Search

Background: Sleeve gastrectomy is the most performed bariatric surgery. Post-operative gastric sleeve leaks, although rare, are dreaded complications. This study aims to perform an updated investigation of the factors associated with sleeve leaks. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed 692,554 cases from the MBSAQIP database (2016–2021) with CPT code 43,775 for primary sleeve gastrectomy. We excluded emergency operations, conversions/revisions, endoscopic interventions, patient with prior foregut surgery, and open operations. Multivariate logistic regression analysis (STATA version 15) was performed to identify factors associated with sleeve gastrectomy leaks. Results: Out of 692,554 patients, 600,910 (86.77%) patients underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, and 91,644 (13.23%) patients underwent robotic sleeve gastrectomy. 1179 (0.17%) developed leaks within 30 days; 177(0.19%) were in the robotic group and 1002 (0.17%) in the laparoscopic group with no significant difference in leak rates between two groups on multivariate analysis. Black patients had lower odds of having leaks as compared to white patients (Odds Ratio (OR): 0.68 (0.56–0.82); p < 0.01). Hispanic patients had lower odds of having leak as compared to non-Hispanics. Factors associated with higher leak odds (p < 0.05) included hypertension, GERD, smoking, immunosuppression, increased operating time, and albumin < 3.5 g/dl. Higher odds of leaks were observed in years 2016–2019 vs 2020–2021 (OR: 1.44 (1.25–1.65), p < 0.01). Higher odds of leak in operations with general surgeons compared to bariatric surgeons was found (OR: 1.46 (1.04–2.02), p = 0.02); observed only on robotic group on subgroup analysis (OR: 2.2 (1.2–4.2), p = 0.02). Staple line reinforcement, oversewing, and performance of leak test showed no differences in leak rate. Bougie size and distance from pylorus were not associated with changes in leak rate. Conclusion: This study provides updated insights into the factors associated with sleeve leaks, reinforcing information gained from prior studies. A higher association of leak among general surgeons could represent a learning curve for new robotic general surgeons. The overall decreasing trend for gastric sleeve leak is encouraging and may be a sign of improved techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There has been a rising trend of outpatient bariatric surgery, particularly accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and outcomes of same-day discharge laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) using the MBSAQIP database. Methods: In this retrospective study, the MBSAQIP was queried for patients undergoing non-revisional LRYGB between 2020 and 2021. Two cohorts were established: same-day discharge (SDD; length of stay = 0 days) and next-day discharge (POD1; length of stay = 1 day), with the latter serving as a control group. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression were employed to compare outcomes between cohorts. Results: A total of 48,408 patients underwent LRYGB, with 1,918 (4.0%) SDD and 46,490 (96.0%) POD1. The two cohorts were similar in mean age (SDD 44.2 ± 11.3 years vs POD1 44.0 ± 11.3 years; p = 0.61) and female sex (SDD 83.8% vs POD1 83.1%; p = 0.43). However, the POD1 cohort had a higher preoperative body mass index (45.4 ± 7.3 vs 44.9 ± 7.3 kg/m2; p < 0.01). Preoperative anticoagulation and obstructive sleep apnea were more prevalent in the POD1 group. There was no difference in overall 30-day overall complication rates (SDD 2.0% vs POD1 2.3%; p = 0.51), reintervention, reoperations, mortality, and emergency department visits between the two cohorts. Readmissions were lower in the SDD cohort (2.9% vs 4.0%; p = 0.02), whereas the need for outpatient intravenous hydration was higher in the SDD cohort (6.7% vs 3.6%; p < 0.01). This finding remained significant even after adjustment for confounders. Conclusion: Same-day LRYGB is safe and feasible, with comparable complication rates to next-day discharge. Notably, SDD is associated with lower readmission rate and higher need for outpatient intravenous hydration, possibly reflecting rigorous bariatric protocols and thorough patient follow-up. Further investigations are warranted to elucidate the selection criteria and optimize postoperative care for outpatient LRYGB. