Revisional surgery after failed gastric banding: results of one-stage conversion to RYGB in 195 patients

BackgroundThe most performed restrictive bariatric procedure is the laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB). With many patients still receiving a LAGB in Europe and the United States, inevitably, the number of complications also increases. For many complications revisional bariatric surgery is necessary. In this study, the outcomes of one-stage LAGB conversion to a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) at our institution are presented. The objective of this study was to investigate the safety and efficiency of RYGB performed as a one-stage procedure after failed LAGB.MethodsPatients were retrospectively selected using a prospectively collected database. The gastric band had to be in situ for at least 1 year and minimum postoperative follow-up was 12 months. The revisional RYGB had to be performed as a 1-step procedure.ResultsA total of 195 patients were included while 3 were lost to follow up. Overall, 178 (91%) procedures were performed without perioperative complications, and only 8 (4%) patients required reoperation within 30 days. The mean follow-up was 40 months (±24) after RYGB. Mean excess weight loss (EWL) increased from 25% (±26/-50- 120%) to 60% (±21.2/0- 130), 65% (±23.5/0- 131), 63% (±24.2/2- 132), 60% (±24.1/0- 111) and 53% (±28.7/-39- 109) in the first 5 postoperative years.ConclusionConverting a gastric band to a RYGB in a one-stage procedure is safe and feasible, with acceptable complication rates when performed in a specialized institution. The RYGB conversion results in a good EWL of 65% after 2 years. However, proper patient selection is of the utmost importance.     

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass after successful weight loss with a laparoscopic adjustable gastric band: rationales and early outcomes in patients of body mass index<35 kg/m2

BackgroundLaparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has a number of well-established acute and chronic issues that can require revisional surgical procedures. There is no existing data to evaluate conversion of band patients with body mass index (BMI)<35 kg/m² from LAGB to a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). This study aims to report on the indications for and the safety profile of conversion of the LAGB to RYGB in patients with BMI<35 kg/m².MethodsA review of data from 200 consecutive conversions of LAGB to RYGB was conducted. Fifty-two patients whose BMI was<35 kg/m² were included in this analysis. Indications for conversion, technical details, early morbidity, length of hospital stay, and weight loss data were assessed.ResultsLaparoscopic conversion to RYGB was performed in 100% of patients. The median BMI pre-RYGB was 32.8 kg/m². The most common indication for surgery was weight regain after removal of LAGB (28.8%). There was no mortality. Early morbidity was seen in 25% of patients; the most common complication was stricture of the gastrojejunal anastomosis (9 patients).ConclusionMorbidity resulting from conversion of LAGB to RYGB in patients with BMI <35 kg/m² is similar to that seen in the BMI>35 kg/m² population. The procedure is technically challenging and morbidity rates are higher than those reported for surgically ‘naïve’ patients. It is recommended that this procedure be undertaken by appropriately trained surgeons in high-volume bariatric centers to optimize safety and outcomes.     

Conversion of one-anastomosis gastric bypass to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: short-term results from a tertiary referral center

BackgroundOne-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), also known as minigastric bypass, is an increasingly popular bariatric surgery option worldwide. While OAGB offers advantage in terms of procedure time and technical ease, revisional operations to correct complications may be necessary.ObjectivesWe aimed to describe the indications and perioperative outcomes for OAGB conversions to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) at a single-referral center.SettingAcademic hospital, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.MethodsAll patients undergoing conversion from OAGB to RYGB from February 2016 through September 2018 were retrospectively identified from a prospectively maintained database of revisional bariatric surgeries.ResultsSixteen patients underwent conversion from previous OAGB to RYGB during the study period. The cohort was 62.5% female (n = 10) with a mean age of 40.2 years and median body mass index of 30.7 kg/m². Indications for conversion included intractable nausea/vomiting (n = 8, 50.0%), biliary reflux (n = 3, 18.8%), weight recidivism (n = 3, 18.8%), and protein-calorie malnutrition (n = 2, 12.5%). Twelve cases (75.0%) were successfully completed with a laparoscopic approach, with 4 cases (25.0%) converted to open. The median length of stay was 5.5 days. Six patients (37.5%) experienced minor and major complications within 30 days of discharge. Fourteen patients (87.5%) were available for follow-up at 6 months, with 100% of these patients reporting resolution of their preoperative symptoms. There were no mortalities.ConclusionsData from this largest reported single-center experience demonstrates that conversion of OAGB to RYGB is safe and technically feasible. Further studies and longer-term follow-up are needed to definitively describe outcomes after this revisional bariatric surgery.     

