Bile reflux after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: an unrecognized cause of postoperative pain

BackgroundTo determine, in a private practice, whether symptomatic bile reflux can occur after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for morbid obesity and the outcome after laparoscopic alimentary (Roux) limb lengthening. Bile reflux as a cause of pain after laparoscopic RYGB has not been previously described. We report on a series of patients with chronic pain after RYGB as a result of bile reflux owing an abnormally short alimentary limb.MethodsA prospective database of patients who underwent revisional surgery to treat symptomatic bile reflux at our center was retrospectively reviewed and analyzed for the onset of symptoms, interval to revision, length of alimentary limb, and outcome after revision.ResultsA total of 16 patients were diagnosed with bile reflux and underwent revisional surgery. The onset of symptoms occurred at 58.3 ± 22.2 months after RYGB. All patients complained of pain, 13 (81.3%) had vomiting, and 7 (43.8%) had dysphagia. Endoscopy was performed in all patients and confirmed the presence of bile in all patients and detected marginal ulceration in 5 (31.3%) and gastritis in 8 (50.0%). At revisional surgery, the mean alimentary limb length was 37.7 ± 12.4 cm (range 20–62 cm). At a mean follow-up of 14.9 months after revision, all patients had reported resolution of their symptoms.ConclusionAlthough previously unreported after RYGB, bile reflux can be an important possible cause of chronic pain. Bile reflux, however, responds favorably to alimentary limb lengthening to 100 cm and was not been seen in patients with an alimentary limb length >62 cm.     

Revision Surgery for Treatment of Weight Regain After Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass

Background

This study aims to evaluate results on revision surgery for weight regain after gastric bypass, based on surgical technique and follow-up.

Methods

This study is a retrospective analysis of 29 patients who presented weight regain on follow-up after more than 5 years, divided into four groups according to revision surgery type: group 1 (n?=?9) includes patients who underwent an increase in the length of the alimentary limb to 200 cm; group 2 (n?=?13) are patients who underwent an increase in the length of the alimentary limb and placing of a silicon ring; group 3 (n?=?2) are patients who underwent an increase in the length of the alimentary limb and gastric plication, and group 4 (n?=?5) are patients who underwent gastric plication and placing of a silicon ring.

Results

The average preoperative weight before revision surgery was 117.8 kg, and the average postoperative follow-up for revision surgery was 13.7 months. Weight loss after revision surgery was observed in all groups but was greater in patients with longer revisional postoperative follow-up. Patients who underwent placing of a silicon ring presented greater weight loss than those who had had such a band since the original gastric bypass operation.

Conclusions

Data suggest that revision surgery may be a useful tool in achieving weight loss in patients presenting weight regain following gastric bypass, obesity, bariatric surgery, gastric bypass, weight regain, and revision surgery.     

Treatment of liver failure post one anastomosis gastric bypass by revising to normal anatomy: A case report

IntroductionObesity and the associated metabolic syndrome are global health problems. Significant weight loss after bariatric surgery can cause a substantial difference in those comorbidities in obese patients. In this case, we described a rare complication of a patient who developed acute liver failure after an uneventful one anastomosis gastric bypass treated conservatively and revision of the one anastomosis gastric bypass to normal anatomy.Case presentationWe present a 52-year-old female known to have hypothyroidism and morbid obesity with a BMI of 45. For that, she underwent uneventful one anastomosis gastric bypass. Later, she developed liver failure and hepatic encephalopathy, which was managed conservatively and revision surgery to normal anatomy.DiscussionBariatric surgery plays an integral role in treating obese patients for its associated impacts, like facilitating weight loss and related metabolic syndrome improvement. The effects of bariatric surgery on liver functioning are controversial. Some malabsorptive procedures are linked to postoperative hepatic complications. However, it is uncommon in a recent new technique in bariatric surgery. Liver transplant and revision of the bariatric surgery have been described as management. However, optimal nutrition support without a liver transplant along with revision surgery is possible in experienced hands.ConclusionEarly detection of liver impairment and early intervention by a revision to normal anatomy by an experienced surgeon is considered the safest and most effective procedure for such patients. However, late detection where liver failure occurs, liver transplantation is the only effective treatment for preventing fatal outcomes.     

