Search

Background: Obesity is a risk factor for gallstone formation, which can be exacerbated by bariatric surgery-induced rapid weight loss. Current guidelines do not recommend concomitant cholecystectomy (CC) for asymptomatic gallstones during the bariatric surgery procedure. However, long-term follow-up studies have shown that the incidence of post-bariatric surgery symptomatic gallstones necessitating therapeutic cholecystectomy increases to 40%. Therefore, some surgeons advocate simultaneous cholecystectomy during the bariatric surgery for asymptomatic individuals. This study aims to evaluate the safety of performing cholecystectomy for asymptomatic gallstones during the bariatric procedure., Methods: Data from a consecutive series of patients that underwent primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or conversion of LSG to a LRYGB with or without concomitant cholecystectomy for asymptomatic gallstones between Jan 2010 and Dec 2017 were retrieved from the database. The primary endpoint was the complication rate. Secondary endpoints were the surgical operating room time (ORT) and the length of hospital stay (LOS)., Results: Out of the 2828 patients who were included, 120 patients underwent a concomitant cholecystectomy during their bariatric procedure (LSG or LRYGB) for asymptomatic gallbladder stones and were compared to the 2708 remaining patients who only had bariatric surgery. None of the concomitant cholecystectomy patients developed a gallbladder-related complication. There was no significant increase in the rate of minor or major complications between the CC groups and the non-CC groups (LSG: 6.7% vs. 3.2%, p=0.132; LRYGB: 0% vs. 2.3%, p =0.55; and conversion of LSG to LRYGB: 20% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.125, respectively). In addition, there was no significant increase in the length of hospital stay (1.85 ±4.19 days vs. 2.24 ±1.82, p=0.404) for LSG group and (1.75 ±2.0 vs. 2.3 ±2.1, p=0.179) for LRYGB group. Adding the cholecystectomy to the bariatric procedure only added an average of 23 min (min) (27 min when added to LSG and 18 min when added to LRYGB)., Conclusion: As one of the largest series reviewing concomitant cholecystectomy in bariatric surgery, this study showed that in skilled laparoscopic bariatric surgical hands, concomitant cholecystectomy during bariatric surgery is safe and prevents potential future gallstone-related complications. Long-term large prospective randomized trials are needed to further clarify the recommendation of prophylactic concomitant cholecystectomy during bariatric surgery., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

In the multi-center Dutch Common Channel Trial (DUCATI), a very long Roux limb Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (VLRL-RYGB: BP-limb 60 cm, Roux limb variable, and common channel 100 cm) was compared to a standard Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (S-LRYGB: BP-limb 60 cm, Roux limb 150 cm, and common channel variable) in the treatment of morbidly obese patients. As all trial patients are beyond 3-year follow-up a midterm analysis was performed to investigate the effect of the VLRL-RYGB., Methods: A total of 444 patients were randomized (1:1) to receive either a VLRL-RYGB or a S-LRYGB. Follow-up results for weight loss, effect on obesity-related comorbid conditions, complications, reoperation, and malnutrition are investigated., Results: At 3-year follow-up a significant difference in %TWL (34.0% vs. 31.4%, p = 0.017) and %EWL (84.7% vs. 76.6%, p = 0.043) was observed in favor of VLRL-LRYGB group. Overall complication rate 3-years after surgery was 15.8% in the VLRL-LRYGB group vs. 9% in the S-LRYGB group (p = 0.031). Eight (3.6%) patients in the VLRL-LRYGB group versus 2 (0.9%) in the S-LRYGB group (p = 0.055) required revisional surgery for malabsorption. In the VLRL-LRYGB group 71.9% of patients had resolution of T2DM versus 48.9% in the S-LRYGB group (p = 0.044)., Conclusion: At midterm FU a considerable, significantly increased effect on weight loss of the VLRL-LRYGB was observed compared to the S-LRYGB, with a higher risk of overall complications, but no significant nutritional side effects. These results might impact the current view on the value of the Roux limb in the discussion on optimum limb lengths in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: Although the laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (LRYGB) is the gold-standard bariatric procedure, it remains uncertain what the optimal bowel limb lengths are to accomplish maximal weight loss while minimizing nutritional deficiencies and related gastro-intestinal complaints. The aim of this randomized controlled multicenter trial is to investigate the effect of significant lengthening of the length of the Roux limb (RL) at the cost of the length of the common channel (CC) while keeping the biliopancreatic limb (BPL) lengths the same on both study arms., Methods: Four hundred forty-four patients were randomized to receive either a Very Long Roux Limb LRYGB (VLRL-LRYGB) (variable RL length, BPL 60 cm, and CC 100 cm) or a Standard LRYGB (S-LRYGB) (RL 150 cm, BPL 60 cm, and a variable CC length). Results at 1-year follow-up for weight loss, effect on obesity-related comorbid conditions, complications, re-operation rate, malnutrition rate, and re-admission rate were investigated., Results: Weight loss at 1-year showed no significant differences for %EWL (84.3% versus 85.3%, p = 0.72) and %TWL (34.2% versus 33.6%, p = 0.359) comparing VLRL-LRYGB versus S-LRYGB. Malabsorption requiring surgical bowel length adjustment was observed in 1.4% in VLRL-LRYGB group versus 0.9% in S-LRYGB group (p = 0.316)., Conclusion: Significant lengthening of the RL at the cost of the common channel seems to have no effect on the weight loss at 1-year follow-up, which supports the theory that absorption of nutrients also occurs in the RL. Nevertheless, long-term results of the VLRL-LRYGB have to be awaited to draw final conclusions as part of the discussion towards optimal limb length in LRYGB surgery.

Introduction Interest in bariatric surgery in adolescents is increasing, because adolescent obesity equals increased health risks in adult life. To define the preferred procedure in adolescents, this study compares outcomes of LSG and LRYGB in late adolescents in our center. Materials and methods Data on baseline characteristics, operative details, and follow-up were collected retrospectively in all patients (age 18-20 years) who underwent LSG or LRYGB in our clinic. Outcomes were analyzed using nonparametric tests. Results Total 65 adolescents (54 females; median age 19 years) were included, 45 patients underwent LSG, and 20 underwent LRYGB.Significant differences in %EWL were observed at 2-year follow-up; 81.0% in LRYGB (n = 11) versus 96.8% in LSG (n = 23), p = 0.007. No differences were observed in postoperative mortality, complication rate, and resolution of comorbidities between both procedures. Discussion LSG showed significant better results than LRYGB in terms of %EWL after 2 years in this selected group of late adolescents. Considering these results in LSG patients and the theoretical advantages of LSG (normal diet options, preservation of an intact GI-tract, less vitamin disturbances, and better quality of life), LSG may be an appropriate bariatric technique to perform in morbidly obese adolescents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]