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Primary bariatric surgery is associated with moderate-to-high risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTE); however, the risk for revisional surgery lacks granularity. Our primary objective was to define the risk of VTE following revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) compared to primary RYGB. Methods: Adults who underwent primary or revision/conversion RYGB between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019, with a BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 were identified in a bariatric specific database. VTE was defined as pulmonary embolus and/or deep venous thrombosis. Thirty-day VTE and transfusion rates were compared between the two groups using propensity score matching of 3:1. Results: Primary RYGB was performed in 197,186 (92.4%) patients compared to 16,144 (7.6%) in the revisional group. Patients in the revisional group had fewer comorbidities than those undergoing primary RYGB. In the matched cohort of 64,258 procedures, there were 48,116 (74.9%) primary RYGB cases compared to 16,142 (25.1%) RYGB revisions. The rate of VTE was similar in the revisional surgery group compared to the propensity matched primary RYGB group (0.4% vs. 0.3%, p > 0.580); however, transfusion was more common in the revisional group (1.4% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.005). Revisional group had higher rates of readmission, reoperation, increased length of stay, and operation length ≥ 180 min compared to matched primary RYGB group (p < 0.001). Conclusions: VTE rates for both primary and revisional RYGB are similar. Revisional RYGB cases impose increased risk of bleeding among other outcomes. Thus, identifying those at higher risk of complications is critical. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Robotic-assisted metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is gaining popularity. Revisional MBS is associated with higher perioperative morbidity compared to primary MBS. The optimal surgical approach to minimize complications in these complex cases is unclear. The goal of this study was to assess robot utilization in revisional MBS and compare laparoscopic and robotic revisional MBS outcomes in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. Methods: A retrospective review of the MBSAQIP database was performed identifying revisional sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) cases from 2015 to 2022. Primary MBS, open/emergent cases, cases converted to another approach, and combined cases other than esophagogastroduodenoscopy were excluded. 30-Day outcomes for laparoscopic and robotic cases were compared using multivariate logistic regression adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, and operative variables. Results: 41,404 Cases (14,474 SG; 26,930 RYGB) were identified. From 2015 to 2022, the percentage of revisional SG and RYGB cases performed robotically increased from 6.1% and 7.3% to 24.2% and 32.0% respectively. Laparoscopic SG had similar rates of overall morbidity, leak, bleeding, readmission, reoperation, and length of stay compared to robotic. Laparoscopic RYGB had significantly higher rates of overall morbidity (6.2% vs. 4.8%, p < 0.001, AOR 0.80 [0.70–0.93]), blood transfusion (1.5% vs. 1.0%, p < 0.05, AOR 0.74 [0.55–0.99]), superficial incisional SSI (1.2% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001, AOR 0.30 [0.19–0.47]), and longer length of stay (1.87 vs. 1.76 days, p < 0.001) compared to robotic. Laparoscopic operative times were significantly shorter than robotic (SG: 86.4 ± 45.8 vs. 113.5 ± 51.7 min; RYGB: 130.7 ± 64.7 vs. 165.5 ± 66.8 min, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Robot utilization in revisional bariatric surgery is increasing. Robotic surgery has lower postoperative morbidity and shorter length of stay in revisional RYGB when compared to laparoscopic. Robotic platforms may have the capacity to improve the delivery of care for patients undergoing revisional bariatric surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Marginal ulceration (MU) following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is an established complication, with early MU (within 30-days of operation) being less understood compared to its late counterpart. This study aims to identify risk factors for early MU in patients undergoing primary RYGB. Utilizing data from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality Improvement Project (MBSAQIP 2015-2021), 1,346,468 records were evaluated. After exclusions for revisions, conversions, pediatric cases, nonbinary gender, missing body mass index (BMI) data, and missing operative time; 291,625 cases of primary RYGB were included for full analysis and rare events modeling of early MU. The prevalence of early MU was.29% (n = 850). Higher rates of early MU were associated with BMI, race, history of diabetes mellitus (DM), prior thrombotic complications (deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE)), prior percutaneous cardiac intervention (PTC), immunosuppressive therapy, and anticoagulation status. Additionally, procedural aspects like the nonspecialization of the surgeon and longer operative times also correlated with higher early MU rates. Rare-events regression modeling noted significant associations of early MU with younger age, diabetes requiring insulin, history of PTC, DVT, immunosuppressive therapy, and anticoagulation status. Early MU remains a relatively rare complication. The lower than previously reported occurrence suggests possible improvements in both patient preparation and surgical technique. The identification of relevant risk factors enables better perioperative and intraoperative management of patients at risk of developing early MU. