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.     

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.     

Health disparity in access to bariatric surgery

BackgroundSociodemographic disparities in terms of access to bariatric surgery are ongoing.ObjectivesThis study aimed to examine the trends for bariatric interventions based on patient characteristics from 2011 to 2018 in the state of New York.SettingAdministrative statewide database.MethodsThis study used the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database to identify all patients with obesity who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG), and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) between 2011 and 2018. The trends were studied for the types of bariatric procedures performed across different patient characteristics, including median household income as determined based on ZIP code. A multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to compare the yearly trends.ResultsWe identified 111,793 patients who underwent bariatric surgery. The number of bariatric procedures increased from 9304 in 2011 to 16,946 in 2018. RYGB was the most performed bariatric operation in 2011, but was replaced by SG from 2013 to 2018. Patients living in the highest decile median household income ZIP code areas had the highest increase in SG (odds ratio [OR], 1.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.46–1.55; P < .0001) and the largest decrease in LAGB (OR, .53; 95% CI, .51–.56; P = .0007).ConclusionsThe use of bariatric surgery increased significantly from 2011 to 2018. However, the disproportionately and substantially increased use of SG and the decreased use of LAGB in patients living in wealthier areas suggest that disparity in the use of bariatric interventions still exists. Public health efforts should be made to equalize access to bariatric surgery.     

Comparative analysis of the single-anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) to established bariatric procedures: an assessment of 2-year postoperative data illustrating weight loss,type 2 diabetes,and nutritional status in a single US center

BackgroundThe sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and single-anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with SG (SADI-S) are recognized bariatric procedures. A comparison has never been made between these 3 procedures and especially in different body mass index (BMI) categories.ObjectiveThe study aimed to analyze a large cohort of patients undergoing either laparoscopic (L) SG, LRYGB, or LSADI-S to evaluate and compare weight loss and glycosylated hemoglobin level. The secondary aim was to compare the nutritional outcomes between LRYGB and LSADI-S.SettingPrivate practice, United States.MethodsThis is a retrospective review of 878 patients who underwent LSG, LRYGB, or LSADI-S from April 2014 through October 2015 by 5 surgeons in a single institution. For weight loss analysis, the patients were categorized into 4 different categories as follows: patients regardless of their preoperative BMI, patients with preoperative BMI <45 kg/m², patients with preoperative BMI 45 to 55 kg/m², and patients with preoperative BMI >55 kg/m².ResultsA total of 878 patients were identified for analysis. Of 878 patients, 448 patients, 270 patients, and 160 patients underwent LSG, LRYGB, and LSADI-S, respectively. Overall, at 12 and 24 months, the weight loss was highest with LSADI-S, followed by LRYGB and LSG in all 4 categories. At 2 years, the patients lost 19.5, 16.1, and 11.3 BMI points after LSADI-S, LRYGB, and LSG, respectively. In addition, the weight loss was highest in patients with preoperative BMI <45 kg/m² and lowest in patients with preoperative BMI >55 kg/m² at 12 and 24 months. Also, there were no statistically significant differences between the nutritional outcomes between LRYGB and LSADI-S. The LSADI-S had significantly lower rates of abnormal glycosylated hemoglobin than LRYGB and LSG at 12 months (P < .001).ConclusionsThe weight loss outcomes and glycosylated hemoglobin rates were better with LSADI-S than LRYGB or LSG. The nutritional outcomes between LRYGB and LSADI-S were similar.     

Early cardiac complications after bariatric surgery: does the type of procedure matter?

BackgroundMajor adverse cardiac events (MACE) can be a cause of postoperative mortality. This is specifically important in bariatric surgery due to obesity-related cardiovascular risk factors.ObjectiveTo assess postoperative cardiac adverse events after bariatric surgery and its independent predictors.SettingA retrospective analysis of 2011–2015 Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project-National Inpatient Sample.MethodsData on patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) were retrieved. MACE was identified as a composite variable including myocardial infarction, acute ischemic heart disease without myocardial infarction, and acute heart failure. Dysrhythmia (excluding premature beats) was identified as a separate outcome. Multivariate regression analysis for MACE was performed using demographic factors, co-morbidities, and type of surgery.ResultsThe analysis included 108,432 patients (SG: 54.6%, RYGB: 45.4%). MACE was found in 116 patients (.1%), and dysrhythmia occurred in 3670 patients (3.4%). Median length of stay in patients with MACE was 4.5 versus 2 days in others (P < .001). There were 43 deaths overall, and 31 were in patients with MACE or dysrhythmia (P < .001). Age ≥ 50 years, male sex, congestive heart failure, chronic pulmonary disease, ischemic heart disease, history of pulmonary emboli, and fluid or electrolyte disorders were independent predictors of MACE based on multivariate analysis. Type of surgery (SG versus RYGB) was not an independent predictor for MACE (odds ratio 1.41, 95% confidence interval: .77–2.55).ConclusionsWhile cardiac complications are rare after bariatric surgery, their occurrence is associated with increased length of stay, hospital charges, and mortality. Older age, male sex, cardiopulmonary co-morbidities, and fluid or electrolyte disorders are predictive of MACE. RYGB does not increase the risk of MACE compared with SG.     