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

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

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass as revisional procedure after gastric banding: leaving the band in place

BackgroundRoux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) are frequently used bariatric procedures. With both techniques, LAGB more than RYGB, failures occur. After years of experience with both techniques, we present a series of patients who underwent RYGB after failed LAGB. The band was kept in place. Our objective was to evaluate the safety and short-term effectiveness of RYGB after failed LAGB, without removing the band. The setting was a large teaching hospital in Heerlen, The Netherlands.MethodsWe first retrospectively considered the efficacy and complication rate of adding an adjustable band to RYGB. This was safe and effective. The patients lost a median of 7.6 kg within a median period of 21 months. The complication rate was low. Observing the positive results in this group, we began to leave the band in place when converting patients from LAGB to RYGB.ResultsA total of 12 patients underwent revision of LAGB to RYGB. There was no mortality. The complication rate and severity were low. During a median period of 16 months, the patients lost a median of 23 kg or 8 points in the body mass index. Also, additional improvement in co-morbidities was observed.ConclusionOur results suggest that performing RYGB after LAGB and leaving the band in place is feasible, safe, and effective in the short term.     

Gastric band conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass shows greater weight loss than conversion to sleeve gastrectomy: 5-year outcomes

Background

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) are often used as revisional surgeries for a failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB). There is debate over which procedure provides better long-term weight loss.

Revisional versus primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a case-matched analysis

Background

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has been a widely performed bariatric procedure. Unfortunately, revisional surgery is required in 20–30 % of cases. Data comparing revisional and primary gastric bypass procedures are scarce. This study compared revisional malabsorptive laparoscopic very very long limb (VVLL) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) with primary VVLL RYGB and tested the hypothesis that one-stage revisional laparoscopic VVLL RYGB is an effective procedure after failed LAGB.

Methods

In this study, 48 revisional VVLL RYGBs were matched one-to-one with 48 primary VVLL RYGBs. The outcome measures were operating time, conversion to open surgery, excess weight loss (EWL), and early and late morbidity.

Results

Surgical and medical morbidities did not differ significantly. No conversions occurred. The revisional group showed an EWL of 41.8 % after 12 months of follow-up evaluation and 45.1 % after 24 months based on the pre-revisional weight. The total EWL based on the weight before the LAGB was calculated to be 54.3 % after 12 months and 57.2 % after 24 months. The EWL in the primary RYGB group was significantly higher for both types of calculation: 41.8 %/54.3 % versus 64.1 % (p < 0.001 and <0.01) after 12 months and 45.1 %/57.2 % versus 70.4 % (p < 0.001 and <0.002) after 24 months.

Conclusions

Revisional laproscopic VVLL RYGB can be performed as a one-stage procedure by experienced bariatric surgeons but shows less effective EWL than primary RYGB procedures.     

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric band versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

Background In the United States, the most frequently performed bariatric procedure is the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Worldwide, the most common operation performed is the laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB). The expanding use of LAGB is probably driven by the encouraging data on its safety and effectiveness, in contrast to the disappointing morbidity and mortality rates reported for RYGB. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of LAGB versus RYGB at a single institution. Methods Between November 2000 and July 2004, 590 bariatric procedures were performed. Of these, 120 patients (20%) had laparoscopic RYGB and 470 patients (80%) had LAGB. A retrospective review was performed. Results In the LAGB group, 376 patients (80%) were female, and the mean age was 41 years (range, 17–65). In the RYGB group, 110 patients (91%) were female, and the mean age was 41 years (range, 20–61). Preoperative body mass index was 47 ± 8 and 46 ± 5, respectively (p = not significant). Operative time and hospitalization were significantly shorter in LAGB patients (p < 0.001). Complications and the need for reoperation were comparable in both groups. Weight loss at 12, 18, 24, and 36 months for LAGB and RYGB was 39 ± 21 versus 65 ± 13, 39 ± 20 versus 62 ± 17, 45 ± 25 versus 67 ± 8, and 55 ± 20 versus 63 ± 9, respectively. Conclusions The current study demonstrates that LAGB is a simpler, less invasive, and safer procedure than RYGB. Although mean percentage excess body weight loss (%EBWL) in RYGB patients increased rapidly during the first postoperative year, it remained nearly unchanged at 3 years. In contrast, in LAGB patients weight loss was slower but steady, achieving satisfactory %EBWL at 3 years. Therefore, we believe that LAGB should be considered the initial approach since it is safer than RYGB and is very effective at achieving weight loss.     

