Search

Objectives To determine conception rates, contraceptive use patterns, and frequency of counseling regarding pregnancy recommendations in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Study Design Using a database of bariatric surgery patients at our institution, we identified female patients aged 18 to 45 who underwent surgery from 2013 to 2018. Patient charts were reviewed for demographic information, documentation of counseling regarding pregnancy recommendations, conception during the postoperative period, and pre and postoperative contraception use. We examined rates of contraception use and used standard statistical tests to compare conception rates between groups. Results Of the 460 patients that met inclusion criteria and did not have a history of permanent contraception, 54% (95% CI 49–58) had documented postoperative contraception use, most commonly the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine device followed by combination oral contraceptive pills. In the 18 months following bariatric surgery, 6% of patients (95% CI 4–8) had a documented pregnancy. Over 50% (95% CI 35–71) of pregnancies occurred in patients without documented postoperative contraception. Conclusions For bariatric surgery patients at risk of pregnancy, postoperative contraception use patterns and conception rates are not consistent with the recommendation to refrain from pregnancy for 18 months. Implications Individualized contraceptive counseling that includes a discussion of fertility and weight loss goals, planned bariatric procedure type, and patient preference should be implemented as part of standard preoperative care for patients at risk of pregnancy undergoing bariatric surgery.

Background Patients with medically intractable GERD after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) have limited surgical options. Fundoplication is difficult post-LSG. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass may be used as a conversion procedure but is more invasive with potential for serious complications. Magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) is a less invasive GERD treatment alternative. The objective of this study was to assess safety and efficacy outcomes of MSA after LSG. Methods The primary outcome of this observational, multicenter, single-arm prospective study was the rate of serious device and/or procedure-related adverse events (AEs). The efficacy of the LINX device was measured comparing baseline to 12-month post-implant reductions in distal acid exposure, GERD-HRQL score, and average daily PPI usage. Results Thirty subjects who underwent MSA implantation were followed 12 months post-implant. No unanticipated adverse device effects were observed. There were two adverse events deemed serious (dysphagia, pain, 6.7%) which resolved without sequelae. GERD-HRQL scores showed significant improvement (80.8%, P P = 50% reduction of total distal acid exposure time (baseline 16.2%, 12 months 11%; P = 0.038). Conclusions Post-LSG, MSA showed an overall improvement of GERD symptoms, and reduction in PPI use with explants within anticipated range along with improvement in distal esophageal acid exposure time. Graphical Abstract

Conversion of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) has been utilized to promote further weight loss, but results are variable in available literature.To evaluate outcomes of SG to RYGB conversion for weight loss and to identify predictors of below-average weight loss.University-affiliated hospital, United States.Chart review was performed of our patients who underwent SG to RYGB conversion from November 1, 2013, to November 1, 2020. Primary outcomes were below-average percent excess weight loss (%EWL) at 1 and 2 years. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for preconversion demographics to evaluate their relationship to the primary outcome.Sixty-two patients underwent conversion from SG to RYGB with weight loss as a goal. One-year data was available for 47 patients. The average %EWL at 1 year was 41.5%. Twenty-six patients had below-average %EWL at 1 year. Interval to conversion2 years (OR = 4.41, 95% CI [1.28,15.17], P = .019) and preconversion body mass index (BMI)40 (OR = 4.00, 95% CI [1.17,13.73], P = .028) were statistically significant predictors of below-average 1-year %EWL. Two-year data was available for 36 patients. The average %EWL at 2 years was 30.8%. Seventeen patients had below-average %EWL at 2 years. Evaluated demographics were not statistically significant predictors of below-average 2-year %EWL.Following SG to RYGB conversion, %EWL outcomes are lower at 1 year (41.5%) and 2 years (30.8%) than reported values for primary RYGB. Interval to conversion2 years and preconversion BMI40 are predictors of below-average 1-year weight loss after conversion.

