Is esophagogastroduodenoscopy before Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy mandatory?

BackgroundRoux-Y Gastric Bypass is a frequently used technique in bariatric surgery. Postoperative anatomy is altered by exclusion of the stomach, which makes this organ inaccessible for future esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD). The value of preoperative assessment of the stomach is unclear. Some institutions choose to investigate the future remnant stomach by EGD, others do not. Aim of the present study is to quantify the yield of preoperative EGD in our institution.MethodsPatients, planned for primary laparoscopic Roux-Y Gastric Bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy from December 2007 until August 2012, were screened by EGD in advance. Results of EGD and patient characteristics were retrospectively analyzed and categorized according to a classification system based on intervention needed.Results523 patients (122 male, 401 female, mean age 44.3 years, average BMI 46.6) underwent preoperative EGD. In 257 patients (48.9%) no abnormality was found (group A), 117 patients (17.2%) had abnormalities without treatment consequences (B1), 84 patients (of the 326 tested [comment #1, reviewer #1, 26.8%] were H. Pylori positive (B2), in 75 (14.3%) treatment with proton pump inhibitors was required (B3), 6 (1.1%) required follow up EGD before surgery (C). For1 patient (0.2%) the operation was canceled because preoperative EGD presented with Barrett’s esophagus with carcinoma (D). When all abnormalities were taken into account, baselines did show a significant difference for age, gender and reflux symptoms.ConclusionStandard preoperative assessment by EGD in patients who are planned for bariatric surgery is not indicated. The number needed to screen to find clinically significant abnormalities is high.     

Is preoperative gastroscopy necessary before sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass?

Background

Consensus on the necessity of esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) before bariatric surgery is lacking. Recommendations and practices vary by country and unit. Several reports have expressed concerns on gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and its consequences after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and the risk of leaving a premalignant lesion in the excluded stomach after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy: what factors influence patient preference?

Background

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) are the most commonly performed bariatric procedures. RYGB involves altered gastrointestinal anatomy and 2 anastomoses, while SG involves gastric resection. When potential patients view images of the procedures, they may perceive RYGB to involve significant risk compared with SG, in which no significant gastrointestinal alterations are depicted.

Is laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy safer than laparoscopic gastric bypass? a comparison of 30-day complications using the MBSAQIP data registry

Background

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become popular due to its technical ease and excellent short-term results. Understanding the risk profile of LSG compared with the gold standard laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is critical for patient selection.

Is high BMI associated with specific complications after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass?

Controversy remains whether patients with body mass index (BMI) > or =50 kg/m2 experience more complications after laparoscopic Roux-en-y gastric bypass (LRYGB) than those with a lower BMI. Whether BMI > or =50 kg/m2 is associated with specific complications remains unknown. Charts of 152 patients who underwent LRYGB were reviewed. Logistic regression was used to determine whether high BMI is associated with minor or major complications. Overall, there was a trend that major complications occurred more frequently in patients with BMI > or =50 compared with BMI < 50, (30.4% vs. 19.8%, P = 0.138). Major bleeding complications occurred in 16.1 per cent of high BMI patients as compared with 5.2 per cent with lower BMI (P = 0.025). Multivariate regression found that BMI > or =50 was associated with higher odds of a major technical complication (OR = 2.73, P = 0.04), particularly for bleeding complications (odds ratio [OR] = 5.59, P = 0.01). Male gender was also associated with higher odds of a major technical complication (OR = 3.43, P = 0.04). These results suggest that high BMI patients may be better candidates for other types of weight loss surgery, such as staged procedures, and that surgeons early in their career should operate on patients with lower BMI.     

Do patients with higher baseline BMI have improved weight loss with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy?

Background

As sleeve gastrectomy (SG) becomes the most common bariatric procedure, it remains unclear for which patients laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) may be advantageous. Some contend that patients with higher initial body mass index (BMI) achieve better weight loss with LRYGB.

Conversion of failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding: Sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass?

BackgroundIn the literature, late complications and treatment failures in laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) have been reported. When the patient presents with failure of LAGB, surgeons have the option to convert it to a different procedure. The aim of our study is to evaluate and compare the safety and efficacy of converting LAGB to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB).MethodsBetween March 2008 and October 2012, a total of 54 patients underwent conversion of LAGB at our institution. Of these patients, 41 (75.9%) were converted to LRYGB, and 13 (24.1%) patients were converted to LSG. A retrospective review of a prospectively collected database was performed, noting the outcomes and complications of the procedure.ResultsMean body mass index at the time of conversion was 41.8±6.5 kg/m² in LRYGB and 39.0±6.6 kg/m² in LSG. Mean percentage of excess weight loss was 57.4%±17.0% and 62.4%±19.6% in LRYGB, and it was 47.7%±4.2% and 65.6%±34.5% in LSG at 12 months (P>.34) and 24 months (P>.79) after conversion. Of LRYGB patients, 7 (17.5%) were readmitted as a result of abdominal pain, dehydration, and nausea/vomiting, and 4 (10.0%) patients required reoperation. One LSG patient (8.3%) was readmitted for new-onset severe reflux and underwent hiatal hernia repair. She was converted to LRYGB 32 months after the LSG procedure. Readmission rate (P>.61) and reoperation rate (P>.63) did not show statistical difference between the 2 procedures.ConclusionConverting LAGB to LSG and LRYGB both seem feasible and resulted in substantial further weight loss.     