Laparoscopic fundoplication compared with laparoscopic gastric bypass in morbidly obese patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease

BackgroundGastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is commonly associated with morbid obesity. Laparoscopic fundoplication is a standard surgical treatment for GERD, and laparoscopic gastric bypass has been shown to effectively resolve GERD symptoms in the morbidly obese. We sought to compare the in-hospital outcomes of morbidly obese patients who underwent laparoscopic fundoplication for the treatment of GERD versus laparoscopic gastric bypass for the treatment of morbid obesity and related conditions, including GERD, at U.S. academic medical centers.MethodsUsing the “International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision” procedural and diagnoses codes for morbidly obese patients with GERD, we obtained data from the University HealthSystem Consortium database for all patients who underwent laparoscopic fundoplication or laparoscopic gastric bypass from October 2004 to December 2007 (n = 27,264). The outcome measures included the patient demographics, length of stay, in-hospital overall complications, mortality, risk-adjusted mortality ratio (observed to expected mortality), and hospital costs.ResultsCompared with the patients who underwent laparoscopic gastric bypass, those who underwent laparoscopic fundoplication had a lower severity of illness score (P <.05). The overall in-hospital complications were significantly lower in the laparoscopic gastric bypass group (P <.05). The mean length of stay, observed mortality, risk-adjusted mortality, and hospital costs were comparable between the 2 treatment groups.ConclusionLaparoscopic gastric bypass is as safe as laparoscopic fundoplication for the treatment of GERD in the morbidly obese. Hence, morbidly obese patients with GERD should be referred for bariatric surgery evaluation and offered laparoscopic gastric bypass as a surgical option.     

Long-term comparative effectiveness of gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy on use of antireflux medication: a difference-in-differences analysis

BackgroundGastroesophageal reflux (GERD) is common among patients with obesity who undergo bariatric surgery. Although gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy are the most common bariatric operations performed in the United States, their long-term comparative effectiveness on GERD medication use is unknown.ObjectiveTo compare the long-term effectiveness of gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy on use of antireflux medication.Setting: National cohort undergoing inpatient bariatric surgery.MethodsThis is a retrospective study of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2017. A difference-in-differences analysis was conducted to evaluate the differential change in antireflux medication use between groups before and after surgery.ResultsA total of 16,640 patients underwent gastric bypass, and 26,724 patients underwent sleeve gastrectomy. Before surgery, GERD medication use was higher among patients who underwent gastric bypass (62.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 62.0%–63.7%) compared with patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy (60.1%; 95% CI: 59.3%–60.9%). Five years after surgery, GERD medication use was lower in patients who underwent gastric bypass (47.8%; 95% CI: 46.3%–49.3%) compared with patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy (53.7%; 95% CI: 50.5%–56.9%). The differential decrease from baseline GERD medication use was greater for patients who underwent gastric bypass at 2 years (–4.1 percentage points [pp]; 95% CI: –1.7 to –6.5 pp), 3 years (–4.3 pp; 95% CI: –1.6 to –7.0 pp), 4 years (–6.9 pp; 95% CI: –4.1 to –9.6 pp), and 5 years (–8.3 pp; 95% CI: –3.7 to 12.8 pp) after surgery.ConclusionThough use of antireflux medication decreased following both procedures, gastric bypass was associated with a greater reduction in antireflux medication use 5 years after surgery compared with sleeve gastrectomy. Understanding the long-term comparative effectiveness of these common bariatric operations may better inform treatment decisions among patients and surgeons.     

Outcome following resectional gastric bypass for failed bariatric surgery

PurposeAn increasing number of patients who have failed a primary bariatric procedure are presenting for revisional surgery. There are few studies examining the outcome following any revisional surgery, and none examining resectional gastric bypass (RGB) in this role. We examine the indications, outcome, and patient satisfaction following conversion of a prior bariatric procedure to the RGB.MethodsFrom May 1992 to May 1998, 38 patients underwent RGB as a conversion from prior bariatric operations. Weight loss, indications, and complications were reviewed. A patient survey was used to examine patient satisfaction.ResultsMean body mass index decreased from 46 to 33 kg/m² following revision to RGB. Median weight loss after revision to RGB was 34 kg. From the time of the initial bariatric procedure to post-RGB, mean body mass index decreased from 52 to 33 kg/m². Patients with pre-RGB Visick scores of 3 or 4 improved following RGB. Ninety-five percent of respondents were satisfied with the RGB, and 85% thought it improved their lives. Constant nausea and vomiting and failure of weight control were the most common indications for revision.ConclusionsResectional gastric bypass is a safe and effective revisional procedure for patients who have had failed or complicated bariatric surgery.     