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.     

Safety and effectiveness of 1-stage conversion of adjustable gastric band-to-sleeve gastrectomy: a single-institution case–control study

BackgroundPatients are increasingly referred for conversion of laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The safety of a 1- versus 2-stage approach to this revision is debated.ObjectivesWe examined the safety and efficacy of 1-stage conversion of LAGB to SG at our institution.SettingUniversity hospital.MethodsAn institutional database was used to retrospectively identify patients who underwent single-stage LAGB-to-SG conversion between 2010 and 2018. Patients were matched 1:1 for age, sex, and body mass index with primary SG patients during this same period. Primary endpoints were operative time, complication rate, length of hospital say, and weight loss 12 months from surgery.ResultsTwo-hundred and twenty-nine patients undergoing conversion of LAGB to SG were identified. Median postoperative length of hospital stay was 2 days. Two patients (.8%) developed surgical site infection. One patient (.4%) developed a postoperative myocardial infarction. There were 4 total readmissions (1.7%) and 1 reoperation within 30 days (.4%). There were no statistically significant differences in 30-day complication rates between groups. Weight loss at 12 months was significantly different: Median body mass index loss for conversion patients was 5.1 kg/m² compared with 8.85 kg/m² for patients in the primary SG group (P < .0001).ConclusionSingle-stage conversion of LAGB to SG is safe and effective. Patients may not experience the same extent of weight loss as those with primary SG. Our findings represent the largest single-institutional experience to date and support a 1-stage approach whenever feasible.     

Conversion from laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) to one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB): preliminary data from a multicenter retrospective study

BackgroundLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is the most commonly performed bariatric procedure, while laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has been for a decade one of the most popular interventions for weight loss. After LSG and LAGB, some patients may require a second surgery due to weight regain or late complications. One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a promising bariatric procedure, which provides effective long-term weight loss and has a favorable effect on type 2 diabetes.ObjectivesTo retrospectively analyze data from 10 Italian centers on conversion from LAGB and LSG to OAGB.SettingHigh-volume centers for bariatric surgery.MethodsProspectively collected data from 10 high-volume centers were retrospectively reviewed. Body mass index (BMI), percentage of excess BMI loss, reasons for redo, remission from co-morbidities (hypertension, diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux, and dyslipidemia), and major complications were recorded.ResultsThree hundred patients were included in the study; 196 patients underwent conversion from LAGB to OAGB and 104 were converted from LSG. BMI was 45.1 ± 7 kg/m² at the time of first intervention, 41.8 ± 6.3 kg/m² at redo time, and 30.5 ± 5.5 kg/m² at last follow-up appointment. Mean percentage of excess BMI loss was 13.2 ± 28.2 at conversion and 73.4 ± 27.5 after OAGB. Remission rates from hypertension, diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux, and dyslipidemia were 40%, 62.5%, 58.7% and 52%, respectively. Mean follow-up was 20.8 (range, 6–156) months and overall complications rate was 8.6%.ConclusionOur data show that OAGB is a safe and effective revisional procedure after failed restrictive bariatric surgery.     

Reasons and outcomes of laparoscopic revisional surgery after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding for morbid obesity

BackgroundLaparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is a purely restrictive procedure that has been proved to be an effective tool in achieving weight loss. The low operative morbidity and reversibility are often seen as advantages of this procedure compared with other bariatric approaches. We have attempted to define the reasons for revisional surgery after LAGB and the outcomes.MethodsA retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was performed from February 2001 to October 2008 at a center of excellence after institutional review board approval. The patients who had undergone revisional surgery after primary LAGB were evaluated.ResultsOf 343 patients who had undergone primary LAGB, 60 subsequently underwent a revisional procedure. In addition, 28 revisional procedures were performed on patients who had undergone primary LAGB at an outside institution. These procedures included 39 (44.3%) band removals alone, 12 (13.6%) band removals with conversion to sleeve gastrectomy, 13 (14.8%) band removals with conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, 9 (10.2%) band repositioning, and 2 (2.3%) band replacements. In addition, 13 (14.8%) port-related procedures (3 relocations, 6 reconnections, and 4 replacements/removals) were performed.ConclusionAlthough reversible and efficacious, LAGB appears to have a high incidence of complications requiring revisional surgery and/or band removal. The results of our study have shown that laparoscopic revisional surgery after primary LAGB is safe and can be performed with minimal morbidity.     

