Outcomes in racial minorities after robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy: a retrospective review of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database

BackgroundThe rate of robotic-assisted metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is increasing. While discord remains about racial disparity in primary MBS, there are no data on robotic MBS outcomes in racial cohorts.ObjectivesTo determine whether outcomes following robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) are mediated by race or ethnicity.SettingUniversity Hospital, United States.MethodsRobotic RYGB and SG cases were identified from the 2015–2017 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) databases using Current Procedure Terminology codes 43644, 43645, and 43775. Selected cases were stratified by race and ethnicity. Case-control matched and logistic regression analyses were performed.ResultsMatched analyses compared outcomes in 2666 RYGB cases of Black versus White patients and 1794 RYGB cases of Hispanic versus White patients. Black RYGB patients had longer operative lengths (OLs; P = .0008) and postoperative lengths of stay (P = .001), and a higher rate of pulmonary embolism (P = .05). Hispanic (versus White) RYGB patients had longer lengths of stay (P = .007). All other outcomes were similar between RYGB racial and ethnic cohorts. Matched analyses also compared outcomes of 8328 SG cases in Black versus White patients and 4852 SG cases in Hispanic versus White patients. Black patients had longer OLs (P = .004), had longer lengths of stay (P < .0001), had higher overall morbidity (P = .02), had higher bariatric-related morbidity (P = .02), had higher rates of readmission (P = .009), and were more likely to have an operative drain present at 30 days (P = .001). All other outcome measures were similar between racial/ethnic SG cohorts.ConclusionRobotic-assisted SG is associated with higher overall and bariatric-related morbidity, but not mortality. However, robotic-assisted RYGB and SG remain safe, with lower rates of mortality and morbidity.     

Perioperative and 1-year outcomes of bariatric surgery in septuagenarians: implications for patient selection

BackgroundAlthough bariatric surgery is an effective treatment for obesity, utilization of bariatric procedures in older adults remains low. Previous work reported higher morbidity in older patients undergoing bariatric surgery. However, the generalizability of these data to contemporary septuagenarians is unclear.ObjectivesWe sought to evaluate differences in 30-day outcomes, 1-year weight loss, and co-morbidity remission after bariatric surgery among 3 age groups as follows: <45 years, 45–69 years, and ≥70 years.SettingStatewide quality improvement collaborative.MethodsUsing a large quality improvement collaborative, we identified patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) between 2006 and 2018. We used multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate the association between age cohorts and 30-day outcomes, 1-year weight loss, and co-morbidity remission.ResultsWe identified 641 septuagenarians who underwent SG (68.5%) or RYGB (31.5%). Compared with 45–69 year olds, septuagenarians had higher rates of hemorrhage (5.1% versus 3.1%; P = .045) after RYGB and higher rates of leak/perforation (.9% versus .3%; P = .044) after SG. Compared with younger patients, septuagenarians lost less of their excess weight, losing 64.8% after RYGB and 53.8% after SG. Remission rates for diabetes and obstructive sleep were similar for patients aged ≥70 years and 45–69 years.ConclusionsBariatric surgery in septuagenarians results in substantial weight loss and co-morbidity remission with an acceptable safety profile. Surgeons with self-imposed age limits should consider broadening their selection criteria to include patients ≥70 years old.     

Exploring perioperative outcomes in metabolic and bariatric surgery amongst the elderly: an analysis of the 2015–2017 MBSAQIP database

BackgroundMetabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is increasingly performed in patients >65 years. Studies of perioperative outcomes have shown equivocal results.ObjectivesOur study objective was to explore perioperative outcomes in elderly MBS patients compared with those <65 years.SettingAcademic Hospital.MethodsPrimary sleeve (SG) and gastric bypass (RYGB) cases were identified from the 2015–2017 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. Selected cases were stratified by age (≥65 yr versus <65 yr). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed comparing outcomes in the elderly with the general MBS cohort.Results26,557 (5.6%) of MBS cases were performed in elderly patients, who were more likely to be white, male, have a lower mean body mass index (BMI), receive a gastric bypass, and robotic-assisted surgery. Elderly patients had a significantly higher disease burden, and most outcome measures were significantly higher in elderly patients, including mortality and morbidity. On multivariate regression analyses, elderly patients undergoing SG have significantly less risk of mortality and morbidity compared with RYGB. In general, co-morbidities were in most cases more strongly predictive of complications than age alone. The number needed to harm (NNH) for overall and related morbidity were 59 and 232, respectively.ConclusionElderly MBS patients have higher disease burden and higher adverse outcomes following MBS; however, complications in this cohort remain overall rare. When performing bariatric surgery on elderly patients, procedure consideration should favor SG as RYGB is independently associated with worse outcomes.     