Obesity Surgery Results Depending on Technique Performed: Long-Term Outcome

Background  Many techniques have excellent results at 2 years of follow-up but some matters regarding their long-term efficacy have arisen. This is why bariatric surgery results must be analyzed in long-term follow-up. The aim of this study was to extend the analysis over 5 years, evaluating weight loss, morbidity, and mortality of the surgical procedures performed. Methods  This was a retrospective cohort study of the different procedures for morbid obesity practiced in our Department of Surgery for morbid obesity. The results have been analyzed in terms of weight loss, morbidity improvement, and postoperative morbidity (Bariatric Analysis And Reporting Outcome System). Results  One hundred twenty-five patients were operated on open vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG), 150 patients of open biliopancreatic diversion (BPD) of Scopinaro, 100 patients of open modified BPD (common limb 75 cm; alimentary limb 225 cm), and 115 patients of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGBP). Mean follow-up was: VBG 12 years, BPD 7 years, and LRYGBP 4 years. An excellent initial weight loss was observed at the end of the second year of follow-up in all techniques, but from this time an important regain of weight was observed in VBG group and a discrete weight regain in LRYGBP group. Only BPD groups kept excellent weight results so far in time. Mortality was: VBG 1.6%, BPD 1.2%, and LRYGBP 0%. Early postoperative complications were: VBG 25%, BPD 20.4%, and LRYGBP 20%. Late postoperative morbidity was: protein malnutrition 11% in Scopinaro BPD, 3% in Modified BPD group, and no cases reported either in VBG group or LRYGBP group; iron deficiency 20% VBG, 62% Scopinaro BPD, 40% modified BPD, and 30.5% LRYGBP. A 14.5% of VBG group required revision surgery to gastric bypass or to BPD due to 100% weight regain or vomiting. A 3.2% of Scopinaro BPD with severe protein malnutrition required revision surgery to lengthen common limb to 100 cm. A 0.8% of LRYGBP required revision surgery to distal LRYGBP (common limb 75 cm) due to 100% weight regain. Conclusions  The most complex bariatric procedures increase the effectiveness but unfortunately they also increase morbidity and mortality. LRYGBP is safe and effective for the treatment of morbid obesity. Modified BPD (75–225 cm) can be considered for the treatment of superobesity (body mass index > 50 kg/m²), and restrictive procedures such as VBG should only be performed in well-selected patients due to high rates of failure in long-term follow-up.     

Biliopancreatic Diversion with Duodenal Switch Combined with Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding

Background: The authors investigated the usefulness of an approach combining biliopancreatic diversion (BPD) with duodenal switch (DS) and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) in morbidly obese patients. Methods: 258 morbidly obese patients underwent bariatric surgery. 80 underwent gastric bypass (GBP), with an 80-ml pouch, a 120-150-cm common channel and a 350-cm alimentary limb (Group 1). 178 underwent BPD combined with DS-LAGB (Group 2): an 80cm common channel and a 200-cm alimentary limb were created in 68 patients (Subgroup 2a); a 120-cm common channel and a 300-cm alimentary limb were created in 110 patients (Subgroup 2b). Quality of life was assessed using the Moorehead-Ardelt Quality of Life Questionnaire (MA-QLQ). Results: At 2 years, mean BMI and %EWL were 27.8 kg/m² and 77.4 (Group 1), 25.2 kg/m² and 99.6 (Subgroup 2a), and 27.6 kg/m² and 79.3 (Subgroup 2b), respectively. 4 GBP patients regained their weight 2 years after surgery. There was 1 death, not related to surgery in Subgroup 2b. Preoperative MA-QLQ scores were similar between groups; at 2 years, MA-QLQ scores were higher in Subgroups 2a and 2b compared to Group 1 (+2.49 and +2.59 vs +0.98, respectively). Conclusion: Combination bariatric surgery is a safe, effective and durable weight loss option for the treatment of morbid obesity.     

