Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Bariatric Surgery for Morbid Obesity

Background

In the USA, three types of bariatric surgeries are widely performed, including laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). However, few economic evaluations of bariatric surgery are published. There is also scarcity of studies focusing on the LSG alone. Therefore, this study is evaluating the cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery using LRYGB, LAGB, and LSG as treatment for morbid obesity.

Methods

A microsimulation model was developed over a lifetime horizon to simulate weight change, health consequences, and costs of bariatric surgery for morbid obesity. US health care prospective was used. A model was propagated based on a report from the first report of the American College of Surgeons. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained were used in the model. Model parameters were estimated from publicly available databases and published literature.

Results

LRYGB was cost-effective with higher QALYs (17.07) and cost ($138,632) than LSG (16.56 QALYs; $138,925), LAGB (16.10 QALYs; $135,923), and no surgery (15.17 QALYs; $128,284). Sensitivity analysis showed initial cost of surgery and weight regain assumption were very sensitive to the variation in overall model parameters. Across patient groups, LRYGB remained the optimal bariatric technique, except that with morbid obesity 1 (BMI 35–39.9 kg/m²) patients, LSG was the optimal choice.

Conclusion

LRYGB is the optimal bariatric technique, being the most cost-effective compared to LSG, LAGB, and no surgery options for most subgroups. However, LSG was the most cost-effective choice when initial BMI ranged between 35 and 39.9 kg/m².

     

Metabolic Parameters,Weight Loss,and Comorbidities 4 Years After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy

Background

Sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is now the predominant bariatric surgery performed, yet there is limited long-term data comparing important outcomes between LSG and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). This study compares weight loss and impact on comorbidities of the two procedures.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated weight, blood pressure, hemoglobin A1c, cholesterol, and medication use for hypertension, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia at 1–4 years post-operatively in 380 patients who underwent RYGB and 334 patients who underwent LSG at the University of Michigan from January 2008 to November 2013. Follow-up rates from 714 patients initially were 657 (92%), 556 (78%), 507 (71%), and 498 (70%) at 1–4 years post-operatively.

Results

Baseline characteristics were similar except for higher weight and BMI in LSG. There was greater weight loss with RYGB vs. LSG at all points. Hemoglobin A1c and total cholesterol improved more in RYGB vs. LSG at 4 years. There was greater remission of hypertension and discontinuation of all medications for hypertension and diabetes with RYGB at 4 years.

Conclusions

Weight loss, reduction in medications for hypertension and diabetes, improvements in markers of diabetes and hyperlipidemia, and remission rates of hypertension were superior with RYGB vs. LSG 4 years post-operatively. Choice of bariatric procedures should be tailored to surgical risk, comorbidities, and weight loss goals.

     

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

Background

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

Material and Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

     

Destiny of Failed Adjustable Gastric Bandings: Do All the Patients Need Further Bariatric Surgery?

Purpose

The number of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) removal has increased throughout the years. The aim of the study was to evaluate the outcomes in patients undergoing LAGB removal with or without further bariatric surgery.

Materials and Methods

Data prospectively collected from consecutive patients undergoing LAGB removal from 2008 to 2016 at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. Obesity-related comorbidities, complications, and body mass index (BMI) before removal and at 1-year follow-up were evaluated.

Results

A total of 156 patients were included in the study. Seventy-six patients had further surgery (SURG group): 55 underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and 21 laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). Eighty patients underwent only LAGB removal (No-SURG group). The mean BMI was lower in the No-SURG group (33.9 vs 36.3 kg/m², p =?0.0055). Reasons for removal were different in the two groups: dysphagia, frequent vomiting, and LAGB-related complications requiring urgent treatment occurred more commonly in the No-SURG group (p <?0.05): 71.3 vs 51.3%, 67.5% vs. 38.2%, 28.8% vs. 6.6%, respectively. At 1-year follow-up, 96.3% of No-SURG patients regained weight after LAGB removal; two (2.5%) patients showed new-onset comorbidities, four (5%) needed adjustments in pharmacological therapy, and four (5%) complained from persistence of GERD symptoms. Additional surgery provided significant weight loss: the mean %TWL was 23.7% after LSGs and 27.2% after LRYGBs.

