Search

Background: Despite excellent reported outcomes after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), a percentage of patients go on to have a secondary bariatric surgery to manage side-effects or address weight regain after LSG. Reported weight loss outcomes for patients undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) after previous LSG are variable. We sought to determine the weight-loss outcomes of patients undergoing LRYGB after LSG in the largest bariatric surgical network in Canada and to determine whether outcomes differ according to indications for conversion., Methods: The Bariatric Registry is a multi-center database with prospectively collected standardized data on patients undergoing bariatric surgery at ten Bariatric Centers of Excellence within the Ontario Bariatric Network in Ontario, Canada. A retrospective analysis was performed of patients who underwent LRYGB after previous LSG between 2012 and 2019. Weight loss outcomes were compared between patients who underwent LRYGB for insufficient weight loss/weight regain and those who underwent conversion to LRYGB for other reasons., Results: Excluding patients with multiple revisions and those without follow-up data, 48 patients were included in the analysis: 33 patients (69%) underwent conversion to LRGYB for insufficient weight loss/weight regain (Group 1) and 15 patients (31%) underwent conversion for other reasons (Group 2). Mean body mass index (BMI) measured pre-LSG, pre-LRYGB, and at mid-term follow-up after LRYGB was 61, 48, and 43 kg/m 2 in Group 1 and 51, 39, and 34 kg/m 2 in Group 2, respectively. ΔBMI and %total weight loss (TWL) at mid-term follow-up were not significantly different between the groups., Conclusions: Conversion to LRYGB after previous LSG resulted in an additional loss of 4 kg/m 2 in BMI points at mid-term follow-up. Patients lost a similar number of BMI points and cumulative %TWL was similar regardless of reason for conversion. This can help inform surgical decision-making in the setting of weight regain after LSG., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

One of the short- and long-term complications following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for morbid obesity is the development of marginal ulcers (MUs). Although chronic and recalcitrant/recurrent marginal ulcers (rMUs) are common, there is no consensus on their optimal management. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of the elective operative management of rMUs. A systematic search of the literature was conducted. Relevant databases were searched up to May 16, 2020. Articles were included if they met the following inclusion criteria: (1) bariatric patients were included as the study population, (2) laparoscopic RYGB was performed as the index operation, (3) study patients developed rMUs, and (4) MUs required elective operative (surgical, endoscopic) interventions. Quality of articles was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The search identified 3470 citations; of these, 16 observational studies were included. Elective management of rMUs consisted of endoscopic (oversewing ± stents) and surgical interventions (gastrojejunostomy revision, vagotomy, conversion to sleeve gastrectomy, subtotal/total gastrectomy, reversal to normal anatomy). Quality of the studies as assessed by the GRADE system was low to very low. Recalcitrant/recurrent MUs are challenging complications both for bariatric patients and for their treating surgeons. There are no established algorithms for the management of rMUs, and the currently available evidence in the literature is limited both in quantity and in quality. Future multicentre, multisurgeon, randomized, controlled trials are needed to address this issue., (Copyright © 2021 American Society for Bariatric Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The reported incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) following bariatric surgery ranges from 1.4 to 30%. The use of skin staples and tissue adhesive was shown to be superior to sutures in reducing SSI in a variety of surgical disciplines; however, this area is under-investigated in elective bariatric surgery. The aim of this study was to examine the effect of tissue adhesive for skin closure on SSI in patients undergoing bariatric surgery., Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed to determine the incidence of SSI in patients who underwent elective laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Tissue adhesive was selectively used for skin closure during the study period. Patient characteristics, operative data, and 30-day postoperative outcomes were collected from patient charts and the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database., Results: A total of 1,579 patients were included in the study. Tissue adhesive was used in 31.2% of all operations (n = 494). The rate of incisional SSI in our study was 2.2% (n = 35). The use of tissue adhesive was more common in patients who developed incisional SSI compared with those without incisional SSI (54.3 vs. 30.8%, p = 0.003). On multivariate analysis, the use of tissue adhesive remained an independent predictor for the development of incisional SSI (OR 2.77, p = 0.007)., Conclusion: The use of tissue adhesive was an independent predictor for incisional SSI following elective bariatric surgery. This is the first study to report the effects of tissue adhesive in this patient population.

Background: Marginal ulcer formation is a known complication following RYGB. While most respond to medical therapy, many patients have recurrent or chronic MU. Although non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use, smoking and Helicobacter pylori infection are known risk factors of MU, little is known about what increases the likelihood of developing recalcitrant ulcers. The objective of this study is to identify risk factors for marginal ulcer (MU) formation, including recalcitrant ulcers requiring surgical revision, and to define the incidence and outcomes of revisional surgery., Methods: All patients who underwent RYGB between 2011 and 2017 at a high-volume academic center were included. Patients with a postoperative diagnosis of MU were identified from the institution's bariatric database. Patient characteristics, operative data and surgical outcomes were analyzed using data collected in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program and the Ontario Bariatric Registry., Results: A total of 2830 RYGB were performed during the study period. The incidence of MU was 6.9% with 1% of patients requiring revisional surgery for a recalcitrant ulcer. Patients with a history of smoking (HR 5.03), immunosuppression (HR 4.60) and preoperative NSAID use (HR 3.11) were significantly more likely to develop a MU requiring surgical revision. Patients undergoing revision reported resolution of their symptoms in only 36% of cases with 57% developing a recurrent ulcer., Conclusion: Patients with a history of smoking and use of immunosuppressive medication were at significantly higher risk of developing MU that failed medical therapy. Additional evidence is needed to inform perioperative management of bariatric patients.