Gastric bezoar after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for morbid obesity: A case report

IntroductionWe aimed to present a patient with gastric pouch bezoar after having a bariatric surgery.Presentation of caseSixty-three years old morbid obese female had a laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery 14 months ago. She has lost 88% of her excess body mass index; but started to suffer from nausea, abdominal distention and vomiting lately, especially for the last two months. The initial evaluation by endoscopy, computed tomography (CT) and an upper gastrointestinal contrast series overlooked the pathology in the gastric pouch and did not display any abnormality. However, a second endoscopy revealed a 5 cm in diameter phytobezoar in the gastric pouch which was later endoscopically removed. After the bezoar removal, her complaints relieved completely.DiscussionThe gastric bezoars may be confused with the other pathologies because of the dyspeptic complaints of these patients. The patients that had a bariatric surgery; are more prone to bezoar formation due to their potential eating disorders and because of the gastro-enterostomy made to a small gastric pouch after the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery.ConclusionPossibility of a bezoar formation should be kept in mind in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients who has nausea and vomiting complaints. Removal of the bezoar provides a dramatic improvement in the complaints of these patients.     

Gastrointestinal symptoms before and after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a longitudinal assessment

BackgroundRoux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is an effective treatment for morbid obesity, but many patients have increased gastrointestinal symptoms.ObjectivesTo evaluate gastrointestinal symptoms and food intolerance before and after RYGB over time in a large cohort of morbidly obese patients.SettingA high-volume bariatric center of excellence.MethodsA prospective cohort study was performed in patients who underwent RYGB between September 2014 and July 2015, with 2-year follow-up. Consecutive patients screened for bariatric surgery answered the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) and a food intolerance questionnaire before RYGB and 2 years after surgery. The prevalence of gastrointestinal symptoms before and after surgery and the association between patient characteristics and postoperative gastrointestinal symptoms were assessed.ResultsFollow-up was 86.2% (n = 168) for patients undergoing primary RYGB and 93.3% (n = 28) for revisional RYGB. The total mean GSRS score increased from 1.69 to 2.31 after surgery (P < .001), as did 13 of 16 of the individual scores. Preoperative GSRS score is associated with postoperative symptom severity (B = .343, P < .001). Food intolerance was present in 16.1% of patients before primary RYGB, increasing to 69.6% after surgery (P < .001). Patients who underwent revisional RYGB had a symptom severity and prevalence of food intolerance comparable with that among patients with primary RYGB, even though they had more symptoms before revisional surgery.ConclusionsTwo years after surgery, patients who underwent primary RYGB have increased gastrointestinal symptoms and food intolerance compared with the preoperative state. It is important that clinicians are aware of this and inform patients before surgery.     

Racial disparities in perioperative outcomes after bariatric surgery

BackgroundNonHispanic black patients bear a disproportionate burden of the obesity epidemic and its related medical co-morbidities. While bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for morbid obesity, black patients access bariatric surgery at lower rates than nonHispanic white patients.ObjectivesTo examine racial differences before bariatric surgery and in short-term perioperative outcomes and complications, and the extent to which race is independently associated with perioperative morbidity and mortality.SettingMetabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program national database.MethodsData were extracted from the 2015 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program Participant Use File. Multivariate analysis was used to identify differences in mortality, length of stay, readmission, and reintervention by race in patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG).ResultsA total of 108,198 patients were included in the analysis. There were significant differences in perioperative disease burden. Black patients had a higher body mass index at the time they underwent surgery (laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: 48.0 versus 45.7 kg/m²; SG: 46.8 versus 44.9 kg/m²; P < .001). Black patients had significantly longer length of stay and higher rates of readmission in both the laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and SG groups. In the SG group, black patients had significantly higher 30-day mortality (.2% versus .1%, odds ratio = 3.613, 95% confidence interval 1.990–6.558, P < .001) and higher rates of reoperation or reintervention.ConclusionsWe found significant racial disparities in bariatric surgery outcomes, including higher mortality in black patients undergoing SG. The specific causes of these disparities remain unclear and must be the subject of future research.     