Conclusions

LAGB is associated with a high rate of reoperation. Further bariatric surgery after LAGB removal should be considered due to weight regain, persistence of GERD symptoms, and new-onset comorbidities.

     

Effect of Contemporary Bariatric Surgical Procedures on Type 2 Diabetes Remission. A Population-Based Matched Cohort Study

Objective

The objective of the study is to evaluate the effect of gastric banding, gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy on medium to long-term diabetes control in obese participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Research Design and Methods

Matched cohort study using primary care electronic health records from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Obese participants with type 2 diabetes who received bariatric surgery from 2002 to 2014 were compared with matched control participants who did not receive BS. Remission was defined for each year of follow-up as HbA1c <6.5 % and no antidiabetic drugs prescribed.

Results

There were 826 obese participants with T2DM who received bariatric surgery including adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) 220; gastric bypass (GBP) 449; or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) 153; with four procedures undefined. Mean HbA1c declined from 8.0 % before BS to 6.5 % in the second postoperative year; proportion with HbA1c <6.5 % (<48 mmol/mol) increased from 17 to 47 %. The proportion of patients in remission was 30 % in the second year, being 20 % for LAGB, 34 % for GBP and 38 % for SG. The adjusted relative rate of remission over the first six postoperative years was 5.97 (4.86 to 7.33, P?<?0.001) overall; for LAGB 3.32 (2.27 to 4.86); GBP 7.16 (5.64 to 9.08); and SG 6.82 (5.05 to 9.19). Rates of remission were maintained into the sixth year of follow-up.

Conclusions

Remission of diabetes may continue for up to 6 years after bariatric surgical procedures. Diabetes outcomes are generally more favourable after gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy than LAGB.

     

Diabetes Outcomes More than a Decade Following Sustained Weight Loss After Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Band Surgery

Background

Long-term outcome data are needed to define the role of bariatric surgery in type 2 diabetes (T2D). To address this, we collated diabetes outcomes more than a decade after laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) surgery.

Method

Clinical and biochemical measures from 113 obese T2D patients who underwent LAGB surgery in 2003 and 2004 were analyzed. Diabetes remission was defined as HbA1c < 6.2% (44 mmol/mol) and fasting glucose < 7.0 mmol/L.

Results

Seventy-nine patients had weight data at 10 years and attained a median [Q1, Q3] weight loss of 16 [10, 21] percent. Sixty patients attended a follow-up assessment. Their baseline HbA1c of 7.8 [7.1, 9.3] percentage units (62 [54, 78] mmol/mol) had decreased to 6.6 [6.1, 8.4] (49 [43, 68] mmol/mol) despite no significant change in glucose-lowering therapy. Eleven patients (18%) were in diabetes remission and another 18 had HbA1c ≤ 6.5%. Significant improvements in physical measures of quality of life, blood pressure, and lipid profile were also observed but there was no change in the proportion of patients with albuminuria and a significant decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate. Twelve patients in the follow-up cohort (20%) required anti-reflux medication after surgery and 26 (43%) underwent gastric band revision surgery.

Conclusion

Weight loss for over 10 years after LAGB surgery delivers clinically meaningful improvements in HbA1c, blood pressure, lipids, and quality of life at the cost of a high rate of revision surgery and increased use of anti-reflux medication. These findings support the use of bariatric surgery as a long-term treatment for weight loss and wellbeing in patients with T2D.

Study Registration

Registered with the Australian Clinical trials registry as ACTRN12615000089538.