Patients that undergo bariatric surgery are at risk of bleeding. Some obesity-related comorbidities including venous thromboembolism and heart disease can often require therapeutic anticoagulation. Previous small institutional studies have demonstrated that bariatric surgery can be performed in this patient population. This study attempts to identify best practices in stopping and restarting therapeutic anticoagulation in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. A retrospective analysis was completed of our institution’s database using anticoagulant medications to identify patients on therapeutic anticoagulation. Patients not on therapeutic anticoagulation were excluded, as well as patients that were started on therapeutic anticoagulation only in the post-operative period or those whose anticoagulation was stopped and not restarted. Indications for anticoagulation were recorded, as well as patient demographics and comorbid conditions. The patient chart was examined for when anticoagulation was stopped before surgery, when it was restarted after surgery, and whether or not the patient was therapeutically bridged. Baseline and post-operative hemoglobin values were recorded, as well as bleeding events, transfusions, reoperation, length of stay, and readmissions. Binary variables were compared across groups using Chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests, and continuous variables were analyzed using T test. There were 2933 bariatric operations performed between January 1, 2012 and August 31, 2019. Of these patients, 64 were on therapeutic anticoagulation before and after the operation for one or more indications, including history of VTE (39), atrial fibrillation (27), clotting disorder (6), ventricular assist device (5), previous PCI (4), or mechanical valve (2). There were 4 (6.2%) patients that experienced bleeding events. All four patients were on Coumadin pre-operatively. Three patients experienced extraluminal bleeding, and one patient had intraluminal bleeding, and all events occurred within 72 h of the operation. All four patients had their anticoagulation restarted prior to the bleeding event becoming evident, with anticoagulation in these patients restarted an average of 1.25 days after surgery. There were no conditions that predisposed a patient to bleeding. There was no significant difference in amount of time anticoagulation was stopped before surgery in bleeding versus non-bleeding patients, and there appeared to be no increased risk of bleeding in patients that were on therapeutic bridging therapy. There were no thrombotic complications from the interruption in anticoagulation therapy. Bariatric surgery can be safely performed in patients on therapeutic anticoagulation, though this population is at greater risk for bleeding complications in the perioperative period. Meticulous hemostasis in the operating room is the most important aspect of preventing bleeding complications.

OBJECTIVE To report 1-year results from a 5-year mandated study. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA In 2012, the United States Food and Drug Administration approved magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) with the LINX Reflux Management System (Torax Medical, Shoreview, MN), a novel device for the surgical treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Continued assessment of safety and effectiveness has been monitored in a Post Approval Study. METHODS Multicenter, prospective study of patients with pathologic acid reflux confirmed by esophageal pH testing undergoing MSA. Predefined clinical outcomes were assessed at the annual visit including a validated, disease-specific questionnaire, esophagogastricduodenoscopy and esophageal pH monitoring, and use of proton pump inhibitors. RESULTS A total of 200 patients (102 males, 98 females) with a mean age of 48.5 years (range 19.7-71.6) were treated with MSA between March 2013 and August 2015. At 1 year, the mean total acid exposure time decreased from 10.0% at baseline to 3.6%, and 74.4% of patients had normal esophageal acid exposure time (% time pH

An unusually high surgical site infection (SSI) rate after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) was noted on routine outcomes review. Surgeon A, who had a rate of 8.9%, utilized the transoral technique (passage down esophagus into gastric pouch) for anvil insertion for the circular-stapled gastrojejunostomy. By comparison, SSI rate was 0% for Surgeon B, who inserted anvil transabdominally (direct passage into stomach via gastrotomy) and used wound protection (wound protector and plastic drape over stapler). We sought to determine if it was the technique for anvil insertion (transoral or transabdominal) or use of wound protection that could help reduce SSIs. In mid-2017, Surgeon A added wound protection (wound protector and plastic drape over stapler) to the transoral technique to minimize oral flora wound contamination. Surgeon B made no changes. In this study, wound-related outcomes are examined, comparing patients who underwent surgery before (Group 1) versus after (Group 2) this intervention. Statistical analysis performed utilizing t tests and Chi square analysis; p