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Quality Improvement Project (MBSAQIP) is the largest bariatric surgery–specific clinical data set. In 2020, the definition of emergency cases was altered to include only revisional or conversion cases and not primary cases. The aim of this study was to examine how this change affects the utility of the data set for emergency case tracking. MBSAQIP database. Emergency cases were extracted from available MBSAQIP data (2015–2021). A comparison of co-morbidity profiles was done, specifically before and after the recent change to how "emergency" is defined in the data set. Eleven thousand and twenty-nine of the 1,048,575 total cases were coded as "emergency cases." From 2015 to 2019, 10,574 emergency cases were performed (∼2115 cases/yr), markedly decreasing in 2020 and 2021 to 455 cases (∼228 cases/yr). Before 2020, the most common procedures were the unlisted procedure of the stomach (45.14%, n = 3101), gastric band removal (25.3%, n = 2676), and reduction of internal hernia (11.8%, n = 1244). Between 2020 and 2021, this distribution changed with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), the most common emergency procedure (29.23%, n = 133). As expected from the change that captured only revisional cases, the average operative length was greater between 2020 and 2021 (127.6 versus 86.5 min). Capturable emergency cases declined in 2020, a trend related to changing the definition of emergency as part of MBSAQIP standards. This change excludes data on internal hernia reduction and does not likely reflect a real change in the prevalence of emergency bariatric cases. Because capture for emergency cases has diminished, so has any prior utility of using MBSAQIP data for studying emergency cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) has been a game changer for metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), with continuous improvements in safety and outcomes throughout the years of its usage. It allows in-depth evaluations of MBS procedures, presenting practitioners and researchers with unparalleled opportunities for quality assessment, research and clinical advancement. To offer an updated overview of MBSAQIP-related publications. United States. PubMed was queried using keywords "MBSAQIP" and "Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program." Letters to editors, duplicates, commentaries, and retracted articles were excluded. Studies that mentioned MBSAQIP but did not use the data within were also excluded. A total of 400 search items were returned as of August 2023. After exclusions, 289 studies were reviewed. Articles were published in a total of 28 unique journals, the majority of which were featured in Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases (SOARD), with 114 articles (39.4%). Sixty-one articles were focused on creating predictive models or risk calculators, 58 on investigating the safety of procedures, and 52 on exploring complications. Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) were the 2 most commonly discussed procedures, at 80.3% and 80% respectively. Forty-three studies included patients who underwent robotic-assisted MBS. The MBSAQIP is a valuable resource that has generated a wealth of studies in the literature. It has allowed for intense analysis of clinical issues and fostered a culture of safety and quality improvement. Participating surgeons must pledge commitment to extended follow-up periods to maximize its effectiveness. • The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database is a game changer for metabolic and bariatric (MBS) surgeons. • Two hundred eighty-nine articles using the MBSAQIP were evaluated as of August 2023. • The majority of articles were published in Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases (SOARD), with 114 articles (39.4%). • Most articles focused on establishing risk calculators and the safety of procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Bariatric surgery is considered the main treatment option for patients with severe obesity. The objective of our study is to compare intra- and postoperative outcomes between the robotic and laparoscopic approaches within the sleeve gastrectomy (SG), duodenal switch (DS), and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Materials and Methods: The data from the MBSAQIP were collected for patients who underwent SG, DS, and RYGB between 2015 and 2021. The postoperative and procedural outcomes including 30-day