Racial disparity in causes for readmission following bariatric surgery

BackgroundReadmission after bariatric surgery is not cost-effective and is a preventable quality metric within standardized practices. However, reasons for readmission among racial/ethnic bariatric cohorts are less explored and understood.ObjectiveOur study objective was designed to compare reasons for readmission among racial/ethnic cohorts of bariatric patients.SettingAcademic hospital.MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of the 2015–2018 MBSAQIP databases to identify Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) cases. Regression analyses determined predictors of all-cause and bariatric-related readmissions. Reasons for readmission were compared between racial/ethnic cohorts using propensity score matching.ResultsMore than 550 000 RYGB and SG cases were analyzed. The readmission rate was 3%–4%. Black race, RYGB, robot-assisted approach, and numerous co-morbidities were independently associated with readmission (P <.05). In RYGB cases, black (versus white) patients were at decreased odds of leak-related (P < .001) and cardiovascular-related (P < .001) readmissions but at increased odds of readmissions related to renal complications (P < .001). Hispanic (versus white) patients had a higher likelihood of venous thromboembolism–related readmissions (P < .001). In SG cases, black (versus white) patients had a similar lower likelihood of readmission related to leaks or cardiovascular complications but higher odds of readmission related to renal complications (P < .001). Hispanic (versus black) patients had a higher likelihood of leak-related readmissions (P < .001).ConclusionReadmission reasons after bariatric surgery vary by race/ethnicity. Perioperative pathways to mitigate complications, including readmissions, should consider these disparate findings.     

Three-year weight outcomes from a bariatric surgery registry in a large integrated healthcare system

BackgroundA registry was created for patients having procedures for weight loss from 2004 to the present time at a large integrated healthcare system. The objective of this study was to compare findings to the literature and national quality monitoring databases and present 3-year weight loss outcomes.MethodsPatients are passively enrolled in the registry with the following characteristics: a bariatric procedure for weight loss after January 1, 2004 and actively enrolled in the health plan at the time of surgery.ResultsCompared to national surgical quality databases, the registry (n = 20,296) has a similar proportion of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB; 58%), more vertical sleeve gastrectomy (SG; 40%), fewer banding (2%) procedures, more Hispanic patients (35%), and higher rates of 1 year follow-up (78%). RYGB patients lost more weight at every time point up to 3 years after surgery compared with SG patients (P<.001). Non-Hispanic white RYGB patients had a higher percent excess weight loss than non-Hispanic black (P<.001) and Hispanic (P<.001) RYGB patients. There were no differences between SG racial/ethnic groups in percent excess weight loss throughout the 3-year follow-up period.ConclusionWe are one of the first groups to publish comparison weight outcomes for RYGB and SG in a diverse patient population, showing that the responses to RYGB and not SG vary by race/ethnicity.     

Variations in bariatric surgical practice patterns between general and bariatric surgeons: a matched analysis of the 2017 MBSAQIP database

BackgroundWhile general surgeons (GSs) perform metabolic and bariatric surgery (MABS), these procedures are increasingly performed by metabolic and bariatric surgeons (MBSs). Because MABS is an evolving practice with changing surgical platforms and approaches, it is important to evaluate outcomes between different specialists performing these procedures.ObjectivesTo compare perioperative practice pattern variations and outcomes of MABS performed by GSs versus MBSs.SettingUniversity Hospital, United States.MethodsUsing the 2017 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database, we identified Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) cases and stratified them by specialization (GSs versus MBSs). Patient characteristics, practice patterns and outcomes, complications, and 30-day outcomes were compared between cohorts. Matched procedure-specific analyses were performed.ResultsOf 172,430 MABS procedures, 4394 (2.5%) were performed by GSs and 168,036 (97.4%) by MBSs. At baseline, patients of GSs had fewer co-morbidities. GSs more commonly used the robotic platform for SG cases and performed interventions such as staple line reinforcement and staple line check with provocative testing. MBSs more commonly performed robotic (versus laparoscopic) RYGB. Overall complications were low in both study cohorts. After propensity matching, transfusion and venous thromboembolism were higher in SG performed by GSs, while surgical site infection was higher in SG and RYGB performed by MBSs. These findings were not reproduced after case-control matching. In matched analyses, there were no mortality or morbidity differences between study cohorts.ConclusionMABS is performed safely by both GSs and MBSs, with no difference in morbidity and mortality.     