The aim of this study was to assess the safety of revisional surgery to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) compared to laparoscopic Roux-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) after failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB).The number of reoperations after failed gastric banding rapidly increased in the United States during the last several years. A common approach is band removal with conversion to another weight loss procedure such as gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy in a single procedure. The safety profile of those procedures remains controversial.Preoperative characteristics and 30-day outcomes from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program Participant Use Files 2015 were selected for all patients who underwent a 1-stage conversion of LAGB to LSG (conv-LSG) or LRYGB (conv-LRYGB). Conv-LSG cases were matched (1:1) with conv-LRYGB patients by age (±1 year), body mass index (±1 kg/m(2)), sex, and comorbidities including diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, venous stasis, and sleep apnea.A total of 2708 patients (1354 matched pairs) were included in the study. The groups were closely matched as intended. The mean operative time in conv-LRYGB was significantly longer in comparison to conv-LSG patients (151 ± 58 vs 113 ± 45 minutes, P0.001). No mortality was observed in either group. Patients after conv-LRYGB had a clinically increased anastomotic leakage rate (2.07% vs 1.18%, P = 0.070) and significantly increased bleed rate (2.66% vs 0.44%, P0.001). Thirty-day readmission rate was significantly higher in conv-LRYGB patients (7.46% vs 3.69%, P0.001), as was 30-day reoperation rate (3.25% vs 1.26%, P0.001). The length of hospital stay was longer in conv-LRYGB.A single-stage conversion of failed LAGB leads to greater morbidity and higher complication rates when converted to LRYGB versus LSG in the first 30 days postoperatively. These differences are particularly notable with regards to bleed events, 30-day reoperation, 30-day readmission, operative time, and hospital stay.

Introduction Despite the clinical benefits of bariatric surgery, some patients have experienced disappointment with their weight loss. Setting realistic expectations is the key to success. Aim To develop a specific prediction calculator to estimate the expected body mass index (BMI) at 1 year after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Material and methods A retrospective analysis was performed to study 211 patients after primary LSG. Nine baseline variables were analyzed. Least angle regression (LARS) was employed for variable selection and to build the predictive model. External validation was performed on a dataset of 184 patients. To test the accuracy of the model, a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was performed between BMI estimates and the observed BMI. A linear logistic equation was used to construct the online predictive calculator. Results The model included three variables – preoperative BMI (β = 0.023, p < 0.001), age (β = 0.005, p < 0.001), and female gender (β = 0.116, p = 0.001) – and demonstrated good discrimination (R2 = 0.672; adjusted R2 = 0.664) and good accuracy (root mean squared error of estimate, RMSE = 0.124). The difference between the observed BMI and the estimated BMI was not statistically significant (median = 0.737 (–2.676, 3.254); p = 0.223). External validation confirmed good performance of the model. Conclusions The study revealed a useful predictive model for estimating BMI at 1 year after LSG. The model was used for development of the PREDICT BMI calculator. This tool allows one to set realistic expectations of weight loss at one year after LSG.

Background Esophageal motility disorders (EMDs) are often diagnosed manometrically, yet the underlying pathology is not always clear. Esophageal function testing (EFT), which incorporates manometry and multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII), is considered a useful tool in the assessment of EMDs. Objective This study aims to assess the most likely level of impaired bolus transit within the esophagus which may help further localize and characterize EMDs. Methods In a retrospective study design, we reviewed consecutive EFTs over a period of 12 months. Data included diagnosis, presenting symptoms, and EFT results of liquid and viscous swallows. Each patient underwent 10 liquid and 10 viscous swallows, and bolus transit is measured at 5, 10, 15 and 20 cm above the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). We recorded the initial level of impaired bolus transit for each swallow. Results A total of 2358 swallows in 118 patients was included for analysis. Of these, 837 swallows (35.5%) were incompletely transmitted. The proportions of impaired bolus transit were 39%, 41%, 15.6%, 4.4% at 20 cm, 15 cm, 10 cm, and 5 cm above the GEJ, respectively. The common symptoms at presentation were dysphagia (47%), heartburn (44%), chest pain (24.6%) and regurgitation (18%). The mean lower esophageal sphincter (LES) pressure was 24 ± 13.9 mmHg whereas the mean contraction amplitude was 84 ± 46.6 mmHg. Conclusion In patients with abnormal esophageal clearance, the most likely levels of impaired bolus transit are 15 and 20 cm above the GEJ. These levels of the esophagus should be a focus of attention in future studies evaluating the pathophysiology of esophageal dysmotility., Highlights • There is a common location of the impaired esophageal bolus transit as detected by multichannel intraluminal impedance (MII). • Healthy individuals may have physiological alteration of esophageal bolus transit at the transitioning zone of striated muscles to smooth muscles. • The most common levels at which impaired bolus transits occurred in our study were 15 and 20 cm above the GEJ. • The impaired bolus transit may affect esophageal emptying and clearance. However, the exact long-term clinical impact of impaired bolus transit is unclear.