morbidity and mortality as well as operation length were analyzed using regression models. Results: Our analysis included 1,178,886 surgeries with SG comprising the majority (70%) followed by RYGB (28%) and DS (1%). Other than a higher adjusted risk of unplanned reoperation for robotic RYGB (relative risk (RR) 1.07) and a statistically significant higher rate of postoperative wound disruption in robotic SG for robotic surgery (RR 1.56), there were no statistically significant between-approach differences including infection, wound disruption, death, or reoperation for DS, RYGB, or SG. Our data showed no significant difference in anastomotic leak rate between laparoscopic and robotic approaches in either the DS (p = 0.521) or RYGB (p = 0.800) procedures. Across our study period, the median operation lengths decreased significantly per year for both the robotic SG and DS. Conclusions: Robotic and laparoscopic bariatric surgical procedures have statistically similar 30-day patient outcomes. Robotic bariatric procedures do have significantly longer median operative times than laparoscopic procedures. The decision to use a robotic approach or laparoscopic approach should be made based upon surgeon experience and possibly cost. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) was once the most popular bariatric procedure in the 1980's, with many patients subsequently requiring conversional surgery. However, knowledge regarding the prevalence and outcomes of these procedures remains limited. This study aims to determine the prevalence, indications, rate of 30-day serious complications, and mortality of conversional surgery after VBG. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of the MBSAQIP database from 2020 to 2022 was conducted. Individuals undergoing conversional or revisional surgery after VBG were included. The primary outcomes were 30-day serious complications and mortality. Results: Of 716 VBG conversions, the common procedures included 660 (92.1%) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and 56 (7.9%) sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The main indication for conversion was weight gain for RYGB (31.0%) and for SG (41.0%). RYGB had longer operative times than SG (223.7 vs 130.5 min, p < 0.001). Although not statistically significant, serious complications were higher after RYGB (14.7% vs 8.9%, p = 0.2). Leak rates were higher after SG (5.4 vs 3.5%) but this was not statistically significant (p = 0.4). Mortality was similar between RYGB and SG (1.2 vs 1.8%, p = 0.7). Multivariable regression showed higher body mass index, longer operative time, previous cardiac surgery and black race were independently associated with serious complications. Conversion to RYGB was not predictive of serious complications compared to SG (OR 0.96, 95%CI 0.34–2.67, p = 0.9). Conclusions: Conversional surgery after VBG is uncommon, and the rate of complications and mortality remains high. Patients should be thoroughly evaluated and informed about these risks before undergoing conversion from VBG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) is a joint program between the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and the American College of Surgeons (ACS). On-site surveys of the applicant programs to determine adherence to the MBSAQIP standards are a hallmark of the accreditation process. A retrospective review of 619 site surveys completed over 2 years was performed to include analysis of reviewer decisions, tabulation and cross-reference of identified deficiencies to the MBSAQIP standards and determine final disposition of corrective actions and overall accreditation rates. Accredited Hospitals (Community and Academic) within MBSAQIP. This is a retrospective review of site surveys by expert panel. ≥1 MBSAQIP Standards deficiencies were present at 149 of the 619 program site surveys (24.07%). The 3 leading Standards in Deficiency were in order: Commitment to Quality Care, Continuous Quality Improvement Process, and Data Collection. Within a year following initial site survey of the149 programs with Standards deficiencies, 59 programs demonstrated compliance, 83 programs were placed on probation (with a specific time-frame to demonstrate compliance) and 7 programs were denied accreditation. Ultimately, 98.9% of programs were able to gain or maintain MBSAQIP accreditation. The MBSAQIP accreditation through on-site surveys can identify and improve program adherence to MBSAQIP standards. • 24% of MBSAQIP programs had deficiencies during accreditation. • The leading deficiency was Commitment to Quality Care. • With compliance, 99% of deficient programs gained or maintained accreditation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adjustable gastric bands (AGB) are frequently converted to sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) due to weight recurrence or band complications. Such