Assessment of postoperative nausea and vomiting after bariatric surgery using a validated questionnaire

BackgroundPostoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is known to occur after bariatric surgery, with over two thirds of patients affected. However, variability exists in how to objectively measure PONV.ObjectivesThe goals of the present study were to use a validated, patient-centered scoring tool, the Rhodes Index of Nausea, Vomiting, and Retching to measure the severity of PONV after bariatric surgery, to directly compare PONV between patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), and to identify risk factors for the development of PONV after bariatric surgery.SettingBarnes-Jewish Hospital/Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, United States of America.MethodsThe Washington University Weight Loss Surgery team prospectively surveyed patients from January 1, 2017 to December 1, 2018 at the following 6 different timepoints: postoperative day (POD) 0, POD 1, POD 2, POD 3 to 4, the first postoperative outpatient visit (POV 1: POD 5–25), and the second postoperative visit (POV 2: POD 25–50). At each timepoint, a cumulative Rhodes score was calculated from the sum of 8 questions. The American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database was used to collect patient demographic characteristics and perioperative clinical data.ResultsA total of 274 patients met study criteria and completed 605 Rhodes questionnaires. Two hundred fifty Rhodes questionnaires were completed by patients after SG and 355 were completed by patients after LRYGB. Total Rhodes scores are statistically higher in LSG patients compared with patients who underwent LRYGB (LSG = 5.45 ± 6.27; LRYGB = 3.08 ± 4.19, P = .0002). Additionally, at the earlier timepoints, scores were higher among patients who underwent LSG than those who had undergone LRYGB as follows: POD 0 (LSG = 6.96 ± 6.50; LRYGB = 2.89 ± 2.90, P = .0115), POD 1 (LSG = 8.20 ± 6.76; LRYGB = 2.88 ± 3.44, P < .0001), and POD 2 (LSG = 4.05 ± 4.88; LRYGB = 2.06 ± 3.43, P = .05). On subset analysis, examining patients who either underwent an LSG or LRYGB, both procedures had a statistically significant PONV peak emerge on POV 2. Last, overall Rhodes scores were statistically higher in female patients compared with male patients (female: 4.43 ± 5.46; male: 2.35 ± 3.90, P = .021). Although the magnitude of the difference varied somewhat across POD time intervals, the difference was most pronounced at POV 2.ConclusionsThis is the largest study using a validated nausea and vomiting questionnaire to objectively measure PONV after bariatric surgery. The factors found to be most associated with increased PONV were LSG and female sex. Ultimately, these data can help bariatric surgery programs, including Washington University Weight Loss Surgery, identify patients who may require more intensive treatment of PONV, particularly POD 0 to 2, and help to identify patients that continue to struggle with PONV in the later surgical recovery phase.     

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.     

Surgeon factors are strongly correlated with who receives a sleeve gastrectomy versus a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

BackgroundSleeve gastrectomy (SG) has replaced Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as the most common bariatric operation. While SG constitutes ～70% of all bariatric volume, we hypothesize that the distribution of SG versus RYGB varies widely at the level of the surgeon and that surgeon rather than patient factors are the primary driver of the procedure performed.ObjectivesTo determine the distribution of bariatric procedures performed at the surgeon level.SettingPopulation-level analysis using the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) for New York State (2004–2014).MethodsIdentified surgeons performing SG and RYGB using billing codes. Logistic regression performed to determine the impact of surgeon, patient, and hospital factors on receiving a RYGB.ResultsOf the 142 surgeons who perform >5 bariatric operations per year, 32 (22.5%) performed a SG in ≥95% of their bariatric cases in the year 2014. In logistic regression, diabetes (odds ratio [OR] 1.45; P < .001) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (OR 1.36; P < .001) were associated with receiving a RYGB. However, the most correlated factor was whether the surgeon had a RYGB case volume >66^th percentile in the preceding year (OR 33.8; P < .001). In pseudo-R² analysis, 83% of the power of the regression could be explained by surgeon factors alone.ConclusionsWhile the percentage of SG in this cohort closely matches the national average, there is wide variation at the surgeon level with a significant proportion predominantly performing a single procedure. Surgeon factors are more strongly correlated with procedure selection compared to patient or hospital factors.     