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.     

Racial disparities in perioperative outcomes after bariatric surgery

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

Comparison of Short-term Safety of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy in the United States: 341 cases from MBSAQIP-accredited Centers

BackgroundOne anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is the third most common (4%) primary bariatric procedure worldwide but is seldom performed in the United States and is currently under consideration for endorsement by the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. Evidence from the United States on safety of OAGB compared to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is limited.ObjectiveTo compare the short-term safety outcomes of the three primary bariatric procedures.SettingMetabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP)-accredited hospitals in the United States and Canada.MethodsUsing the 2015–2019 MBSAQIP database, we compared the safety outcomes of adult patients who underwent primary laparoscopic OAGB, RYGB, and SG. Exclusion criteria included age over 80 years, emergency operation, conversion, and incomplete follow-up. The primary outcome was 30-day overall complication. Secondary outcomes were 30-day surgical and medical complications and hospitalization length.ResultsA total of 341 patients underwent primary OAGB. Using propensity scores, we matched the OAGB cohort 1:1 with two cohorts of similar baseline characteristics who underwent RYGB and SG, respectively. The OAGB cohort had a lower overall complication rate than the RYGB cohort (6.7% versus12.3%, P = .02) and a similar rate to the SG cohort (5.0%, P = .43). The OAGB cohort had a similar rate of surgical complication to the RYGB cohort (5.0% versus 8.5%, P = .1) and a higher rate than the SG group (1.2%, P = .009). The OAGB cohort had a shorter median hospitalization than the RYGB cohort (1 d [interquartile range (IQR) 1–2 d] versus 2 d [IQR 1–2 d], P < .001) and a similar hospitalization length to the SG cohort ([1–2 d], P = .46).ConclusionUsing the largest and the most current U.S. data, this study demonstrated that the short-term safety profile of primary OAGB is acceptable, but future studies should determine the long-term safety.     

Racial disparities in bariatric surgery postoperative weight loss and co-morbidity resolution: a systematic review

While bariatric surgery is an accepted treatment for morbid obesity, the impact of race on surgical outcomes remains unclear. This systematic review aims to compare differences in weight loss and co-morbidity outcomes among various races after bariatric surgery. PubMed, Medline, and SCOPUS databases were queried to identify publications that included more than 1 racial group and reported weight loss outcomes after bariatric surgery. A total of 52 studies were included. Non-Hispanic black (NHB) patients comprised between 5.5% and 69.7% and Hispanic patients comprised between 4.7% and 65.3% of the studies’ populations. Definitions of weight loss success differed widely across studies, with percent excess weight loss being the most commonly reported outcome, followed by percent total weight loss and change in body mass index (BMI). Statistical analyses also varied, with most studies adjusting for age, sex, preoperative weight, or BMI. Some studies also adjusted for preoperative co-morbidities, including diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia, or socioeconomic status, including income, education, and neighborhood poverty. The majority of studies found less favorable weight loss in NHB compared to Hispanic and non-Hispanic white (NHW), patients while generally no difference was found between Hispanic and NHW patients. The trend also indicates no association between race and resolution of obesity-related co-morbidities. Racial minorities lose less weight than NHW patients after bariatric surgery, although the factors associated with this discrepancy are unclear. The heterogeneity in reporting weight loss success and statistical analyses amongst the literature makes an estimation of effect size difficult. Generally, racial disparity was not seen when examining co-morbidity resolution after surgery. More prospective, robust, long-term studies are needed to understand the impacts of race on bariatric surgery outcomes and ensure successful outcomes for all patients, regardless of race.     