     

Preoperative Prediction of Type 2 Diabetes Remission After Gastric Bypass Surgery: a Comparison of DiaRem Scores and ABCD Scores

Background

Gastric bypass surgery has been well accepted as a novel treatment modality for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in obese patients. Some scoring systems have been proposed for the selection of T2DM patients who are eligible for gastric bypass surgery. This study compares two scoring systems with regard to remission of T2DM after gastric bypass surgery.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included 245 patients (150 females and 95 males) who had undergone gastric bypass surgery for the treatment of T2DM with 1 year follow-up. We examined the predictive power of complete remission of two scoring systems, the DiaRem score, and the ABCD score. The DiaRem score includes the factors of age, HbA1c, medication, and insulin usage. The ABCD score includes the factors of age, BMI, C-peptide level, and duration of T2DM. The rate of remission of T2DM after gastric bypass surgery was evaluated using both scoring systems.

Results

At 1 year after surgery, the percent weight loss was 26.5 % and the mean BMI decreased from 35.7 to 26.2 kg/m². The mean HbA1c decreased from 8.8 to 6.2 %. A significant number of patients showed improvement in glycemic control, including 130 (53.1 %) patients with complete remission (HbA1c?<?6.0 %), 36 (14.7 %) patients with partial remission (HbA1c?<?6.5 %), and 26 (10.6 %) patients with improvement (HbA1c?<?7 %). Both the DiaRem score and the ABCD score predicted the success of the gastric bypass surgery, but the ABCD score was better at differentiating patients with poorer score (27.9 vs. 9.1 %, p?<?0.001).

Conclusions

Gastric bypass surgery is a treatment option for obese T2DM patients. The ABCD score is better at predicting T2DM remission at 1 year after gastric bypass surgery than the DiaRem score.

     

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

     

Characterizing Readmissions After Bariatric Surgery

Introduction

Readmissions are an important quality metric for surgery. Here, we compare characteristics of readmissions across laparoscopic Roux­en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and adjustable gastric band (LAGB).

Methods

Demographic, intraoperative, anthropometric, and laboratory data were prospectively obtained for 1775 patients at a single academic institution. All instances of readmissions within 1 year were recorded. Data were analyzed using STATA, release 12.

Results

For the 1775 patients, 113 (6.37 %) were readmitted. Mean time to readmission was 52.1 days. Of all the readmissions, 64.6 % were within 30 days, 22.1 % from 30 to 90 days, 1.77 % from 90 to 180 days, and 11.5 % from 180 to 365 days. Incidence of 30-day readmissions varied across surgeries (LRYGB: 7.17 %; LAGB: 3.05 %; LSG: 4.25 %, p?=?0.04). Time to readmission varied as well, with 90.0 % of LSG and 80.0 % of LABG patients within the first 30 days, versus 60.8 % of LRYGB (p?=?0.02). The most common causes of readmissions were gastrointestinal issues related to index procedure (34.5 %) and did not vary across surgeries. In multivariable logistic regression, index hospital length of stay (LOS) was associated with readmission (OR?=?1.07, 95 % CI 1.02–1.13, p?=?0.01).

Conclusions

Readmissions after bariatric surgery are associated with high index hospital LOS, and a measureable proportion of procedure-related readmissions can occur up to 1 year, especially for LRYGB.

     

Long-Term (over 10 Years) Retrospective Follow-up of Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding

Background

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) placements have progressively decreased in recent years. This is related to poor long-term weight loss outcomes and necessity for revision or removal of these bands. Long-term outcome results following LAGB are limited. The aim of our study was to determine the long-term outcome after LAGB at our institution.

Objectives

The aim of our study was to determine the long-term outcome after LAGB at our institution.

Setting

The setting of this is Academic Center, Israel.

Methods

Patients who underwent LAGB between 1999 and 2004 were reviewed. Patient comorbidities and weight loss parameters were collected preoperatively and at defined postoperative periods. Improvement in weight loss was defined as percent excess weight lost, and improvement in comorbidities was defined based on standardized reporting definitions.