Safety of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in elderly patients – analysis of the MBSAQIP

Background

An increase in the prevalence of obesity and longer life expectancy has resulted in an increased number of candidates over the age of 60 who are pursuing a bariatric procedure.

Gastroesophageal reflux–related physiologic changes after sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a prospective comparative study

BackgroundThe development of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is a major concern as it affects the quality of life of the patients and potentially exposes them to the complications of GERD. The reported incidence of GERD after LSG is up to 35%. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is considered the procedure of choice for patients with morbid obesity with GERD but objective evidence based on physiologic studies for the same are limited.ObjectiveThe objectives of the study were to determine the physiologic changes related to gastroesophageal reflux based on symptoms index, 24-hour pH study, impedance, and manometry after LSG and LRYGB.SettingsTertiary care teaching hospital, India.MethodsThis registered study (CTRI/2017/06/008834) is a prospective, nonrandomized, open-label clinical trial comparing the incidence of GERD after LSG and LRYGB. In this study, non-GERD patients were evaluated for GERD based on clinical questionnaires, 24-hour pH study, and impedance manometry preoperatively and 6 months postoperatively.ResultsThirty patients underwent LSG, and 16 patients underwent LRYGB. The mean DeMeester score increased from 10.9 ± 11.8 to 40.2 ± 38.6 (P = .006) after LSG. The incidence of GERD after LSG was 66.6%. The increase in DeMeester score from 9.5 ± 4.6 to 12.2 ± 17.2 after LRYGB was not significant (P = .7). There was a significant increase in the nonacid reflux both after LSG and LRYGB.ConclusionThe incidence of GERD after LSG is high, making it a contraindication for LSG. LRYGB remains the preferred procedure for patients with GERD. However, more studies are needed to understand the physiologic changes in patients with preexisting GERD.     

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy as a revisional procedure for failed laparoscopic gastric banding with a “2-step approach”: a multicenter study

BackgroundLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has been proposed as an alternative revisional procedure for failed/complicated gastric banding. This is a retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database of revisional LSG after band removal for insufficient weight loss and/or band-related complications, using a 2-step approach. The outcomes were compared with a control group of primary LSG. The study was conducted at a university hospital (Sapienza University of Rome-Polo Pontino, Icot, Latina, Italy) and 2 community general hospitals (Hospital Andosilla Civita Castellana, Viterbo, Italy and Hospital Villa D'Agri, Potenza, Italy).MethodsA total of 76 revisional LSG procedures was recorded; a control group of 279 LSG patients was selected. The primary endpoint was to compare the perioperative complication rate between the revisional versus the control group. Secondary endpoints were operative time, conversion rate, postoperative length of stay and percentage excess weight loss (%EWL) at 6, 12, and 24 months.ResultsThe indications for band removal were inadequate weight loss (47 patients), slippage (10 patients), erosion (7 patients), and pouch dilation (12 patients). All procedures were completed laparoscopically. The median operative time was 78 minutes for the revision LSG and 65 minutes for the control LSG (P<.05). In the revision group, the overall complication rate was 17.1%, and the median postoperative length of stay was 4 days; in the control group, the overall complication rate was 10.7%, and the median postoperative length of stay was 3. No complications requiring reoperation or readmission occurred in the revision group. In the control group, there were 5 cases of major complications. All the patients completed the follow-up. A total of 56 patients in the revision group and 184 patients in the control group were followed-up for at least 24 months. The %EWL at 6, 12, and 24 months was 46.5%, 66.4%, and 78.5%, respectively, in the revision group, and 49.8%, 78.2%, and 78%, respectively, in the control group.ConclusionResults confirmed that LSG, performed in 2 steps, is an effective revision procedure for failed or complicated laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding with good perioperative outcomes and 2-year weight loss.     

Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: is there a difference in outcomes?

Background  

Application of the robot for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass has been slow to evolve, despite its rapid acceptance in other fields. This is largely due to associated costs of technology, reports of increased operative time, and inadequate data available to correlate the benefits of robotics to a clinical outcome. The authors present a comparative study between laparoscopic and robot-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass performed at a specialized institution for robotic surgery.     