Obesity poses a significant health care concern in the United States, with 39.8% of adults being classified as obese. Several different methods have been introduced to combat obesity, from medical therapy to surgical options. Bariatric surgery has been demonstrated to be superior to medical therapy alone for weight loss in obese patients. Despite this information, only about 1% of eligible patients undergo bariatric surgery per year. The reason for this treatment gap is multifactorial, but patient apprehension to undergo surgery is a major driving force. Many patients perceive bariatric surgery as dangerous, and believe that living with their current weight is safer than undergoing surgery. To combat this treatment gap, endoscopic therapies have been developed to reach more patients in a less invasive way. This article will review endoscopic treatment options currently available and approved by the Food and Drug Administration, as well as other treatment modalities that are currently in development.

The goal of this review is to summarize the current literature on predictors of success in bariatric surgery. These predictors include clinical, psychological, behavioral, and socioeconomic factors. Successful bariatric surgery is defined by excess weight loss, as well as improvement in medical comorbidities and the patient’s quality of life. Successful bariatric surgery is dependent on clinical, psychological, behavioral, and socioeconomic factors. The choice of operation, as well as the starting body mass index (BMI), has the largest clinical effect on weight loss. The presence of maladaptive eating habits, such as binge eating and emotional eating, is strongly correlated with poor postoperative weight loss. The presence of psychiatric disorders such as depression and anxiety has mixed effects on postoperative weight loss. Socioeconomic factors are barriers to access to bariatric surgery and can affect weight loss. Success after weight loss surgery not only is measured by the amount of weight lost but also by the improvement/resolution of comorbidities. Weight loss after bariatric surgery is a complex interplay of various clinical, psychological, behavioral, and socioeconomic factors. The strongest predictors appear to be behavioral. Channeling efforts to improve behavioral and nutritional support should be the focus of research going forward. More long-term studies are needed to further define the importance and influence of these factors on post-bariatric surgery outcomes.

Endoscopic approaches to the bariatric patient have increased significantly in the last two decades. Obese patients present a challenge to surgeons as they are at higher risk of having perioperative complications. Patients also are seeking less and less invasive ways to have procedures performed. The combination of these two demands has led to the development of new technologies in the bariatric arena. Now there are several new endoscopic approaches for primary weight loss. Endoscopic metabolic procedures are developing for the management of diabetes. This article reviews the latest in these technologies.

Background The HospitAl stay, Readmission, and Mortality rates (HARM) score is a quality indicator that is easily determined from routine administrative data. However, the HARM score has not yet been applied to patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Objective The aims of the present study were to adjust the HARM score to the bariatric population and to validate the ability of the modified HARM score to serve as an inexpensive tool to measure the quality of bariatric surgery. Methods A MBSAQIP 2015 PUF database was reviewed. For each discharge, a 1 to 10 score was calculated on the basis of length of stay (LOS), discharge status, and 30-day readmissions. We adjusted the LOS categories to the distribution of LOS in the MBSQIP database. The new LOS categories were used to calculate the modified HARM score, referred to as the BARiatric HARM (BAR-HARM) score. The association between HARM and BAR-HARM scores and complication rate was assessed. Results A total of 197,141 cases were evaluated: 98.8% were elective and 1.2% were emergent admissions. The mean individual patient BAR-HARM score was 1.75 ± 1.04 for elective cases, and 2.02 ± 1.45 for emergency cases. The complication rates for the respective BAR-HARM categories ≤ 2, > 2 to 3, > 3 to 4, and > 4 were 3.95, 27.53, 40.14, and 79.97% (p