Safety of bariatric surgery in patients older than 65 years

BackgroundThe increase in life expectancy along with the obesity epidemic has led to an increase in the number of older patients undergoing bariatric surgery. There is conflicting evidence regarding the safety of performing bariatric procedures on older patients.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare the safety of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for older patients (>65 yr).SettingNationwide analysis of accredited centers.MethodsThe Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program 2015 to 2017 database was used to identify nonrevisional laparoscopic RYGB and SG procedures. Comparisons were made based on patient age. Clinical outcomes included postoperative events and mortality.ResultsThere was a total 13,422 and 5395 matched pairs for SG and RYGB in comparing patients aged 18 years to those aged 65 and >65 years, respectively, and 5395 matched RYGB and SG procedures performed in patients >65 years. The complication rate was higher in older patients undergoing RYGB compared with SG (risk difference = 2.39%, 95% confidence interval: 1.57%–3.21%, P < .0001). When comparing older to younger patients, the older group had a higher complication rate for SG but not for RYGB (SG: risk difference = 1.01%, 95% confidence interval: .59%–1.43%, P < .0001, RYGB: risk difference = .59%, 95% confidence interval: ?.29% to 1.47%, P = .2003).ConclusionsOverall complication rates of bariatric surgery are low in patients >65 years. SG appears to have a favorable safety profile in this patient population compared with RYGB. The overall complication rate for RYGB is not significantly different between the older and younger groups.     

Outcomes of adolescents compared with young adults after bariatric surgery: an analysis of 227,671 patients using the MBSAQIP data registry

BackgroundObesity in the United States is increasingly prevalent in adolescents. Metabolic and bariatric surgery is offered at select sites to adolescents (<18 yr). Controversy exists regarding the safety of performing metabolic and bariatric surgery in adolescents.ObjectivesThe Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program registry was employed to compare outcomes of adolescents with adults (18–40 yr) undergoing sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB).SettingAcademic Teaching Institution.MethodsThe Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program Participant User Files were reviewed for patients undergoing SG or RYGB (2015–2018). Patients were stratified by age and outcomes for adolescents versus adults compared. A bivariate analysis was performed on propensity-matched data.ResultsAfter exclusion criteria were applied, 227,671 patients <40 years remained, of whom 1005 were adolescents. For those undergoing RYGB (13.8% adolescents, 25.3% adults), demographic characteristics were similar. Adolescent SG patients were more likely to be male and Hispanic, but less likely to be smokers or have preoperative co-morbidities. There were no differences in infection rates, mortality, major complications, reoperation, readmission, or other interventions for RYGB and SG groups. For both adult SG and adolescent SG, patients’ operative times were less than adult and adolescent RYGB, respectively. However, operative times were shorter for adolescent RYGB versus adult RYGB patients, yet longer for adolescent SG patients versus adult SG patients.ConclusionsMetabolic and bariatric surgery is as safe for adolescents undergoing an SG or RYGB as adults. Currently, SG is more commonly performed in adolescents than RYGB, and adolescent SG patients have similar outcomes and shorter operating room times compared with adolescent RYGB patients.     

Effects of intraoperative leak testing on postoperative leak-related outcomes after primary bariatric surgery: an analysis of the MBSAQIP database

BackgroundIntraoperative leak test (IOLT) is commonly performed to evaluate the integrity of an anastomosis or staple line during bariatric surgery. However, the utility of IOLT is controversial.ObjectiveTo evaluate the effect of IOLT on postoperative leak-related outcomes after primary bariatric surgery.SettingMetabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program–accredited centers.MethodsThe 2015 and 2016 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement databases were analyzed for sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPDDS) to determine the postoperative anastomotic/staple line leak (A/SL) and leak-related outcomes.ResultsData for a total of 265,309 patients who underwent SG (69.6%), RYGB (29.7%), or BPDDS (.8%) were analyzed. IOLT was performed in 81.9% of all patients. Overall A/SL, mortality rate in patients with leakage, and 30-day leak-related mortality were .28%, .1%, and .003%, respectively. There were no significant differences between the IOLT and non-IOLT groups in terms of A/SL, 30-day mortality in patients with leakage, 30-day leak-related mortality, readmission, reoperation, intervention, or organ/space surgical site infection. However, the rate of 30-day leak-related intervention in BPDDS was significantly lower in the IOLT group compared to the non-IOLT group (.18% versus 1.15%, P = .01). Whether IOLT was performed endoscopically or nonendoscopically had no effect on the rate of postoperative leaks. Overall mean operative time increased by 19.1 minutes (9.5, 11.9, and 21.2 min for SG, RYGB, and BPDDS, respectively) when IOLT was performed.ConclusionThe overall rate of postoperative A/SL and leak-related morbidity was low. This study provided no evidence of either benefit or harm from IOLT in patients who underwent SG, RYGB, or BPDDS.     