Proposal for a bariatric mortality risk classification system for patients undergoing bariatric surgery

BackgroundAn obesity surgery mortality risk score derived from a single clinical series can be used to stratify the mortality risk of patients undergoing gastric bypass. However, such a scoring system does not take into account 2 important factors in contemporary bariatric surgery—increased use of the laparoscopic approach and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding. The present study analyzed the preoperative factors that might predict in-hospital mortality after bariatric surgery using data from academic medical centers and proposes a classification system for predicting mortality.MethodsUsing the “International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision,” diagnosis and procedural codes, the data for all patients who underwent bariatric surgery for the treatment of morbid obesity from 2002 to 2009 were obtained from the University HealthSystem Consortium database. The limitations of this database included the lack of the body mass index and the underestimation of some co-morbidities, such as sleep apnea. Multiple regression analyses were performed to determine the factors predictive of greater in-hospital mortality. The factors examined included race, gender, age, co-morbidities, surgical technique (laparoscopic versus open), bariatric operation (gastric bypass versus nongastric bypass), and payer type. A scoring system was devised by assigning 1 point for each major factor (those with an adjusted odds ratio [AOR] of ≥2.0) and .5 point for each minor factor (those with an AOR <2.0). Using contemporary data from 2007 to 2009, the in-hospital mortality was analyzed according to the classification: class I, 0-0.5 point; class II, 1.0–1.5 points; class III, 2.0–3.0 points; and class IV, ≥3.5 points.ResultsDuring the 8-year period, 105,287 patients underwent bariatric surgery. The operations included laparoscopic gastric bypass (45%), open gastric bypass (41%), and laparoscopic gastric banding or gastroplasty (14%). The overall in-hospital mortality rate was .17%. The number of deaths per 1000 bariatric operations decreased from 4.0 in 2002 to .6 in 2009. Using regression analyses, the factors predictive of greater in-hospital mortality were male gender (AOR 3.2), gastric bypass procedure (AOR 5.8), open surgical technique (AOR 4.8), Medicare payer (AOR 3.0), diabetes (AOR 1.6), and age >60 years (AOR 1.9). The mortality rate was .10% for class I patients, .15% for class II, .33% for class III, and .70% for class IV (P < .05 among all classes).ConclusionWithin the context of academic centers, the mortality after bariatric surgery has decreased substantially since 2002, with an increase in the use of the laparoscopic technique and laparoscopic gastric banding. A bariatric mortality risk classification system was developed to stratify mortality, given the limits of this database, which does not include the body mass index and underestimates the incidence of sleep apnea. It might be useful to aid surgeons in surgical decision-making, to inform patients of their risks, and for quality improvement reporting purposes.     

Laparoscopic revisional surgery after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy

BackgroundFailure of primary bariatric surgery is frequently due to weight recidivism, intractable gastric reflux, gastrojejunal strictures, fistulas, and malnutrition. Of these patients, 10–60% will undergo reoperative bariatric surgery, depending on the primary procedure performed. Open reoperative approaches for revision to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) have traditionally been advocated secondary to the perceived difficulty and safety with laparoscopic techniques. Few studies have addressed revisions after RYGB. The aim of the present study was to provide our experience regarding the safety, efficacy, and weight loss results of laparoscopic revisional surgery after previous RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy procedures.MethodsA retrospective analysis of patients who underwent laparoscopic revisional bariatric surgery for complications after previous RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy from November 2005 to May 2007 was performed. Technical revisions included isolation and transection of gastrogastric fistulas with partial gastrectomy, sleeve gastrectomy conversion to RYGB, and revision of RYGB. The data collected included the pre- and postoperative body mass index, operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, and intraoperative and postoperative complications.ResultsA total of 26 patients underwent laparoscopic revisional surgery. The primary operations had consisted of RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy. The complications from primary operations included gastrogastric fistulas, refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease, weight recidivism, and gastric outlet obstruction. The mean prerevision body mass index was 42 ± 10 kg/m². The average follow-up was 240 days (range 11–476). The average body mass index during follow-up was 37 ± 8 kg/m². Laparoscopic revision was successful in all but 1 patient, who required conversion to laparotomy for staple line leak. The average operating room time and estimated blood loss was 131 ± 66 minutes and 70 mL, respectively. The average hospital stay was 6 days. Three patients required surgical exploration for hemorrhage, staple line leak, and an incarcerated hernia. The overall complication rate was 23%, with a major complication rate of 11.5%. No patients died.ConclusionLaparoscopic revisional bariatric surgery after previous RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy is technically challenging but compared well in safety and efficacy with the results from open revisional procedures. Intraoperative endoscopy is a key component in performing these procedures.     

Revision Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass: An Effective Approach Following Failure of Primary Bariatric Procedures

Background  

The laparoscopic approach plays an important role in the primary surgical management of morbid obesity. This study evaluated the potential role of the laparoscopic approach to revision Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) in the management of selected patients who fail to lose adequate weight or regain weight after primary bariatric surgery.     