Revisional surgery after failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding

BackgroundLaparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is a restrictive procedure that achieves weight loss without anatomic alteration. However, morbidity requiring surgical reintervention can occur.MethodsA retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of primary LAGB and revisional surgery after failed LAGB was performed from January 2001 to October 2006 at an academic private clinic.ResultsOf 2467 bariatric procedures, primary LAGB was performed in 242 patients. A total of 53 revisional procedures were performed in 40 patients and 16 in 9 patients who were referred from other centers after failed primary LAGB. The mean follow-up was 45.7 ± 15.8 months (range 9.5–70). The early surgical reintervention rate was 6.1%. The revisional procedures included band removal only in 27 (39%), band removal and conversion to sleeve gastrectomy in 10 (14.5%), band removal and conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in 5 (7.2%), band repositioning in 7 (10%), device-related reintervention in 6 (8.7%), subsequent conversion to another bariatric procedure in 3 (4.3%), and other procedures in 11 (15.9%). Of the 49 patients, 21 (43%) presented with acute band-related morbidity. A total of 55 procedures (96.5%), amenable to minimal invasive surgery, excluding wound and port site-related procedures, were completed laparoscopically. The major early and late complication rate was 4.1% and 2%, respectively.ConclusionPrimary LAGB was associated with acceptable major early complication and surgical reintervention rates. However, a late surgical reintervention rate of 15.2% was observed. Band removal was required in 14% of our primary LAGB patients because of band-related morbidity, with conversion to another bariatric procedure in 6.2%. Our results have shown that LAGB can be associated with significant morbidity and that revisional surgery is common.     

Revisional Surgery After Failed Vertical Banded Gastroplasty: Restoration of Vertical Banded Gastroplasty or Conversion to Gastric Bypass

Background: An increasing number of patients with a failed primary bariatric procedure present themselves for secondary treatment. Only a few studies have investigated critically the success of revisional surgery. In the present study, the effectiveness of revisional surgery for failed vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) is analyzed: restoration of the VBG (reVBG) is compared to conversion to a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Patients and Methods: From 1980 to 1996, 136 consecutive morbidly obese patients underwent primary RYGB (n = 20) or VBG (n = 16). Weight loss, indications and complications after revisional surgery were registered. The rate of revisional surgery after primary and secondary bariatric procedures was estimated by means of a Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that 56% of the patients will eventually require revisional surgery after initial VBG over a 12-year period compared to 12% after initial RYGB (P < 0.01). After reVBG 68% will need revisional surgery over a 5-year period, while no further revisional surgery was required after conversion to a RYGB (P < 0.05). Body mass index dropped significantly after reVBG or conversion to RYGB for insufficient weight loss (P < 0.05), however, more revisional surgery was necessary after reVBG to achieve this result. The complication rate was comparable between reVBG and conversion to RYGB (33%). Conclusion: Conversion of a failed VBG to a RYGB is more effective than a reVBG, because conversion to RYGB provides satisfactory weight loss without requiring further revisional surgery.     

Treatment of gastric leaks after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a paradigm shift

BackgroundDuring the past decade, nonoperative treatment of leaks after bariatric surgery has been deemed acceptable in selected patients. The setting of our study was 2 university affiliated hospitals.MethodsWe reviewed gastric leaks in 1069 consecutive bariatric operations that were performed by 1 surgeon during the past 8 years, including 836 primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), 114 primary open RYGBs, and 119 revisional procedures. Drains were used routinely in the laparoscopic and revision groups and selectively in the open group. Perforations and jejunojejunostomy leaks were excluded.ResultsThere were no leaks after open RYGB, 8 leaks (.95%) after laparoscopic RYGB, and 5 leaks (4.2%) after the revisional procedures. Of the 13 leaks, 7 occurred at the gastrojejunostomy, 6 at the staple line of the upper pouch, and none in the excluded stomach. Of the 8 postlaparoscopic RYGB leaks, 3 required reoperation versus 2 of 5 postrevision leaks. There were no perioperative deaths. All but 2 patients in the nonoperative group were treated with endoscopic injection of fibrin sealant (EIFS). Of the 4 leaks in the laparoscopic RYGB group, 2 treated by EIFS closed after 1 treatment; however, all leaks in the revision group required >1 EIFS treatment. The mean length of stay was 36 ± 34 days in the operative group and 33 ± 7 days in the EIFS patients. Operation for failure of EIFS was not required in any patient.ConclusionEIFS provides safe and successful treatment of patients who develop gastric leaks after bariatric operations. We recommend EIFS for all patients with endoscopically accessible leaks who can safely be treated nonoperatively.     