Comparison of weight loss outcomes between Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy in a racially mixed urban patient population

BackgroundNational data show a trend favoring laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) over Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Published data demonstrating the differences in weight loss between the two procedures are mixed.ObjectiveIn this retrospective study using clinical data from 2010 to 2020, we compared the clinical and demographic characteristics of patients undergoing either SG or RYGB to evaluate their long-term weight loss outcomes.SettingUniversity hospital in the United States.MethodsA total of 3329 patients were identified in our institutional Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement database using Current Procedural Terminology codes for either RYGB or SG. A general linear model was used for baseline characteristics. Logistic regression was used for factors favoring RYGB versus SG. A multivariable linear mixed model was used for weight-trajectory analysis. Cox regression was used for a cumulative hazard ratio of 10% weight regained from nadir.ResultsFactors favoring RYGB were diagnoses of type 2 diabetes and gastroesophageal reflux disease, Hispanic ethnicity, and surgeon’s preference. SG was favored among Black patients and smokers. RYGB was associated with more weight loss at all time points. The risk of weight regain was significantly higher after SG versus RYGB.ConclusionsThe bariatric procedure choice is significantly influenced by race, medical history, and surgeon’s experience. RYGB results in a significantly more durable weight loss compared with SG regardless of race or other stratification factors.     

Comparative analysis of robotic versus laparoscopic revisional bariatric surgery: perioperative outcomes from the MBSAQIP database

BackgroundThere are limited data evaluating the role of robotics in revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) compared with laparoscopy.ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic RBS.SettingThe Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database.MethodsThe 2015 to 2017 MBSAQIP database was queried for patients undergoing revisional robotic and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Multivariate logistic regression was used to compare outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic approaches, adjusting for demographic characteristics, co-morbidities, and operative time.ResultsA total of 17,012 patients underwent revisional SG with 15,935 (93.7%) laparoscopic and 1077 (6.3%) robotic, and 12,442 patients underwent revisional RYGB with 11,212 (90.1%) laparoscopic and 1230 (9.9%) robotic. Overall morbidity was higher in robotic SG compared with laparoscopic SG (6.7% versus 4.5%; adjusted odds ratio 1.51; P < .01) which was not the case after adjustment for operative time. Robotic RYGB was associated with comparable overall morbidity to laparoscopic (9.3% versus 11.6%; adjusted odds ratio .83; P = .07) although respiratory complications, pneumonia, superficial surgical site infections, and postoperative bleeding were lower with robotic RYGB. The robotic approach with both procedures was associated with longer operative time (P < .01). Length of stay was longer in the robotic group for SG (P < .01) but was not different for RYGB (P = .91).ConclusionsRobotic RBS has an increased complication profile compared with the laparoscopic approach for SG and decreased for RYGB. Further analysis is needed regarding variability in surgeon technique and operative experience to determine what factors contribute to these differences.     

Racial/ethnicity differences in endorsing influential factors for prostate cancer treatment choice: An analysis of data from the personal patient profile-prostate (P3P) I and II trials

ObjectiveRates and choice of treatment for localized prostate cancer vary according to race/ethnicity in American men. We hypothesized that there were group differences in influential values and preferences related to treatment decisions.MethodsWe analyzed samples from 2 multicenter, randomized trials of the Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P) I and II decision aid, first comparing the groups on other demographic and decisional variables using Chi-square tests. Stratified (P3P I vs. II) logistic regression was then used to assess the univariate association between race/ethnicity and endorsement of moderate-or-strong influence of 14 lifestyle factors, current or future symptoms, or important others on the decision. A multivariable stratified logistic regression with backward variable selection was used to further estimate the association between influential factors and race/ethnicity.ResultsThere were 494 and 392 participants in P3P I and P3P II, respectively, with 40 Hispanic, 168 non-Hispanic black, 637 non-Hispanic white, 19 others and 6 missing. Age (P = 0.0001), education (P < 0.0001), marital status (P < 0.0001), income (P < 0.0001), Internet use for information (P < 0.0001) and decisional control preference were significantly different across racial/ethnic groups. In adjusted analyses, we saw racial/ethnic differences in the decisional influence of age (Non-Hispanic Black (NHB) vs. Non-Hispanic White (NHW) OR: 0.56 95%CI 0.38–0.85 P = 0.002), religion/spirituality (NHB vs. NHW OR: 3.2095%CI1.95–5.26, P < 0.0001), future bladder function (NHB vs. NHW OR: 0.5795%CI 0.35–0.90, P = 0.04), future ability to engage in recreation (NHB vs. NHW OR: 0.5495%CI 0.34–0.86, P = 0.02), and a story of a famous person with prostate cancer (NHB vs. NHW OR: 2,11 95%CI 1.30–3.43, P = 0.007). No interactions were found.ConclusionOur results suggest racial/ethnic differences for influences underlying treatment choice. Better understanding these influences may help us present salient information about treatment options to patients and address disparities.     