Background "Candy cane" syndrome (a blind afferent Roux limb at the gastrojejunostomy) has been implicated as a cause of abdominal pain, nausea, and emesis after Roux-n-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) but remains poorly described. Objectives To report that "candy cane" syndrome is real and can be treated effectively with revisional bariatric surgery Setting All patients underwent "candy cane" resection at University Hospitals of Cleveland. Methods All patients who underwent resection of the "candy cane" between January 2011 and July 2015 were included. All had preoperative workup to identify "candy cane" syndrome. Demographic data; pre-, peri-, and postoperative symptoms; data regarding hospitalization; and postoperative weight loss were assessed through retrospective chart review. Data were analyzed using Student's t test and χ2 analysis where appropriate. Results Nineteen patients had resection of the "candy cane" (94% female, mean age 50±11 yr), within 3 to 11 years after initial RYGB. Primary presenting symptoms were epigastric abdominal pain (68%) and nausea/vomiting (32%), particularly with fibrous foods and meats. On upper gastrointestinal study and endoscopy, the afferent blind limb was the most direct outlet from the gastrojejunostomy. Only patients with these preoperative findings were deemed to have "candy cane" syndrome. Eighteen (94%) cases were completed laparoscopically. Length of the "candy cane" ranged from 3 to 22 cm. Median length of stay was 1 day. After resection, 18 (94%) patients had complete resolution of their symptoms (P Conclusion "Candy cane" syndrome is a real phenomenon that can be managed safely with excellent outcomes with resection of the blind afferent limb. A thorough diagnostic workup is paramount to proper identification of this syndrome. Surgeons should minimize the size of the blind afferent loop left at the time of initial RYGB.

The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) has recently developed and announced its Masters Program that aims to address existing needs of practicing surgeons for lifelong learning and consists of eight clinical pathways each containing three anchoring procedures. The objective of this study was to select the seminal articles for each anchoring procedure of these pathways using a systematic methodology.A systematic literature search of Web of Science was conducted for the most cited articles for each of the anchoring procedures of the SAGES Masters pathways. The most relevant identified articles were then reviewed by expert members of the relevant SAGES pathway committees and task forces and the seminal articles chosen for each anchoring procedure using expert consensus.578 highly cited articles were identified by the original search of the literature and the seminal articles were selected for each anchoring procedure after expert review and consensus. Articles address procedural outcomes, disease pathophysiology, and surgical technique and are presented in this paper.We have identified seminal articles for each anchoring procedure of the SAGES Masters program pathways using a systematic methodology. These articles provide surgeon participants of this program with a great resource to improve their procedure-specific knowledge and may further benefit the larger surgical community by focusing its attention to must-read impactful work that may inform best practices.

Bariatric surgery has been demonstrated to be superior to medical therapy for weight loss in morbidly obese patients...

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) affects two thirds of the American population. Obesity is also a disease that affects two thirds of the population. The pathophysiology of reflux disease is reasonably understood, however, the degree to which obesity affects this disease remains poorly defined. Therefore the approach to GERD in the obese patient requires special attention and its own algorithm. A literature search was conducted to consolidate the current available literature on GERD and its management in the obese. In addition, the authors reviewed the literature and present expert opinion on controversial topics. It is well established that GERD is increased in obesity and the pathophysiology is reviewed. Management options for GERD are discussed, with a focus on the obese population. Management strategies including fundoplication and gastric bypass are discussed. In addition, bariatric surgery in the setting of GERD is also reviewed. Currently this is an extremely controversial topic and this white paper presents a strong review of the literature to help guide the management of this challenging disease in this population. Expert recommendations are given throughout the paper based upon the current available data.

Regurgitative gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) refractive to medical treatment is common and caused by mechanical failure of the anti-reflux barrier. We compared the effects of magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) with those of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) in a randomized trial.Patients with moderate to severe regurgitation (assessed by the foregut symptom questionnaire) despite once-daily PPI therapy (n = 152) were randomly assigned to groups given twice-daily PPIs (n = 102) or laparoscopic MSA (n = 50) at 20 sites, from July 2015 through February 2017. Patients answered questions from the foregut-specific reflux disease questionnaire and GERD health-related quality of life survey about regurgitation, heartburn, dysphagia, bloating, diarrhea, flatulence, and medication use, at baseline and 6 and 12 months after treatment. Six months after PPI therapy, MSA was offered to patients with persistent moderate to severe regurgitation and excess reflux episodes during impedance or pH testing on medication. Regurgitation, foregut scores, esophageal acid exposure, and adverse events were evaluated at 1 year.Patients in the MSA group and those who crossed over to the MSA group after PPI therapy (n = 75) had similar outcomes. MSA resulted in control of regurgitation in 72/75 patients (96%); regurgitation control was independent of preoperative response to PPIs. Only 8/43 patients receiving PPIs (19%) reported control of regurgitation. Among the 75 patients who received MSA, 61 (81%) had improvements in GERD health-related quality of life improvement scores (greater than 50%) and 68 patients (91%) discontinued daily PPI use. Proportions of patients with dysphagia decreased from 15% to 7% (P .005), bloating decreased from 55% to 25%, and esophageal acid exposure time decreased from 10.7% to 1.3% (P.001) from study entry to 1-year after MSA (Combined P .001). Seventy percent (48/69) of patients had pH normalization at study completion. MSA was not associated with any peri-operative events, device explants, erosions, or migrations.In a prospective study, we found MSA to reduce regurgitation in 95% of patients with moderate to severe regurgitation despite once-daily PPI therapy. MSA is superior to twice-daily PPIs therapy in reducing regurgitation. Relief of regurgitation is sustained over 12 months. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02505945.