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

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

Large series examining laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding as a salvage solution for failed gastric bypass

Background

The Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) has long been considered the gold standard of weight loss procedures. However, there is limited evidence on revisional options with both minimal risk and long-term weight loss results.

Early results of conversion of laparoscopic adjustable gastric band to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

BackgroundAs the number of laparoscopic adjustable gastric bands (LAGBs) placed has increased, the number of patients requiring removal of the device has also increased.MethodsThe data from our institution, a U.S. university medical center, were reviewed to determine the feasibility, patient characteristics, and early results of converting patients from LAGB to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.ResultsA total of 350 patients underwent LAGB placement at our institution from 2001 to 2008. Of these, 26 required conversion to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for the following reasons: slippage, poor weight loss, LAGB intolerance, esophageal dilation, infection, and gastric ischemia. All conversions were completed laparoscopically. The average operating time and length of stay was 160 minutes and 3 days, respectively. Three complications developed. The average interval to conversion was 29 months. The average follow-up after conversion was 18 months. The average percentage of excess body weight loss at conversion was 23%. At 12 months after conversion, the patients had achieved an average percentage of excess body weight loss of 56% from their pre-LAGB weight.ConclusionThe increasing popularity of the LAGB has led to a considerable number of revisions of the device. Our early experience has shown that converting patients from LAGB to laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is feasible and safe and can offer patients substantial additional weight loss.     

Conversion from one-anastomosis gastric bypass to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: when and why—a single-center experience of all consecutive OAGB procedures

BackgroundOne-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a well-established treatment method in patients with morbid obesity. Its long-term impact on de novo reflux, anastomotic complications, and malnutrition needs further evaluation. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is a technically feasible procedure in revisional bariatric surgery. This study presents our institutional data on conversion from OAGB to RYGB.ObjectiveTo determine the reasons for conversion, preoperative endoscopic findings, and feasibility of revisional bariatric surgery after OAGB.SettingUniversity hospital in AustriaMethodsRetrospective analysis of a prospectively fed database. All patients undergoing OAGB between January 2012 and December 2019 were included. Screening was carried out for all patients needing conversion to RYGB. Percent total weight loss, percent excess weight loss, time to conversion, postoperative complications, and reasons for conversion were assessed.ResultsEighty-two of 1,025 patients who underwent OAGB were converted laparoscopically to RYGB. Seven patients were converted early because of anastomotic/gastric tube leakage. Median time to late conversion was 29.1 ± 24.3 months, mean percent excess weight loss was 86.6% ± 33.1% and percent total weight loss was 35.1% ± 13.5%. Forty-two patients were converted because of reflux, 11 because of persistent marginal ulcers, 10 because of anastomotic stenosis, 9 because of malnutrition, and 3 because of weight regain. Seven patients showed Barrett’s metaplasia in biopsies at the gastroesophageal junction before conversion.ConclusionLaparoscopic conversion from OAGB to RYGB is technically feasible with a moderate rate of postoperative complications. Severe (bile) reflux is a serious long-term complication after OAGB, with 4.1% of patients needing conversion to RYGB. Endoscopy after OAGB in patients showing clinical symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease is strongly advised to detect underlying pathologic changes.     

Long-term results for gastric banding as salvage procedure for patients with weight loss failure after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass

Background

Studies reporting revisionary options for weight loss failure after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) have been underpowered and lacking long-term data. We have previously shown that short-term (12 mo) and midterm (24 mo) weight loss is achievable with laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) for failed RYGB. The present study represents the largest published series with longest postoperative follow-up of patients receiving salvage LAGB after RYGB failure.