Comparison of robotic revisional weight loss surgery and laparoscopic revisional weight loss surgery using the MBSAQIP database

BackgroundThe most common bariatric operation in the United States is sleeve gastrectomy. The second and third most common bariatric operations are gastric bypass and revisional bariatric surgery, respectively.ObjectiveThe objective of the study was to assess the differences between laparoscopic revisional weight loss surgery (LRWLS) and robotic revisional weight loss surgery (RRWLS).SettingUniversity hospital, United States.MethodsData were extracted from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database spanning 2015 to 2016 to look at demographic characteristics, operative time, co-morbidities, and length of stay. Using the specified Current Procedural Terminology codes, patients who underwent bariatric procedures and required a revisional procedure were identified.ResultsA total of 354,865 patients were included in this study; 37,917 (11.9%) patients required revision after undergoing a bariatric procedure. Of these revisions, 94.9% (n = 35,988) were LRWLS, and 5.1% (n = 1929) were RRWLS. There were no differences in patient characteristics between the LRWLS and RRWLS groups. There was a significant difference between the RRWLS and the LRWLS groups in operative time, with the RRWLS group taking 167 minutes and the LRWLS group taking 103 minutes (P < .001). There was a statistically significant increase in length of stay for RRWLS, 2.3 days versus 1.7 for LRWLS (P < .005). In terms of postoperative complications, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups.ConclusionsRRWLS is as safe as LRWLS in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database. There is an increase in operative times and length of stay for robotic cases.     

Revision surgery after sleeve gastrectomy: a nationwide study with 10 years of follow-up

BackgroundSleeve gastrectomy is the most common bariatric procedure worldwide. Several studies report good short- and midterm results. However, recent studies report alarming long-term outcomes, in particular about the revision rate.ObjectivesThe aim of this study is the assessment of the revisional rate after sleeve gastrectomy and the analysis of most common reasons for surgical conversion and early complications.SettingThis study is based on a national claims database comprehensive of all bariatric procedures performed in a 10-year period.MethodsThe French Programme De Médicalisation des Systèmes d’Information database was used to identify all patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy between 2008 and 2018. Codes for diagnoses and procedures were used to describe the reason for and the morbidity of revision surgeries. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was performed to compare the risk of having a revision procedure.ResultsDuring the analyzed period, a total of 224,718 sleeve gastrectomies were performed. The rate of revision surgery after sleeve gastrectomy was 4.7%, 7.5%, and 12.2%, at 5, 7, and 10 years post procedure, respectively. A history of gastric banding was associated with a higher risk of revision (hazard ratio, 2.81; 95% CI, 2.66–2.95; P < .001). The most common revision procedure was gastric bypass (75.2%), followed by resleeve (18.7%). The main reasons for revision surgery were persistence of obesity (87.0%) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (5.2%). After revision surgery, we observed the following complications: 5.1% gastric leak, 18% bleeding, and reoperation rate of 6.4%.ConclusionsThis study suggests that a large number of patients who initially underwent a sleeve gastrectomy will undergo a revisional surgery. This information should be considered in the initial choice of the bariatric procedure, and patients should be informed of the mid- and long-term risks.     

Risk factors for acute respiratory failure in bariatric surgery: data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, 2006–2008

BackgroundAcute respiratory failure (ARF) can be a life-threatening postoperative complication after bariatric surgery and is defined as the presence of acute respiratory distress or pulmonary insufficiency. We sought to identify predictors of ARF in patients who underwent bariatric surgery.MethodsUsing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, from 2006 to 2008, the clinical data from morbidly obese patients who underwent bariatric surgery were examined. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to identify the independent factors predictive of ARF. The factors examined included patient characteristics, co-morbidities, payer type, teaching status of hospital, surgical techniques (laparoscopic versus open), and type of bariatric operation (gastric bypass versus nongastric bypass).ResultsA total of 304,515 patients underwent bariatric surgery during the 3-year period. The overall ARF rate was 1.35%. The greatest rate of ARF (4.10%) was observed after open gastric bypass surgery. The ARF rate was lower after laparoscopic than after the open surgical technique (.94% versus 3.87%, respectively; P < .01) and after nongastric bypass versus gastric bypass (.82% versus 1.54%, respectively; P < .01). Using multivariate regression analysis, congestive heart failure (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 5.1), open surgery (AOR 3.3), chronic renal failure (AOR 2.9), gastric bypass (AOR 2.5), peripheral vascular disease (AOR 2.4), male gender (AOR 1.9), age >50 years (AOR 1.8), Medicare payer (AOR 1.8), alcohol abuse (AOR 1.8), chronic lung disease (AOR 1.6), diabetes mellitus (AOR 1.2), and smoking (AOR 1.1) were factors associated with greater rates of ARF. Compared with patients without ARF, patients with ARF had significantly greater in-hospital mortality (5.69% versus .04%, P < .01).ConclusionWe identified multiple risk factors that have an effect on the development of acute respiratory failure after bariatric surgery. Surgeons should consider these factors in surgical decision-making and inform patients of their risk of this potentially life-threatening complication.     