Background: Opioid consumption in North America has risen to alarming levels and represents a potentially modifiable risk factor in perioperative management. Chronic pain and obesity are commonly associated and bariatric surgery remains the most effective intervention for weight loss in morbidly obese patients., Objectives: To understand how preoperative opioid use impacts surgical outcomes in patients undergoing bariatric surgery., Setting: The Ontario Bariatric Registry., Methods: Data collected in the Ontario Bariatric Registry between 2010 and 2018 were used for this retrospective study. Preoperative opioid use was retrospectively retrieved from the medication review during preoperative assessment. Primary outcomes were complications and readmissions at 30 and 90 days of surgery. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay and complication types at 30 and 90 days. Analyses were risk-adjusted for procedure type and patient-specific risk factors, such as age, sex, race, body mass index, and co-morbid conditions., Results: Overall, 5357 patients were included in the study. Among those, 12% (n = 643) used opioids preoperatively. Risk-adjusted analyses demonstrated that opioid users, compared with opioid-naïve patients, had a longer length of stay (odds ratio: 2.50, 95% confidence interval: 1.05-6.00, P < .05) and higher rates of complications at 30 days (odds ratio: 1.40, 95% confidence interval: 1.02-2.18, P < .05). Subgroup analyses revealed that within preoperative opioid users, patients who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass had poorer outcomes than those who underwent sleeve gastrectomy., Conclusion: Opioid use is common before bariatric surgery and is independently associated with prolonged length of stay and complication rates at 30 days. Preoperative opioid use represents a potentially modifiable risk factor and a unique target to improving the quality of surgical care., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) represents one of the most commonly performed bariatric procedures and, in contrast to the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, produces a specimen for pathologic examination. This study aims to describe unexpected histopathological findings in order to better define preoperative management of patients undergoing LSG., Methods: All LSG cases performed at an academic center in Toronto, Ontario between 2010 and 2017 were reviewed. All specimens underwent histopathological assessment, while those with findings suspicious for neoplasia or the presence of Helicobacter pylori underwent additional immunohistochemical stainings. Baseline patient characteristics and surgical outcomes were obtained from our internal database., Results: A total of 222 patients underwent LSG during the study period and had their specimens examined histologically. Among them, 22.5% underwent preoperative endoscopy. The most common histopathological diagnosis was no abnormal findings (50.9%) followed by gastritis (25.7%). Abnormal findings warranting a change in postoperative management or follow-up were discovered in 8.6% of specimens and included H. pylori infection, intestinal metaplasia, malignancy, and atrophic gastritis. Only 4.7% of all patients had not undergone preoperative endoscopy and had truly unexpected findings. No significant association was found between abnormal findings and age, sex, or baseline body mass index (BMI)., Conclusions: Although a majority of patients had a gastric specimen within normal limits, 8.6% had findings requiring a change in postoperative management. This rate dropped to 4.7% when patients whose diagnoses were known preoperatively were excluded. Our findings suggest that further research is needed to better define the role of preoperative endoscopy to potentially reduce the number of unexpected findings following LSG.

Background: The efficacy of drains has long been debated in bariatric surgery. Drains may provide some theoretical benefits to early detection of anastomotic leaks and potential nonoperative treatment; however, there has never been data to support the practice., Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of drain placement after bariatric surgery., Setting: This retrospective cohort study includes all hospitals in the United States that participated in the 2015 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program., Methods: Only patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass were included for the analysis. The main outcomes of interest were anastomotic leak, reoperation, all-cause morbidity, readmission, and mortality. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the effect of abdominal drainage on the outcomes of interest., Results: A total of 142,631 patients were identified in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database. After adjustment for major clinical variables, the odds of anastomotic leaks increased by 30% with the placement of a drain (odds ratio: 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-1.57, P = .01) while the odds of reoperation increased by 17% (95% CI: 1.06-1.30, P = .01). The odds of all cause morbidity increased 19% (95% CI: 1.14-1.25, P<.01), and odds of readmission were significantly higher (odds ratio:1.12, 95% CI:1.06-1.19, P<.01). The odds of mortality did not change significantly with the placement of a drain., Conclusions: Using a large observational cohort, this study provided no evidence that routine drainage is beneficial to patients, but rather may increase major morbidity. Our findings suggest that the use of routine abdominal drainage should be restricted to very select, high-risk cases., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.)