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.

     

A Challenge between Trainee Education and Patient Safety: Does Fellow Participation Impact Postoperative Outcomes Following Bariatric Surgery?

Background

Surgical training may potentially influence patient care. A safe, high-quality bariatric and metabolic surgery practice requires dedicated and specialized training commonly acquired during a fellowship. This study evaluates the impact of fellow participation on early postoperative outcomes in bariatric surgery.

Methods

From the American College of Surgeons (ACS-NSQIP) database, we identified all obese patients who had undergone primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) between 2010 and 2012. Logistic regression was used to prognosticate the surgical fellow (PGY-6, 7, or 8) participation in bariatric surgeries on perioperative outcomes, as compared to surgeries with no trainee participation.

Results

The study cohort consisted of 10,838 patients (8819 LRYGB, 2019 LSG, 32 % fellow participation). Fellows participated in higher-risk surgeries. Fellow involvement was associated with increased operative time in LRYGB (difference 42.4?±?1.2 min, p?<?0.001) and in LSG (difference 38.8?±?2.5 min, p?<?0.001). Multivariate regression revealed that fellow involvement in LSG did not significantly alter postoperative adverse events. Conversely, in the LRYGB group, fellow participation was independently associated with higher rates of overall complications (OR?=?1.37, 95 % CI 1.16–1.63), serious complications (OR?=?1.23, 95 % CI 1.00–1.52), surgical complications (OR?=?1.42; 95 % CI 1.17–1.73), and reoperation (OR?=?1.43, 95 % CI 1.10–1.87). On adjusted analysis, while readmission was higher with fellow involvement in both procedures, mortality rates were comparable.

Conclusions

Fellow involvement resulted in a clinically appreciable increase in operative times. Fellow participation in the operating room was also independently associated with worse early postoperative outcomes following LRYGB, but was not the case for LSG. Promoting proficiency in surgical simulation laboratories and a gradual participation of fellows from LSG to LRYGB during fellowship may be associated with a reduction in postoperative complications.

     

Outcomes of Sleeve Gastrectomy in Septuagenarians

Background

Few previous studies have assessed the safety of bariatric surgery in septuagenarians.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of all patients 70 years or older who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy at our institution between 2012 and 2017 was performed. This group was compared to a matched cohort of younger LSG patients (18–50 years) who were operated during the same time period.

Results

Thirty septuagenarian LSG patients were compared to 60 younger patients. Gender distribution, preoperative weight, and preoperative body mass index (BMI) were comparable, although patients in the older age group suffered from more preoperative comorbidities (100 vs. 51.7%, p?<?0.001). Operative time was longer (77.2 vs. 57.3 min, p?=?0.005) and more hiatal hernias were repaired (46.7 vs. 8.3%, p?<?0.001) in the older age group. Intraoperative complications occurred more in the older age group (6.7 vs. 0%, p?=?0.04) but the overall complication rate (13.3 vs. 5.0%, p?=?0.17) and the postoperative complication rate (10.0 vs. 5.0%, p?=?0.38) were comparable. After a mean follow-up period of 31.3 and 33.5 months, the percentage of total body weight loss was 24.6 and 28.3% for the older and younger patients, respectively (p?=?0.11). Rates of improvement/remission of comorbidities were comparable between the groups.

Conclusions

In a carefully selected group of severely obese patients ≥?70 years old, LSG may be safe, with acceptable postoperative complication rates, weight loss results, and improvement in comorbidities.

     

The Impact of Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass on Comorbidities and Quality of Life in the Older Obese Patients (Age &gt; 60): Our UK Experience

Background

With population ageing, more older patients would benefit from the reduced comorbidities associated with laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). However, health care providers are still reluctant to offer bariatric surgery to older obese patients due to the perceived increased risk and possible reduced benefit. Here, we report the outcomes of first UK series of LRYGB in patients (>?60 years) with emphasis on quality of life (QoL).

Setting

University hospital.

Methods

Data was collected prospectively on all patients aged >?60 years undergoing LRYGB between 2006 and 2011. Patients had a minimum 1-year follow-up. Data related to weight loss, peri-operative complications and obesity-related morbidity (ORM) was collected. Patients’ QoL was assessed by postal questionnaire.

Results

Forty-six patients with a median age of 63 (60–71) underwent LRYGB with a median follow-up of 23 (12–55) months. There was a significant drop in patients’ BMI [mean (SD) 47.5 (6.2) to 31.2 (4.4) kg/m²]. Patients had an average 69% (SD 17%) excess weight loss and 34% (SD 10%) total body weight loss.The median hospital stay was 3 (1–16) with 13% peri-operative morbidity and no mortality. There was a 25% (30/123) resolution and 54% (66/123) ‘improvement’ in ORM. The QoL score increased significantly in several domains particularly physical performance (2.8 to 8.0, p?<?0.001), self-esteem (3.6 to 8.3, p?<?0.001) and mobility (2.9 to 7.5, p?<?0.001).