Peptic ulcer disease is a common cause of epigastric pain. In the past surgery used to be common in the management of the disease. However, with advancement in medical management of peptic ulcer disease, surgical management has been limited to emergent management of the disease in cases of bleeding and perforation. However surgeon should still be familiar with the relevant physiology and anatomy to manage the disease in adequate fashion. In this chapter we discuss clinically relevant physiology of gastric acid secretion and basic anatomical concepts. We describe minimally invasive approach to perform vagotomies. We then discuss our approach to post-op surgical management and finally briefly discuss the post-op complications associated with surgery.

This article was updated to correct Adel Alhaj Saleh’s name, incorrectly displayed as Adel A. Saleh. It is correct as displayed here: Adel (first name) Alhaj Saleh (last name).

The laparoscopic vertical sleeve gastrectomy (LVSG) has become the most popular operation for the treatment of morbid obesity in the United States. Being a purely restrictive procedure, the LVSG works to reduce the caloric intake of patients as well as decrease appetite through removal of ghrelin producing cells. Initially developed as the first part of a combined two step restrictive and malabsorptive procedure, the LVSG developed as a standalone procedure when patients lost significant weight with the restrictive portion of the operation alone. Short term outcomes have been promising in terms of weight loss and resolution of comorbid conditions. Long term outcomes are still evolving, but do demonstrate durable weight loss for a significant number of patients. Concerns with the LVSG in the long term revolve around development or worsening of gastroesophageal reflux disease or weight regain. The LVSG has been demonstrated to be a useful tool in the surgical management of morbid obesity.

Bariatric procedures are complex, and the acceptance of complications by the general public is exceedingly low. Using the database of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program, outcomes in bariatric surgery were evaluated to determine the effect of trainees.The following data on postoperative complications for patients undergoing bariatric surgery in 2015 were collected: surgical site infections, sepsis, urinary tract infection, duration of hospital stay, operative time, renal failure, pulmonary embolus, deep vein thrombosis, pneumonia, and re-operation. These were analyzed against presence and level of trainees, using analysis of variance after normalizing the data.Of 168,093 procedures, 125,078 were performed without trainees, 14,883 were performed with a fellow, and 28,132 were performed with a resident. Cases without trainees were 25% Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, 59% sleeve gastrectomy, and 16% other. Cases with fellows were 35% Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, 51% sleeve gastrectomy, and 13% other; cases with residents were 27% Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, 59% sleeve gastrectomy, and 15% other. Patient demographics were similar. Average operative time differed between groups as follows: without trainees, 85 minutes; with residents, 105 minutes; and with fellows, 117 minutes (P.001). Although not dramatically so, infections tended to be a bit more likely with fellows (2% vs 1%; P.001), and the rate of urinary tract infection and hospital stay tended to be greater with either fellows or residents (1% vs 0%; P.001; 2.0 days vs 2.1 days vs 1.8 days; P.001, respectively).Fellow involvement resulted in the greatest operative times, and the rate of infections, urinary tract infections, and prolonged hospital stay, although statistically greater, were only mildly increased and of questionable clinical importance. These mild increases in postoperative complications may be attributed to prolonged operating room time.

With obesity continuing as a global epidemic and therapeutic technologies advancing, several novel endoscopic and minimally invasive interventions will likely become available as treatment options. With improved technologies and different treatment strategies, as well as different patient populations being targeted, there will be greater application in the treatment armamentarium of specialists dedicated to treating obesity. We sought to review the existing technology and provide a review. Literature review was carried out for endoscopic and minimally invasive devices. Some of these products are not FDA approved, so limited data are available in their review. A summary of the device and data currently available on weight loss and safety profile is provided. Several products are in clinical trials or will be soon. Some of the technology has limited data and companies will be submitting their results for FDA evaluation. The obesity epidemic and associated weight-related diseases represent a tremendous burden to health care practitioners. As such, a multi-modal and progressive approach, with data and outcomes examined, is likely the best and most comprehensive method to care for these patients. SAGES endorses the benefits of minimally invasive and endoscopic approaches in the treatment of obesity and its related co-morbidities.

