%), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (2.54% versus 1.33%), and history of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) (4.03% versus 2.3%). Postoperative complications associated with HA included perioperative blood transfusion (3.1% versus 1.27%; P < .001), 30day readmission (10.87 versus 6.77%; P < .001), 30day reoperation (4.9% versus 3.18%; P < .001), and 30day mortality (.40% versus .14%; P < .0001). HA was a significant predictor of 30day readmission in the RYGB versus VSG matched cohort (odds ratio [OR], 1.30; 95% confidence interval [CI], [1.14, 1.48]; P < .001).ConclusionsHA is a risk factor requiring attention for patients undergoing revisional/conversional bariatric surgery and optimization of nutritional status or medical comorbidities associated with HA prior to bariatric surgery may help avoid postoperative complications.