Conclusion

LRYGB in patients aged >?60 years can be performed safely and with weight loss comparable to younger patients. There is associated benefit in reducing ORM and substantial improvement in QoL.

     

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.

     

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.

     

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.

     

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.

     

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.

     

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.

     

Intraperitoneal Ropivacaine Irrigation in Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery: a Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial

Background

Despite most bariatric procedures are actually performed by laparoscopic approach, management of postoperative pain remains a major challenge. The aim of this study was to analyze the analgesic effect of intraperitoneal ropivacaine infusion in patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

Methods

A prospective randomized clinical trial of all the patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) or laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) between January and November 2015 was performed. Patients were randomized to experimental (EG: those patients undergoing intraperitoneal ropivacain irrigation) and control groups (CG: those undergoing intraperitoneal irrigation with normal saline).

Results

One hundred ten patients were included, 83 LRYGB (75.5 %) and 27 LSG (24.5 %). Mean pain, as measured by VAS score, was 21.7?±?14.5 mm in CG and 13.3?±?10.9 mm in EG (p?=?0.002). Morphine needs during the first 24 h postoperatively were 21.8 % in CG and 3.6 % in EG (p?=?0.01). Early taking of fluids by mouth was possible 6 h after surgery in 76.4 % in EG vs 34.5 % in CG (p?=?0.001). Early mobilization ability (6 h after surgery) was feasible in 72.7 % in EG and 32.7 % in CG (p?=?0.001). Median hospital stay was 3 days (range 2–10 days) in CG and 2 days (2–7 days) in EG (p?=?0.009).

Conclusions

The intraoperative peritoneal infusion with ropivacaine in patients undergoing bariatric surgery is associated with a reduction in postoperative pain, lower morphine needs, earlier mobilization and earlier oral intake of fluids after surgery, and a shorter hospital stay.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02641288

     

Single-stage revision from gastric band to gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy: 6- and 12-month outcomes

Background

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is increasingly requiring revisional surgery for complications and failures. Removal of the band and conversion to either laparoscopic Roux-en-y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is feasible as a single-stage procedure. The objective of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of single-stage revision from LAGB to either LRYGB or LSG at 6 and 12 months postoperatively.

Methods

Retrospective analysis was performed on patients undergoing single-stage revision between 2009 and 2014 at a single academic medical center. Patients were reassessed for weight loss and complications at 6 and 12 months postoperatively.

Results

Thirty-two patients underwent single-stage revision to LRYGB, and 72 to LSG. Preoperative BMIs were similar between the two groups (p = 0.27). Median length of stay for LRYGB was 3 days versus 2 for LSG (p = 0.14). Four patients in the LRYGB group required reoperation within 30 days, and two patients in the LSG group required reoperation within 30 days (p = 0.15). There was no difference in ER visits (p = 0.24) or readmission rates (p = 0.80) within 30 days of operation. Six delayed complications were seen in the LSG group with three requiring intervention. At 6 months postoperatively, percent excess weight loss (%EWL) was 50.20 for LRYGB and 30.64 for LSG (p = 0.056). At 12 months, %EWL was 51.19 for LRYGB and 34.89 for LSG (p = 0.31). There was no difference in diabetes or hypertension medication reduction at 12 months between LRYGB and LSG (p > 0.07).

Conclusion

Single-stage revision from LAGB to LRYGB or LSG is technically feasible, but not without complications. The complications in the bypass group were more severe. There was no difference in readmission or reoperation rates, weight loss or comorbidity reduction. Revision to LRYGB trended toward higher rate and greater severity of complications with equivalent weight loss and comorbidity reduction.

     

The bariatric surgery and weight losing: a meta-analysis in the long- and very long-term effects of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding,laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy on weight loss in adults

Background

Several studies have been investigated to find the long-term effect of bariatric surgery on weight loss; nevertheless, a meta-analysis can detailedly demonstrate the effect of bariatric surgery on weight in morbidly obese patients. This study aimed to assess the long- and very long-term effects of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB), laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) on weight loss in adults.

Methods

An electronic search using PubMed, Scopus, and Google scholar databases was performed for all English-language articles up to May 15, 2016 with no publication date restriction. Outcome was long-term (≥5–10 years) and very long-term (≥10 years) weight reduction that reported as the mean %EWL and changes in BMI from baseline.

Results

Eighty articles with 87 arms were included in this meta-analysis. The excess weight loss percentage (%EWL) was 47.94% and 47.43% after LAGB at ≥5 and ≥10 years, respectively. After LRYGB the %EWL was 62.58% at ≥5 years and 63.52% at ≥10 years. It was 53.25% at ≥5 years after LSG. Results of subgroup analyses have indicated that LRYGB leads to higher %EWL in America and Asia compared with Europe. Meta-regression analyses have shown that there is no significant association between %EWL and baseline age, BMI and length of follow-up after three procedures. However, there is a positive association between gender and %EWL after LRYGB (β?=?1.24). No publication bias was found.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that LRYGB is an effective procedure in morbidly obese patients that leads to sustainable weight loss over the long- and very long-term periods in compared with LAGB and LSG.