Feasibility and safety of robot-assisted bariatric conversions and revisions

BackgroundConversions and revisions after bariatric procedures are inevitable and associated with longer operative time and higher complication rates. Because robot-assisted procedures allow better dissection, robotic conversions and revisions may be more beneficial to the patients than laparoscopic ones.ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare the feasibility and safety of robot-assisted conversions and revisions to laparoscopic procedures.SettingAcademic Hospital, United States.MethodsA retrospective chart review was performed on 94 consecutive patients who underwent a bariatric conversion or revision (revision of gastrojejunostomy, conversions of vertical sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, adjustable gastric banding to sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass to sleeve gastrectomy, adjustable gastric banding to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass to duodenal switch, and adjustable gastric banding to duodenal switch) between January 1, 2017, and February 28, 2019. Of these, 30 underwent a robot-assisted conversion or revision.ResultsPatients who underwent a robot-assisted approach were more likely to be older (45.4-versus 38.8-yr old) and lighter (44.6 versus 50.3 kg/m²) than patients who underwent a laparoscopic approach. The mean operative time was longer in the robot-assisted group (155.5 min) than in the laparoscopic group (113.3 min). No difference was observed between the 2 groups in the mean length of hospital stay, 30-day readmission rate, or 30-day reoperation rate. Results were similar when the baseline difference in age and body mass index were accounted for.ConclusionsRobot-assisted conversions and revisions were as feasible and safe as laparoscopic procedures. However, operative time was longer in robot-assisted conversions.     

The impact of previous fundoplication on laparoscopic gastric bypass outcomes: a case-control evaluation

Background  

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a common comorbid condition in morbidly obese gastric bypass candidates. Unfortunately, some patients who ultimately present for bariatric surgery have previously undergone Nissen fundoplication for GERD. Many surgeons consider previous fundoplication to be a relative contraindication to subsequent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) due to increased technical complexity and risk. We sought to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of a cohort of patients who had first undergone fundoplication and ultimately chose to later pursue LRYGB for morbid obesity (revision) to matched control patients.     

Percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography for choledocholithiasis after laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery

INTRODUCTIONGallstones are a common condition in bariatric patients after a laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). The management of ductal stones is challenging due to the altered gastrointestinal anatomy. Various techniques have been reported to manage bile duct stones.PRESENTATION OF CASEWe present the successful percutaneous trans hepatic management of common bile duct stones after LRYGB.One year after a LRYGB for morbid obesity, a 59-year-old female presented with acute cholecystitis. One month after laparoscopic cholecystectomy a 1 cm calculus was found within the distal CBD and patient underwent a percutaneous trans hepatic cholangiography under local anesthetic. This involved a right sided anterior segmental duct puncture. With the sphincter dilated to 10 mm, a balloon catheter was used to push the stone into the duodenum leaving an internal- external drain. Patient recovered completely at follow up.DISCUSSIONPatients with morbid obesity have a higher incidence of gallstones. After LRYGB, the altered anatomy does not allow the conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for choledocholithiasis.Various techniques have been reported as means of managing bile duct stones in LRYGB patients. These include a double balloon enteroscope-assisted ERCP, laparoscopic transgastric ERCP, laparoscopic or open biliary surgery and interventional radiology. We report a non-surgical approach using percutaneous transhepatic technique under local anesthetic that resulted effective and could be applied more extensively.CONCLUSIONDue to the increase of global obesity, bariatric centers need to strategically plan resources such as interventional radiology in order to manage post LRYGB choledocholithiasis safely, efficiently and in a cost effective manner.