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.     

Early morbidity and mortality of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass in the elderly: a NSQIP analysis

BackgroundEven though the U.S. population is aging, outcomes of bariatric surgery in the elderly are not well defined. Current literature mostly evaluates the effects of gastric bypass (RYGB), with paucity of data on sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The objective of this study was to assess 30-day morbidity and mortality associated with laparoscopic SG in patients aged 65 years and over, in comparison to RYGB.MethodsThe National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was queried for all patients aged 65 and over who underwent laparoscopic RYGB and SG between 2010 and 2011. Baseline characteristics and outcomes were compared. P value<.05 was considered significant. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were reported when applicable.ResultsWe identified 1005 patients. Mean body mass index was 44±7. SG was performed in 155 patients (15.4%). The American Society of Anesthesiology physical classification of 3 or 4 was similar between the 2 groups (82.6% versus 86.7%, P = .173). Diabetes was more frequent in the RYGB group (43.2% versus 55.6%, P = .004). 30-day mortality (0.6% versus 0.6%, OR 1.1, 95% CI .11–9.49), serious morbidity (5.2% versus 5.6%, OR .91, 95% CI .42–0.96), and overall morbidity (9% versus 9.1%, OR 1.0, 95% CI .55–1.81) were similar.ConclusionIn elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery, SG is not associated with significantly different 30-day outcomes compared to RYGB. Both procedures are followed by acceptably low morbidity and mortality.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Metabolic effects of bariatric surgery on patients with type 2 diabetes: a population-based study

BackgroundBariatric surgery among patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes (T2D) can induce complete remission. However, it remains unclear whether sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) has better T2D remission within a population-based daily practice.ObjectivesTo compare patients undergoing RYGB and SG on the extent of T2D remission at the 1-year follow-up.SettingNationwide, population-based study including all 18 hospitals in the Netherlands providing metabolic and bariatric surgery.MethodsPatients undergoing RYGB and SG between October 2015 and October 2018 with 1 year of complete follow-up data were selected from the mandatory nationwide Dutch Audit for Treatment of Obesity (DATO). The primary outcome is T2D remission within 1 year. Secondary outcomes include ≥20% total weight loss (TWL), obesity-related co-morbidity reduction, and postoperative complications with a Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade ≥III within 30 days. We compared T2D remission between RYGB and SG groups using propensity score matching to adjust for confounding by indication.ResultsA total of 5015 patients were identified from the DATO, and 4132 (82.4%) had completed a 1-year follow-up visit. There were 3350 (66.8%) patients with a valid T2D status who were included in the analysis (RYGB = 2623; SG = 727). RYGB patients had a lower body mass index than SG patients, but were more often female, with higher gastroesophageal reflux disease and dyslipidemia rates. After adjusting for these confounders, RYGB patients had increased odds of achieving T2D remission (odds ratio [OR], 1.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.14–2.1; P < .01). Groups were balanced after matching 695 patients in each group. After matching, RYGB patients still had better odds of T2D remission (OR, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.27–2.88; P < .01). Also, significantly more RYGB patients had ≥20%TWL (OR, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.96–3.75; P < .01) and RYGB patients had higher dyslipidemia remission rates (OR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.39–2.76; P < .01). There were no significant differences in CD ≥III complications.ConclusionUsing population-based data from the Netherlands, this study shows that RYGB leads to better T2D remission rates at the 1-year follow-up and better metabolic outcomes for patients with obesity and T2D undergoing bariatric surgery in daily practice.     