GERD is a common problem. If prolonged therapy is needed, the patient should have at least an endoscopy to assess for complications of GERD. If a surgical treatment is being considered, a thorough preoperative evaluation should be done to confirm the presence of pathologic GERD. Studies that should be done before a procedure include ambulatory pH testing, esophageal function testing, endoscopy, and esophagram. Nonacid ambulatory studies can be done in those who seem to be suffering from nonacid reflux with careful note of symptom correlation. Gastric emptying studies should be done if gastroparesis or gastric outlet obstruction is suspected. Esophageal motility disorders should be assessed with manometry, especially to evaluate for achalasia, which can mimic reflux.

An increase in the prevalence of obesity and longer life expectancy has resulted in an increased number of candidates over the age of 60 who are pursuing a bariatric procedure.The aim of this study was to assess the safety of laparoscopic Roux-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) compared to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients aged 60 years or older.University Hospital, United States METHODS: Preoperative characteristics and 30-day outcomes from the MBSAQIP 2015 were selected for all patients aged 60 years or older who underwent a LSG or LRYGB. LRYGB cases were closely matched (1:1) with LSG patients by age (±1 year), BMI (±1 kg/m2), gender, preoperative steroid or immunosuppressant use, preoperative functional health status and comorbidities including: diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux disease, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, venous stasis, sleep apnea and history of severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.A 3371 matched pairs were included in the study. The mean operative time in LRYGB was significantly longer in comparison to LSG patients (122 vs 84 min., P0.001). Patients after LRYGB had a significantly increased anastomotic leakage rate (1.01% vs 0.47 %, p = 0.011), 30-day readmission rate (6.08% vs 3.74%, p0.001) and 30-day reoperation rate (2.49% vs 0.89%, p0.001) The length of hospital stay was longer in LRYGB. Mortality and bleed rate was comparable.LRYGB and LSG in patients aged 60 years or older are relatively safe in the short term with an acceptable complication rate and low mortality. However, LRYGB is more challenging and is associated with significantly increased rates of leakage events, 30-day reoperation, 30-day readmission, longer operative time and longer hospital stay.

Bleeding after bariatric surgery is a rare but potentially devastating complication. Obesity is a growing problem worldwide. As the number of bariatric procedures being performed increases, the number of bariatric patients presenting with postoperative bleeding will continue to increase. General and bariatric surgeons should be well aware of potential sites of bleeding and how to manage this complication. In this chapter, we will discuss management of acute bleeding after bariatric surgery. We will discuss the various clinical presentations and potential sites of bleeding in these patients. Detailed descriptions will be provided regarding managing these bleeds. The role of endoscopy in control of these bleeding will also be discussed. In the end, we will discuss various preventive measures to help decrease risk of bleeding including role of routine intraoperative endoscopy. Since gastric bypass and gastric sleeve are the most commonly performed procedures, they will be the focus of this chapter.

Obesity has become a healthcare problem of epidemic proportions. The etiology is complex and mostly sedentary life style and excessive caloric intake have been implicated. Numerous interventions have been used to treat the disease of obesity. Lifestyle modification along with a combination of healthy diet and exercise are usually first line strategies. This is often not durable in the majority of severely obese individuals. Pharmacotherapy is slightly more effective but recidivism is high once the medication is stopped. Surgical intervention has been shown to be safe, effective and durable. In the last several decades, endoscopic approaches to this disease have become increasingly popular. Endoscopy is an invaluable tool in the armamentarium of any bariatric surgeon or gastroenterologist taking care of bariatric patients. Pre procedural endoscopy remains controversial but is often performed. Post procedural endoscopy is important in identifying various anatomical changes created after these procedures. Endoscopy is increasingly being utilized to manage complications. This requires a thorough knowledge of such normal and altered anatomy in bariatric patients. In this manuscript, the use of endoscopy in the various aspects of the care of the bariatric patient will be reviewed.