conversions carry a higher-risk than primary procedures. Some patients undergo two conversions—from AGB to SG, and subsequently from SG to RYGB. This presents a unique situation with limited literature on indications and complication rates associated with these double conversions. Methods: We examined the 2020–2021 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Participant Use File to evaluate conversions from AGB to SG and then to RYGB. Patient and operative characteristics, along with outcomes, were evaluated. Descriptive statistics were applied. Results: We identified 276 patients who underwent a conversion from AGB to SG and then to RYGB. The primary reason for the second conversion (SG to RYGB) was gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) at 55.1%, followed by inadequate weight loss or weight regain (IWL/WR) at 36.9%. The remaining reasons included dysphagia, nausea, vomiting, or others. Patients converted for IWL/WR demonstrated a higher baseline body mass index and prevalence of sleep apnea compared to other cohorts (both p < 0.001). Meanwhile, patients in the "other reasons" group had the highest rate of open surgical approaches (9.1%) and concurrent lysis of adhesions (p = 0.001 and p = 0.022), with correspondingly higher rates of anastomotic leak, reoperations, serious complications, and mortality. Conclusions: Patients undergoing double conversions (AGB to SG to RYGB) do so primarily for GERD or IWL/WR. Further research is required to better define the optimal primary operation for each patient, aiming to reduce the necessity for multiple conversions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients requiring concurrent paraesophageal hernia repair (CPHR) have been shown to have favorable outcomes in primary bariatric surgery. However, patients requiring revisional or conversional surgery represent a group of patients with higher perioperative risk. Currently, few reports on concurrent paraesophageal hernia repair utilizing the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database are available. The primary aim of this study was to determine perioperative complications associated with CPHR and the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as a revisional/conversional operation. Methods: In this study, patients undergoing revisional/conversional RYGB between 2015 and 2020 were accessed via the MBSAQIP database. Patients were categorized based on the presence of a paraesophageal hernia as a concurrent procedure. Patients who underwent revisional/conversional surgery without additional procedures were utilized for controls. A propensity score-matched cohort was generated and E-analysis utilized to assess unmeasured confounding. Results: After exclusions, 35,698 patients were available. Patients receiving CPHR were more likely to be female (90.79% vs 87.37%; p < 0.001) and have increased frequency of gastroesophageal reflux disease (69.20% vs 51.69%; p < 0.001). However, these patients had lower frequencies of sleep apnea (24.12% vs 30.13%; p < 0.001), hypertension requiring medication (38.51% vs 42.59%; p < 0.001), and decreased frequency of hyperlipidemia (19.44% vs 21.60%;p < 0.001). After matching, 6,231 patient pairs were developed and showed that patients undergoing CPHR were at increased risk of readmission (9.44% vs 7.58%; p < 0.001), intervention (3.56% vs 2.79%; p = 0.018), increased requirement for outpatient dehydration treatment (5.87% vs 4.67%;p = 0.004), and overall increased operation time (169.3 min ± 76.0 vs 153.5 ± 73.3; p < 0.001). However, there were no significant increases in the rates of reoperation, death, postoperative leak complications, or bleeding complications after CPHR. Conclusion: Patients undergoing revisional/conversional RYGB with CPHR may be at higher risk for a small number of rare postoperative complications. CPHR is a safe procedure in patients undergoing revisional/conversional RYGB in the short-term postoperative period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Leak is a feared complication of bariatric surgeries. Time to presentation is important in their management. We used the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) to evaluate the rate and timing of leaks. To determine when leaks present after bariatric surgery. MBSAQIP database. The MBSAQIP Participant Use Files (PUF) for the years 2015–2020 were evaluated. Outcomes of interest were "organ space infection" and "leak." We evaluated the time to presentation for these variables as well as patient characteristics, operative time, complication rates and 30-day outcomes. There were 370,369 sleeve gastrectomies (SG) and 159,280 Roux-en-Y gastric bypasses (RYGB). We identified 598 (.16%) SG leaks with an average time to presentation of 13.2 ± 7.8 days. For RYGB, there were 520 leaks (.32%) with an average time to presentation of 9.5 ± 7.4 days. Both