Reduction in obesity-related comorbidities: is gastric bypass better than sleeve gastrectomy?

Background

Bariatric surgery is currently the most effective treatment for morbid obesity. It provides not only substantial weight loss, but also resolution of obesity-related comorbidities. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has rapidly been gaining in popularity. However, there are limited data on the reduction of obesity-related comorbidities for LSG compared to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of laparoscopic LSG versus LRYGB for the treatment of obesity-related comorbidities.

Methods

A total of 558 patients who underwent either LSG or LRYGB for morbid obesity at the Westchester Medical Center between April 2008 and September 2010 were included. Data were collected prospectively into a computerized database and reviewed for this study. Fisher’s exact test analyses compared 30-day, 6-month, and 1-year outcomes of obesity-related comorbidities.

Results

A total of 558 patients were included in the analysis of obesity-related comorbidity resolution; 200 underwent LSG and 358 underwent LRYGB. After 1 year, 86.2 % of the LSG patients had one or more comorbidities in remission compared to 83.1 % LRYGB patients (P = 0.688). With the exception of GERD (?0.09 vs. 50 %; P < 0.001), similar comorbidity remission rates were observed between LSG and LRYGB for sleep apnea (91.2 vs. 82.8 %; P = 0.338), hyperlipidemia (63 vs. 55.8 %; P = 0.633), hypertension (38.8 vs. 52.9 %; P = 0.062), diabetes (58.6 vs. 65.5 %; P = 0.638), and musculoskeletal disease (66.7 vs. 79.4 %; P = 0.472).

Conclusions

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy markedly improves most obesity-related comorbidities. Compared to LRYGB, LSG may have equal in reducing sleep apnea, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, diabetes, and musculoskeletal disease. LRYGB appears to be more effective at GERD resolution than LSG.     

Radiological studies after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: routine or selective?

Early detection of complications after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) can be difficult because of the subtle clinical findings in obese patients. Consequently, routine postoperative upper gastrointestinal contrast studies (UGI) have been advocated for detection of leak from the gastrojejunostomy. The medical records of 368 consecutive patients undergoing LRYGB were analyzed to determine the efficacy of selective use of radiological studies after LRYGB. Forty-one patients (11%) developed signs suggestive of complications. Of the 41 symptomatic patients, two were explored urgently, 39 (10%) had radiological studies, and 16 of them (41%) were diagnosed with postoperative complications. Overall morbidity of the series was 4.8 per cent. Four patients (1.1%) developed a leak from the gastrojejunostomy and were correctly diagnosed by computerized tomography (CT). The sensitivity and specificity of CT in determining leak was 100 per cent, with positive and negative predictive value of 100 per cent. The mortality of the series was 0 per cent. No radiologic studies were performed in asymptomatic patients, and no complications developed in these patients. Our results show that selective radiological evaluation in patients with suspected complications after LRYGB is safe. High sensitivity makes CT the test of choice in patients with suspected complication after LRYGB. Routine radiological studies are not warranted.     

Does fellow participation in laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass affect perioperative outcomes?

Background

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) requires specialized training commonly acquired during a fellowship. We hypothesized that fellows affect patient outcomes and this effect varies during training.

Methods

We included all LRYGB from the 2005 to 2009 American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Cases without trainees (attending) were compared to those with trainees of ??6?years (fellow). Outcomes were pulmonary, infectious, and wound complications and deep venous thrombosis (DVT). Multivariable regression controlled for age, BMI, and comorbidities.

Results

Of the 18,333 LRYGB performed, 4,349 (24?%) were fellow cases. Fellow patients had a higher BMI (46.1 vs. 45.7, p?<?0.001) and fewer comorbidities. Mortality was 0.2 and 0.1?% and overall morbidity was 4.8 and 6.0?% for attending and fellow groups, respectively. On adjusted analysis, mortality was similar, but fellow cases had 30?% more morbidity (p?=?0.001). Specifically, fellows increased the odds of superficial surgical site infections (SSSIs) [odds ratio (OR)?=?1.4, p?=?0.01], urinary infections (UTIs) (OR?=?1.7, p?=?0.002), and sepsis (OR?=?1.5, p?=?0.05). During the first 6 months, fellows increased the odds of DVT (OR?=?4.7, p?=?0.01), SSIs (OR?=?1.5, p?=?0.001), UTIs (OR?=?1.8, p?=?0.004), and sepsis (OR?=?1.9, p?=?0.008). By the second half of training, fellow cases demonstrated outcomes equivalent to attending cases.

Conclusions

Involving fellows in LRYGB may increase DVT, SSIs, UTIs, and sepsis, especially early in training. By completion of their training, cases involving fellows exhibited outcomes similar to cases without trainees. This supports both the need for fellowship training in bariatric surgery and the success of training to optimize patient outcomes.