GERD patients frequently complain of regurgitation of gastric contents. Medical therapy with proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) is frequently ineffective in alleviating regurgitation symptoms, because PPIs do nothing to restore a weak lower esophageal sphincter. Our aim was to compare effectiveness of increased PPI dosing with laparoscopic magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) in patients with moderate-to-severe regurgitation despite once-daily PPI therapy.One hundred fifty-two patients with GERD, aged ≥21 years with moderate-to-severe regurgitation despite 8 weeks of once-daily PPI therapy, were prospectively enrolled at 21 U.S. sites. Participants were randomized 2:1 to treatment with twice-daily (BID) PPIs (N = 102) or to laparoscopic MSA (N = 50). Standardized foregut symptom questionnaires and ambulatory esophageal reflux monitoring were performed at baseline and at 6 months. Relief of regurgitation, improvement in foregut questionnaire scores, decrease in esophageal acid exposure and reflux events, discontinuation of PPIs, and adverse events were the measures of efficacy.Per protocol, 89% (42/47) of treated patients with MSA reported relief of regurgitation compared with 10% (10/101) of the BID PPI group (P .001) at the 6-month primary endpoint. By intention-to-treat analysis, 84% (42/50) of patients in the MSA group and 10% (10/102) in the BID PPI group met this primary endpoint (P .001). Eighty-one percent (38/47) of patients with MSA versus 8% (7/87) of patients with BID PPI had ≥50% improvement in GERD-health-related quality of life scores (P .001), and 91% (43/47) remained off of PPI therapy. A normal number of reflux episodes and acid exposures was observed in 91% (40/44) and 89% (39/44) of MSA patients, respectively, compared with 58% (46/79) (P .001) and 75% (59/79) (P = .065) of BID PPI patients at 6 months. No significant safety issues were observed. In MSA patients, 28% reported transient dysphagia; 4% reported ongoing dysphagia.Patients with GERD with moderate-to-severe regurgitation, especially despite once-daily PPI treatment, should be considered for minimally invasive treatment with MSA rather than increased PPI therapy. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02505945.).

Barrett's esophagus (BE) is a premalignant condition that is associated with the development of esophageal adenocarcinoma. Risk factors that have been associated with the development of BE include male gender, Caucasian race, chronic gastroesophageal reflux disease, smoking, age >50 and obesity. The current management of BE is dependent on underlying pathological changes and treatment can range from surveillance endoscopy with daily proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy in the setting of intestinal metaplasia or low-grade dysplasia (LGD) to radiofrequency ablation (RFA), endoscopic mucosal resection or surgical resection in the setting of high-grade dysplasia. We report the case of a morbidly obese patient who was found to have long-segment BE with LGD during preoperative work-up for weight loss surgery with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP). The patient underwent successful RFA for the treatment of her BE before and after her RYGBP procedure. At 5-year follow-up, there was minimal progression of BE after treatment.

Periodontitis and obesity are both chronic health problems, and the literature supports an association between the two. Weight loss after bariatric surgery (BS) has been shown to decrease overall mortality as well as the development of new health-related conditions in morbidly obese patients. The present study aims to assess whether significant weight loss would improve the response to non-surgical periodontal therapy in obese patients.This study included 30 obese (body mass index30 kg/m(2)) patients affected with chronic periodontitis. Of these, 15 patients had previously undergone BS and lost ≥40% of their excess weight for ≥6 months after surgery. The other 15 patients were also obese but did not have the surgery, nor did they lose weight to serve as a control group. All participants received non-surgical periodontal therapy (scaling and root planing and oral hygiene instructions). Probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding on probing (BOP), gingival index (GI), and plaque index were measured at baseline and at 4 to 6 weeks after the periodontal treatment. Descriptive statistics, linear mixed-effects models, and linear regression models were used for data analysis.The mean age of the study participants was 47.1 ± 11.5 years, and 36.7% of the participants were males. There was a statistically significant improvement after periodontal therapy in the BS compared with the obese group (P0.05). The PD had a mean reduction of 0.45 mm in the BS group versus 0.28 mm in the control group. The reduction in CAL was 0.44 mm versus 0.30 mm, percentage of BOP sites was 16% versus 15%, and GI was 1.03 versus 0.52 in the BS and control groups, respectively.An improved response to non-surgical periodontal therapy is observed in obese patients who had significant weight loss after BS compared with obese patients who did not have such a surgery.