procedures had longer operative times for the patients with leak; RYGB was 115 minutes versus 131 minutes and SG was 67 minutes versus 77 minutes (both P <.01). SG and RYGB patients with a leak had a higher relative risk (RR) of grade 4 and 5 Clavien-Dindo complication rates. RR of mortality rates in SG patients with leak was 35.2 (confidence interval (CI): 20–61) and in RYGB with leak was 31.4 (CI: 19–50). The length of time for SG leak presentation was more delayed than RYGB leak presentation. Surgeons should be vigilant for leaks for at least 3 weeks after surgery. Leaks increase the mortality rate and overall serious complications. • The average time to leak for RYGB is 9.5 days and 13 days for SG. • Post-operative leak is correlated with high mortality after SG and RYGB. • Surgeons should be vigilant for up to 2 weeks after surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Postoperative gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) is a rare but serious complication of bariatric surgery. The recent rise in extended venous thromboembolism regimens as well as outpatient bariatric surgery may increase the risk of postoperative GIB or lead to delay in diagnosis. This study seeks to use machine learning (ML) to create a model that predicts postoperative GIB to aid surgeon decision-making and improve patient counseling for postoperative bleeds. Methods: The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database was used to train and validate three types of ML methods: random forest (RF), gradient boosting (XGB), and deep neural networks (NN), and compare them with logistic regression (LR) regarding postoperative GIB. The dataset was split using fivefold cross-validation into training and validation sets, in an 80/20 ratio. The performance of the models was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) and compared with the DeLong test. Variables with the strongest effect were identified using Shapley additive explanations (SHAP). Results: The study included 159,959 patients. Postoperative GIB was identified in 632 (0.4%) patients. The three ML methods, RF (AUROC 0.764), XGB (AUROC 0.746), and NN (AUROC 0.741) all outperformed LR (AUROC 0.709). The best ML method, RF, was able to predict postoperative GIB with a specificity and sensitivity of 70.0% and 75.4%, respectively. Using DeLong testing, the difference between RF and LR was determined to be significant with p < 0.01. Type of bariatric surgery, pre-op hematocrit, age, duration of procedure, and pre-op creatinine were the 5 most important features identified by ML retrospectively. Conclusions: We have developed a ML model that outperformed LR in predicting postoperative GIB. Using ML models for risk prediction can be a helpful tool for both surgeons and patients undergoing bariatric procedures but more interpretable models are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND:Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy has become the procedure of choice for the treatment of morbid obesity. Robotic sleeve gastrectomy is an alternative surgical option, but its utilization has been low. The aim of this study was to evaluate the contemporary outcomes of robotic sleeve gastrectomy (RSG) versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) using a national database from accredited bariatric centers. STUDY DESIGN:Using the 2015 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database, clinical data for patients who underwent RSG or LSG were examined. Emergent and revisional cases were excluded. A multivariate logistic regression model was utilized to compare the outcomes between RSG and LSG. RESULTS:A total of 75,079 patients underwent sleeve gastrectomy with 70,298 (93.6%) LSG and 4781 (6.4%) RSG. Preoperative sleep apnea and hypoalbumenia were significantly higher in the RSG group (P

Abstract Introduction Bariatric surgery revisions and emergencies are associated with higher morbidity and mortality compared to primary bariatric surgery. No formal outcome benchmarks exist that distinguish MBSAQIP-accredited centers in the community from unaccredited institutions. Methods A retrospective chart review was conducted on 53 bariatric surgery revisions and 61 bariatric surgical emergencies by a single surgeon at a high-volume community hospital accredited program from 2018 to 2020. Primary outcomes were complications or deaths occurring within 30-days of the index procedure. Secondary outcomes included operative time, leaks, surgical site occurrences (SSOs), and deep surgical site infections. Results There were no significant differences in the demographic characteristics of the study groups. Mean operative time was significantly longer for revisions as compared to emergency operations (149.5 vs. 89.4 min). Emergencies had higher surgical site infection (5.7% vs. 21.3%, p