Results

In total, 74 (80%) patients who underwent LAGB met inclusion criteria. The mean age at LAGB placement was 50.5 ± 9.6 years, and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 45.5 ± 4.8 kg/m². Preoperative comorbidities were diabetes mellitus (13.5%), hypertension (32%), hyperlipidemia (12.1%), obstructive sleep apnea (5.4%), joints disease (10.8%), mood disorders (5.4%), and gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms (8.1%). The mean follow-up was 162.96 ± 13.9 months; 44 patients (59.4%) had their band removed, and 22 (30%) had another bariatric surgery. The follow-up BMI was 35.7 ± 6.9 (p < 0.001), and the % total weight loss was 21.0 ± 0.13. There was no improvement in any of the comorbidities. GERD symptoms worsened at long-term follow-up (p < 0.001). Undergoing another bariatric procedure was associated with a higher weight loss (OR 12.8; CI 95% 1.62–23.9; p = 0.02).

Conclusion

LAGB required removal in the majority of our patients and showed poor resolution of comorbidities with worsening of GERD-related symptoms. Patients who go on to have another bariatric procedure have more durable weight loss outcomes.

     

15-year follow-up of vertical banded gastroplasty: comparison with other restrictive procedures

Introduction

Vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) has been the procedure of choice for bariatric surgeries since the 1980s. However, long-term results of VBG have been reported with different opinions, and new restrictive procedures have been innovated and showing variable results. The aim of this study is to analyze the long-term results of our VBG patients.

Patient and methods

Between June 1998 and May 2002, 652 morbidly obese patients received VBG, with the initial 40 patients having open procedures and the subsequent 612 patients using a laparoscopic approach. Operative complications, weight loss, and late complications were followed and compared with groups of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

Results

Mean age, preoperative weight, and body mass index (BMI) were 30.96 years, 108.83 kg, and 40.63 kg/m², respectively. The overall early postoperative complication rate was 3.4 % (22/652). The excess weight loss percentages at 1, 2, 5, and 10 years were 61.04, 59.70, 51.11, and 42.0 %, respectively. BMI at 1, 2, 5, and 10 years were 29.64, 29.71, 31.33, and 31.73 kg/m², respectively. This result is inferior to the 67 % excess weight loss in the LSG group, but is higher than the 38 % excess weight loss of the LAGB group. The revision rate is 13.19 % (86/652) up to now. Revision surgery was required in 28 (14.0 %) patients in the LAGB group and 8 (1.3 %) in the LSG group.

Conclusion

VBG was an operation with acceptable outcome for treating morbid obesity and metabolic disorders. It sets a standard for new restrictive procedures.

     

Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty,Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy,and Laparoscopic Band for Weight Loss: How Do They Compare?

Background

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a novel endobariatric procedure. Initial studies demonstrated an association of ESG with weight loss and improvement of obesity-related comorbidities. Our aim was to compare ESG to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB).

Methods

We included 278 obese (BMI > 30) patients who underwent ESG (n = 91), LSG (n = 120), or LAGB (n = 67) at our tertiary care academic center. Primary outcome was percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months. Secondary outcome measures included adverse events (AE), length of stay (LOS), and readmission rate.

Results

At 12-month follow-up, LSG achieved the greatest %TBWL compared to LAGB and ESG (29.28 vs 13.30 vs 17.57%, respectively; p < 0.001). However, ESG had a significantly lower rate of morbidity when compared to LSG or LAGB (p = 0.01). The LOS was significantly less for ESG compared to LSG or LAGB (0.34 ± 0.73 vs 3.09 ± 1.47 vs 1.66 ± 3.07 days, respectively; p < 0.01). Readmission rates were not significantly different between the groups (p = 0.72).

Conclusion

Although LSG is the most effective option for weight loss, ESG is a safe and feasible endobariatric option associated with low morbidity and short LOS in select patients.

     

Comparative Study Between Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banded Plication and Sleeve Gastrectomy in Moderate Obesity—2 Year Results

Background

The traditional bariatric surgery guidelines issued by the National Institute of Health in 1991 did not include moderate obesity as an indication for bariatric surgery. These patients also develop risk of significant comorbidity and mortality. Nonsurgical treatment for them is not generally effective. This study compared the results of patients undergoing laparoscopic adjustable gastric banded plication (LAGBP) with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients with BMI between 30 and 35.