     

Morbidity Rates and Weight Loss After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass,Sleeve Gastrectomy,and Adjustable Gastric Banding in Patients Older Than 60 Years old: Which Procedure to Choose?

Background

As life expectancy increases, more elderly patients fit into the criteria for bariatric procedures. The aim of our study is to evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) in patients older than 60.

Material and Methods

Between January 2005 and December 2013, 68 LAGB, 73 LSG, and 212 RYGB patients were 60 years or older at the time of primary procedure. A retrospective review was performed in these patients.

Results

Mean age and body mass index (BMI) was 62.7?±?2.2, 64.1?±?2.9, and 62.6?±?2.3 years and 42.7?±?5.6, 44.0?±?7.0, and 45.2?±?6.7 kg/m² for LAGB, LSG, and RYGB at the time of procedure, respectively.Seven (10.3 %) patients from the LAGB, 3 (4.1 %) from the LSG, and 29 (13.8 %) from the RYGB group required readmissions. Reoperation rate was 10.3, 1.4, and 9.5 % in LAGB, LSG, and RYGB, respectively. The difference in reoperation rates was statistically significant (p?<?0.03) while that in readmission rates was not (p?>?0.58). Procedure-related mortality rate was 1.4 % in the RYGB group, while no mortality was observed in LSG and LAGB groups. At 6, 12, and 18 months postoperatively, mean percentage of excess weight loss were highest in the RYGB group, followed by LSG and LAGB group (p?<?0.01). Mean number of comorbidities at the last follow-up significantly decreased in LSG and RYGB patients.

Conclusions

LSG showed the lowest readmission and reoperation rate, and RYGB patients had the highest mortality rate. Weight loss and comorbidity resolution were effectively achieved in RYGB and LSG patients.

     

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.

     

Trends in Early Morbidity and Mortality after Sleeve Gastrectomy in Patients over 60 Years

Background

The population are getting older and obesity is growing. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is increasingly used worldwide but is still used with skepticism in the elderly. The purpose of our analysis is to judge the security of LSG in patients older than 60 years compared to patients younger than 60 years.

Methods

This retrospective review included data of all patients in Germany who underwent LSG between January 2005 and December 2016.The data were published online in the German Bariatric Surgery Registry. A total of 21,571 operations were gathered and divided into two groups: group I, patients <?60 years old; and group II, patients ≥?60 years old.

Results

The total number of patients and the mean body mass index of group I and group II was 19,786, 51.7?±?9.5 kg/m² and 1771, 49.2?±?8.1 kg/m², respectively. Regarding comorbidities, group II suffered statistically significantly more comorbidities than group I (p?<?0.001). The general postoperative complications were 4.9% in group I and 7.8% in group II (p?<?0.001). There was no significant difference in special postoperative complications (p?=?0.048) and a slightly higher intraoperative complication rate in group II (2.2% vs. 1.6%, p?=?0.048). Thirty-day mortality rate for group I versus II was 0.22% and 0.23% (p?=?0.977), respectively.

Conclusions

LSG is a low-risk operation and safe surgical method with acceptable, not elevated perioperative morbidity and mortality rates in patients ≥?60 years of age.

     

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.

     

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.

     

Risk Factors for Prolonged Length of Hospital Stay and Readmissions After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy and Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

Background

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic gastric bypass (LRYGB) are most commonly performed bariatric procedures. Laparoscopic approach and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols managed to decrease length of hospital and morbidity. However, there are patients in whom, despite adherence to the protocol, the length of stay (LOS) remains longer than targeted. This study aimed to assess potential risk factors for prolonged LOS and readmissions.

Methods

The study was a prospective observation with a post-hoc analysis of bariatric patients in a tertiary referral university teaching hospital. Inclusion criteria were undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Exclusion criteria were occurrence of perioperative complications, prior bariatric procedures, and lack of necessary data. The primary endpoints were the evaluations of risk factors for prolonged LOS and readmissions.

Results

Median LOS was 3 (2–4) days. LOS > 3 days occurred in 145 (29.47%) patients, 79 after LSG (25.82%) and 66 after LRYGB (35.48%; p = 0.008). Factors significantly prolonging LOS were low oral fluid intake, high intravenous volume of fluids administered on POD0, and every additional 50 km distance from habitual residence to bariatric center. The risk of hospital readmission rises with occurrence of intraoperative adverse events and low oral fluid intake on the day of surgery on.

Conclusions

Risk factors for prolonged LOS are low oral fluid intake, high intravenous volume of fluids administered on POD0, and every additional 50 km distance from habitual residence. Risk factors for hospital readmission are intraoperative adverse events and low oral fluid intake on the day of surgery.