Introduction: With expansion of bariatric surgery indications to include Asian patients with diabetes and body mass index (BMI) ≥ 27.5, or BMI ≥ 32.5, it is important to characterize Asian patient population undergoing bariatric surgery and assess their postoperative outcomes. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed the 2015–2019 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. All patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) who self-reported as Asian or White race were included. The primary outcomes were to characterize the Asian race population in North American and to identify if Asian race was associated with serious complications or mortality at 30 days. Results: Overall, 594,837 patients met inclusion, with 4229 self-reporting Asian racial status. Patients of Asian race were younger (41.8 vs 45.5 years, p < 0.001) and had a lower BMI (42.8 vs 44.7 kg/m2p < 0.001) than White patients. They were also more likely to have insulin dependent diabetes (10.9% vs 8.2%, p < 0.001), have received prior cardiac surgery (10.0% vs 1.2% p < 0.001), and suffer from renal insufficiency (1.0% vs 0.5%, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between rates of RYGB (28.3% vs 28.9%, p = 0.4) and mean operative duration (87.7 vs 87.5 min, p = 0.7). Additionally, there were no differences in 30 day outcomes including leak (0.5% vs 0.5%, p = 0.625), bleeding (1.2% vs 1.0%, p = 0.1), serious complications (3.4% vs 3.5%, p = 0.6), or mortality (0.1% vs 0.1%, p = 0.7) and after confounder control, Asian race was not independently associated with serious complications (OR 1.0, CI 0.9–1.2, p = 0.7), or mortality (OR 1.1, CI 0.3–3.3, p = 0.1). Conclusions: Despite the increased metabolic burden of Asian patients, no differences in 30-day outcomes compared to White patients occurs. This data supports evidence suggesting these patients may safely undergo bariatric surgery independent of their increased metabolic burden. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is now the most performed bariatric surgery, though gastric bypass (GB) and duodenal switch (DS) remain common, especially as conversion/revision (C/R) procedures. This analysis compared early postoperative outcomes of primary and C/R laparoscopic SG to DS and GB; and primary procedures of each vs C/R counterparts. Methods: The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) dataset was queried for SG, GB, and DS cases from 2015 to 2019. Multivariable logistic regression calculated crude and adjusted odds ratios for surgical site infection (SSI), reoperation, and readmission at 30 days in two initial comparisons: (1) primary SG vs DS or GB and (2) C/R SG vs DS or GB. A secondary analysis compared primary GS, GB, or DS with C/R counterparts. Models were adjusted for confounding demographics and comorbidities. Results: Of 755,968 primary cases, most were SG (72.8%), followed by GB (26.3%), then DS (0.9%). Compared to SG, GB and DS demonstrated higher odds of SSI (aOR 3.02 [2.84, 3.2]), readmission (aOR 1.97 [1.92, 2.03]), and reoperation (aOR 2.74 [2.62, 2.86]), respectively. Of 68,716 C/R cases, SG was most common (43.2%), followed by GB (37.5%), then DS (19.2%). C/R GB and DS demonstrated greater risk of SSI (aOR 2.28 [1.98, 2.62]), readmission (aOR 2.10 [1.94, 2.27]), and reoperation (aOR 2.3 [2.04, 2.59]) vs SG, respectively. C/R SG and DS demonstrated greater risk of SSI (OR 2.09 [1.66, 2.63]; 1.63 [1.24, 2.14), readmission (OR 1.13 [1.02, 1.26]), and reoperation (OR 1.27 [1.06, 1.52]; 1.58 [1.24, 2.0]), vs primary procedures. C/R DS demonstrated greater risk of SSI (OR 1.23 [1.66, 2.63]). Conclusions: Early complications are comparable between GB and DS, and greater than SG. In C/R procedures, GB and DS demonstrate greater risk than SG. Overall, C/R procedures demonstrate greater risk of most, but not all, early postoperative complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG) has demonstrated to be safe; however, controversy remains on how to decrease major complications, particularly bleeding and leaks. There are variations in staple-line reinforcement techniques, including no reinforcement, oversewing, and buttressing. We sought to evaluate the effect of those methods on post-operative complications using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality Initiative Program (MBSAQIP) database. Methods: The MBSAQIP was queried for patients who underwent VSG during 2015–2019. A propensity-matched analysis was performed between different staple-line reinforcement (SLR) methods, specifically No reinforcement (NR), Oversewing (OS), and Buttressing (BR). The primary outcome of interest was complications within 30 days. Results: A total of 513,354 VSG cases were analyzed. The cohort was majority female (79.0%), with mean (SD) age of 44.2 ± 11.9 years and mean BMI of 45 ± 7.8 kg/m2. Frequency of SLR methods used was 54%BR, 25.6%NR, 10.8% BR + OS, and 9.8%OS. There were no