Insurance-mandated weight management program completion before bariatric surgery provides no long-term clinical benefit

BackgroundThere is no evidence that insurance-mandated weight loss before bariatric surgery affects outcomes.ObjectiveThis retrospective study evaluated the relationship between insurance-mandated weight management program (WMP) completion before primary bariatric surgery and postoperative outcomes.SettingSuburban academic medical center.MethodsPatients who underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB, n = 572) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG, n = 484) from 2014 to 2019 were dichotomized to presence (LRYGB n = 431, SG n = 348) or absence (LRYGB n = 141, SG n = 136) of insurance-mandated WMP completion. Primary endpoints included follow-up rate, percent total weight loss (%TWL), and percent excess weight loss (%EWL) through 60 months after surgery. The Mann-Whitney U test compared between-group means with significance at P < .05.ResultsFollow-up rate, %TWL, and %EWL were not different (P = NS) up to 60 months postoperation between groups for either surgery. Both LRYGB and SG patients without WMP completion maintained greater %TWL (LRYGB: 34.4 ± 11.1% versus 29.8 ± 11.0%, P = .159; SG: 21.4 ± 10.0% versus 18.2 ± 10.5%, P = .456) and %EWL (LRYGB: 71.3 ± 26.3% versus 67.6 ± 26.5%, P = .618; SG: 49.2 ± 18.8% versus 47.5 ± 28.8%, P = .753) at 36 months after surgery. Secondarily, duration of time to get to surgery was significantly greater among yes-WMP patients (LRYGB: 178 days versus 121 days, P < .001; SG: 169 days versus 95 days, P < .001).ConclusionInsurance-mandated WMP completion before bariatric surgery delays patient access to surgery without improving postoperative weight loss potential and must be abandoned.     

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.     

Impact of accreditation in bariatric surgery

BackgroundSeveral studies have shown improved outcomes associated with accredited bariatric centers. The aim of our study was to examine the outcomes of bariatric surgery performed at accredited versus nonaccredited centers using a nationally representative database. Additionally, we aimed to determine if the presence of bariatric surgery accreditation could lead to improved outcomes for morbidly obese patients undergoing other general laparoscopic operations.MethodsUsing the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, for data between 2008 and 2010, clinical data of morbidly obese patients who underwent bariatric surgery, laparoscopic antireflux surgery, cholecystectomy, and colectomy were analyzed according to the hospital’s bariatric accreditation status.ResultsA total of 277,068 bariatric operations were performed during the 3-year period, with 88.4% of cases performed at accredited centers. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower at accredited compared to nonaccredited centers (.08% versus .19%, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that nonaccredited centers had higher risk-adjusted mortality for bariatric procedures compared to accredited centers (odds ratio [OR] 3.1, P<.01). Post hoc analysis showed improved mortality for patients who underwent gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy at accredited centers compared to nonaccredited centers (.09% versus .27%, respectively, P<.01). Patients with a high severity of illness who underwent bariatric surgery also had lower mortality rates when the surgery was performed at accredited versus nonaccredited centers (.17% versus .45%, respectively, P<.01). Multivariate analysis showed that morbidly obese patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (OR 2.4, P<.05) and antireflux surgery (OR 2.03, P<.01) at nonaccredited centers had higher rates of serious complications.ConclusionAccreditation in bariatric surgery was associated with more than a 3-fold reduction in risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality. Resources established for bariatric surgery accreditation may have the secondary benefit of improving outcomes for morbidly obese patients undergoing general laparoscopic operations.     

Two-step conversion surgery after failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding. Comparison between laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and laparoscopic gastric sleeve

BackgroundDespite its worldwide popularity, laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) requires revisional surgery for failures or complications, in 20–60% of cases. The purpose of this study was to compare in terms of efficacy and safety, the conversion of failed LAGB to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. (LSG).MethodsThe bariatric database of our institution was reviewed to identify patients who had undergone conversion of failed LAGB to LRYGB or to LSG, from November 2007 to June 2012.ResultsA total of 108 patients were included. Of these, 74 (68.5%) underwent conversion to LRYGB and 34 to LSG. All of the procedures were performed in 2-stage and laparoscopically. The mean follow-up for the LRYGB group was 29.1±17.9 months while for the LSG patients was 24.2±14.3 months. The mean body mass index (BMI) prior LRYGB and LSG was 45.6±7.8 and 47.5±5.6 (P = .09), respectively. Postoperative complications occurred in 16.2% of the LRYGB patients and in 2.9% of the LSG group (P = .04). Mean percentage of excess weight loss was 59.9%±16.2% and 70.2%±16.7% in LRYGB, and it was 52.2%±11.4% and 59.9%±14.4% in LSG at 12 months (P = .007) and 24 months (P = .01) after conversion.ConclusionIn this series, LRYGB and LSG are both effective and adequate revisional procedure after failure of LAGB. While LRYGB seems to ensure greater weight loss at 24 months follow-up, LSG is associated with a lower postoperative morbidity.