Methods

A review of data was done for patients who underwent either LAGBP or LSG in our hospital from February 2007 to October 2012. The inclusion criterion for both groups was BMI between 30 and 35 with or without comorbidity.

Results

One hundred thirty-nine patients were included in the study out of which 42 underwent LAGBP and 97 LSG. The operating time for LAGBP was significantly longer: 105.39?±?39 vs. 59?±?29.56 min. The postoperative hospital stay was not statistically different between the two procedures. The mean percent excess weight loss (%EWL) was significantly lower for LAGBP at 1 year but became insignificant at 2 years. Both groups had two postoperative complications, but the rate was not statistically different. The comorbidity resolution data did not show any significant difference between the two groups.

Conclusion

In the present study, both LAGBP and LSG seemed to be safe and effective bariatric procedures in moderate obesity with 2-year results. But the long-term results are still awaited.

     

Comparison of Outcomes Between Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy in a Lebanese Bariatric Surgical Practice

Purpose

Long-term studies on the outcomes of bariatric surgery are still limited in the Middle East. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) up to 5 years of follow-up.

Materials and Methods

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent LRYGB and LSG was performed. The primary outcome was weight loss. Postoperative complications, operative time, and hospital length of stay were secondary outcomes.

Results

Four hundred patients underwent primary LSG and 175 patients underwent LRYGB between 2008 and 2013. Follow-up rates at 5 years were around 60%. Percent total weight loss was similar after 3, 4, and 5 years in both groups, averaging around 28%. Mean percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL) at 5 years was 72.0 ± 31.0% in the LSG group vs. 63.0 ± 21.0% in the LRYGB group (p = 0.03). Patients undergoing LRYGB had a significantly longer operative time as well as a longer hospital stay. No significant difference was found in the rates of short- and long-term complications between the two groups. However, patients undergoing LRYGB were more likely to develop small intestinal obstruction and iron-deficiency anemia.

Conclusions

Both LSG and LRYGB result in satisfactory weight loss within 5 years. Patients’ comorbidities and potential risks must be included in the choice of the appropriate bariatric procedure. LSG appears to give durable weight loss with less risk of major long-term complications.

     

Portion Control Eating—a Determinant of Bariatric Outcomes

Introduction

Bariatric surgery leads to significant weight loss but the results vary. Application of dietary principles like portion-controlled eating leads to greater weight loss and fewer complications.

Aims

To evaluate the improvement in weight loss outcomes by incorporating portion-controlled eating behavior in postbariatric patients.

Methods

All patients who underwent bariatric surgery from January 2012 to December 2013 were included in the study. Portion-controlled eating behavior was incorporated in the post-bariatric nutritional protocol. Their demographic, preoperative, and postoperative data were prospectively maintained on Microsoft Office Excel and analyzed statistically.

Results

Three hundred and seventy-two (89.6%) underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), while 43 (10.4%) underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). In the LSG group, lowest (nadir) BMI was 28.99?±?5.6 kg/m² and % Excess weight loss (EWL) was 87.3?±?27.2%, achieved between 1 and 2 years. In the RYGB group, lowest (nadir) BMI was 27.5?±?12.09 kg/m and % EWL was 94.32?±?33.12%. Surgical failure (less than 50% EWL) were 10 (3.27%) in the LSG group and 1 (3%) in the RYGB group. There were no leaks reported in our study.

Conclusion

Our study highlights the importance of postoperative nutritional interventions like portion-controlled eating for successful bariatric outcome.