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.     

Single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass with sleeve in the United States: a first comparative safety analysis of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database

BackgroundThe single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass with sleeve (SADI-S) is a relatively new bariatric procedure. In 2020, the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) started reporting outcomes for SADI-S.ObjectivesWe aimed to study the perioperative safety of SADI-S and compare it with other established bariatric procedures utilizing the MBSAQIP database.SettingAcademic hospital, United States.MethodsThe 2020 MBSAQIP Participant Use File was used to evaluate SADI-S outcomes. We included SADI-S primary cases and excluded revisions and concurrent operations. A 5:1 propensity matched analysis (PMA) for 20 variables was performed to compare the outcomes of the SADI-S with the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and a 2:1 PMA to the biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD/DS).ResultsThere were 255 primary SADI-S reported in 2020. After PMA, the only significant complications between the RYGB and SADI-S cohorts were Clavien-Dindo grade IVa and IVb (.1% and 1.4% versus 1.6% and 7.1%, respectively). SADI-S had more Clavien-Dindo grade II, IVa, and IVb complications than the SG cohort (1.3% versus 3.5%, P = .03; .2% versus 1.6%, P = 0; 1.% versus 7.1%, P = 0). When compared with BPD/DS, outcomes including readmission, reoperation, and intervention were not statistically significant.ConclusionSADI-S, in its early adoption stage, has a higher incidence of perioperative complications than RYGB and SG. It has comparable 30-day outcomes to BPD/DS.     

Exploring racial disparity in perioperative outcomes following revisional bariatric surgery: A case-control matched analysis

IntroductionBariatric surgery is associated with 20–30% weight recidivism. As a result, revisional bariatric operation is increasingly performed. Disparity in bariatric outcomes remains controversial and very little is known about revisional bariatric surgery outcomes in ethnic cohorts.MethodsRevisional bariatric cases were identified from the 2015 and 2016 Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program Participant Use Data File. 1:1 case-control matching was performed and perioperative outcomes compared between racial cohorts.Results24,197 cases were analyzed, including 20.78% Black patients. At baseline, there were differences in demographics and pre-existing conditions between racial cohorts. Matched analysis compared 7,286 Black and White patients. Operative duration (p = 0.008) and length of stay (p = 0.0003) were longer in Black patients. Readmission (6.8% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.009) was higher in Black patients. Bleeding (0.82% vs. 0.38%, p = 0.02) and surgical site infection (SSI) (2.6% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.01) were higher in White patients.ConclusionRevisional bariatric surgery is safe. Apart from a higher rate of bleeding, SSI and readmission, outcomes were not mediated by race.     

Outcomes in racial and ethnic minorities after revisional robotic-assisted metabolic and bariatric surgery: an analysis of the MBSAQIP database

BackgroundRobotic-assisted metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is being performed with increased frequency in the United States, including for revisional MBS. However, little is known about perioperative outcomes between racial and ethnic cohorts after revisional robotic-assisted MBS.ObjectiveThe goal of our study was to determine if there are racial differences in outcomes after robotic-assisted revisional MBS.SettingUniversity Hospital, United States.MethodsUsing the 2015–2017 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database, we identified patients undergoing revisional MBS by a robotic-assisted approach. Univariate analyses were performed of unmatched and matched racial and ethnic cohorts, comparing black versus white patients and Hispanic versus white patients.ResultsOf 2027 robotic-assisted revisional MBS cases in the database, 1922 were included in our analysis, including 67%, 22.6%, and 10.4% white, black, and Hispanic patients, respectively. At baseline, there were some differences in patient characteristics between racial and ethnic cohorts. After propensity matching, outcomes between black and white patients were similar, except for higher rates of superficial surgical site infection among white patients (P = .05) and higher rates of organ space surgical site infection in black patients (P = .05). Outcomes were also similar between matched white and Hispanic patients, except for a higher bleeding in white patients (2% versus 0%, P = .04). There were no mortality or morbidity differences between racial and ethnic cohorts.ConclusionMorbidity and mortality after robotic-assisted revisional MBS do not seem to be mediated by race or ethnicity.