     

Goal-Directed Fluid Therapy on Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy in Morbidly Obese Patients

Background

In bariatric surgery, there are no guidelines available for intraoperative fluid administration. Goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) is a new concept of perioperative fluid management that has been shown to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing abdominal surgery. The aim of our study is to assess the impact of the implementation of a GDFT protocol in morbidly obese patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

Methods

A before-after intervention study, in morbidly obese patients who underwent LSG, was conducted at the Obesity Unit of the General University Hospital Elche. Data from the GDFT implementation group (January 2014 to December 2015) were prospectively collected and compared with a preimplementation group (January 2012 to December 2013).

Results

Baseline demographic and comorbidity data between the two groups of patients were similar. The length of stay in the hospital was significantly shortened in GDFT group from 4.5 to 3.44 days (p?<?0.001). Intraoperative fluid administration was significantly lower in the GDFT group (1002.4 vs 1687.2 ml in preimplementation group, p?<?0.001). In the postoperative period, there was a statistically significant reduction in postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after GDFT implementation (48 to 14.3 %, p?<?0.001).

Conclusions

Implementation of GDFT protocols can prevent intraoperative fluid overload in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. It could improve outcomes, for example decreasing PONV or even hospital stay.

     

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

     

Prevalence of Cholelithiasis and Choledocholithiasis in Morbidly Obese South Indian Patients and the Further Development of Biliary Calculus Disease After Sleeve Gastrectomy,Gastric Bypass and Mini Gastric Bypass

Background

Evaluation of the prevalance of cholelithiasis, choledocholithiasis and there management after sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass and mini gastric bypass in Indian bariatric patients.

Methods

We did a retrospective analysis of our bariatric patient from January 2007 to December 2013 (n?=?1397), for prevalence of cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis. We did synchronous cholecystectomy in all patients planned for bariatric surgery found to have cholelithiasis on USG. Post-operatively, we followed all the patients with gallbladder in situ for minimum of 18–88 months (mean ?32.4) and reviewed data for subsequent development of cholelithiasis/choledocholithiasis. Only those patients who were symptomatic underwent intervention.

Results

Prevalence of cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis in our study was 21.76 and 9.63 %, respectively. The incidence of post-bariatric surgery development of cholelithiasis was 10.53 %; individually, it was 8.42 % in LSG group, 13.4 % in LRYGB group and 12.7 % in MGB patients. The incidence of symptomatic cholelithiasis requiring surgery was 1.94 % after LSG, 4.54 % after LRYGB and 4.25 % after MGB. Post-surgery, six patients developed choledocholithiasis. In our post-bariatric group, the 33 patients who developed symptomatic stones had percentage total weight loss of 30.99?+?4.1 (P?<?0.001). The average time period for readmission of symptomatic patient was 11.26?+?2.67 months.

Conclusions

We recommend routine synchronous cholecystectomy with bariatric procedure. In spite of synchronous cholecystectomy, incidence of cholelithiasis in our post-bariatric patient is 10.53 % of which up to one third were symptomatic and required surgery, and incidence of choledocholithiasis is comparable to that of general population.

     

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

     

The Long-Term Effects of the Adjustable Gastric Band on Esophageal Motility in Patients Who Present for Band Removal

Background

During the past decade, laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) was one of the most popular surgical procedures in treating morbid obesity. Long-term effects, specifically on esophageal motility, of LAGB have not been well described in the literature despite the high prevalence of reoperations and post-operative dysphagia. We aimed to characterize esophageal dysmotility after long-term follow-up using data of high-resolution esophageal manometry (HRM) performed in patients who presented for LAGB removal. The research was conducted in Academic Hospital Center in the USA.

Methods

Research was conducted with approval from the institution’s Institutional Review Board. We included 25 consecutive patients who were requesting removal of the band or revisional bariatric surgery. All patients underwent HRM between 2011 and 2015.

Results

A Fisher’s exact test two-sided p value 0.41 shows no statistically significant difference in proportions of normal motility or impaired motility between asymptomatic and symptomatic patients.

Conclusions

Patients with a history of LABG can have esophageal dysmotility whether they are symptomatic or asymptomatic. Based on existing literature, we recommend pre-operative manometry in these patients requesting revisional surgery.