differences in rate of leaks among SLR methods. Compared to NR, BR was associated with decreased rate of reoperations, overall bleeding, and major bleeding (p < 0.05) but prolonged operative time and length of stay (LOS) (p < 0.05). OS was associated with decreased overall bleeding (p < 0.05) but prolonged operative times and length of stay (p < 0.05) compared to NR. Compared to BR, OS was associated with increased operative times, LOS, and rates of post-operative ventilator use, pneumonia, and venous thrombosis (p < 0.05). Patients with bleeding were associated with lower rate of BR (56% vs 61%) and higher rate of NR (34% vs 28%) compared to patients with no bleeding. Bleeding was associated with a greater frequency of leaks (4.4% vs 0.3%), along with higher morbidity and mortality (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Of the reinforcement methods evaluated, BR and OS were both associated with decreased bleeding despite longer operative times. No method was found to significantly reduce incidence of leaks; however, bleeding was associated with increased incidence of leaks, morbidity, and mortality. The liberal use of SLR techniques is recommended for further optimization of patient outcomes after VSG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Creating a metric in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) to assess Black-versus-White disparities is critical if we are to ensure equitable care for all. To investigate Black-versus-White disparities while replicating MBSAQIP methodology with regard to covariates and modeling so that the results can serve as the foundation to create a benchmarked site-level Disparities Metric for MBSAQIP. United States and Canada. Across the 2015–2019 MBSAQIP cohorts, 543,976 adults underwent primary or revision sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and were reported as either White or Black. Using a set of covariates derived from published MBSAQIP performance models, we performed multivariable logistic modeling with 10-fold cross-validation for the 11 outcomes evaluated in MBSAQIP Semiannual Reports, plus venous thromboembolism (VTE) and death. We analyzed primary and revision cases separately. After risk adjustment, Black patients experienced higher odds of all-occurrence morbidity (odds ratio [OR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19–1.25; P <.001), serious events (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.04–1.13; P <.001), all-cause intervention (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.24–1.37; P <.001), related intervention (OR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.22–1.37; P <.001), all-cause readmission (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.33–1.41; P <.001), related readmission (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.36–1.46; P <.001), venous thromboembolism (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.34–1.65; P <.001), and death (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.34–1.89; P <.001) after primary procedures. Black patients experienced lower odds of morbidity (OR,.94; 95% CI,.91–.98; P =.004) and surgical-site infection (OR,.72; 95% CI,.66–.78; P <.001). Black patients experienced a higher risk for serious complications and required more readmissions, reoperations, and postoperative interventions. This study supports the creation of a site-level Disparities Metric for the MBSAQIP and provides the framework to do so. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bariatric surgery can improve renal function in patients with comorbid chronic kidney disease (CKD) and obesity. Additionally, bariatric surgery can enhance outcomes following renal transplantation. The safety of bariatric surgery in patients with CKD has been debated in the literature. This study evaluates the frequency of perioperative complications associated with CKD. Methods: The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database was queried from 2015–2019. Patients were included if they had a vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and were stratified based on CKD status. An unmatched and propensity-matched analysis was performed comparing 30-day perioperative outcomes between the groups. Results: A total of 717,809 patients included in this study, 5817(0.8%) had CKD, of whom 2266(0.3%) were on dialysis. 74.3% of patients with CKD underwent VSG with 25.7% underwent RYGB. Comparing RYGB to VSG, patients who underwent RYGB had a higher rate of deep organ space infection (0.7%vs.0.1%,p = 0.021) and re-intervention (5.0% vs. 2.2%,p < 0.001). Within the VSG cohort, a matched analysis was performed for those with CKD and without CKD. The CKD cohort had higher risk of complications such as bleeding (2.1%vs. 0.9%,p < 0.001), readmission (9.3%vs.4.9%,p < 0.001), reoperation (2.7%vs.1.3%,p < 0.001), and need for reintervention (2.2%vs.1.3%,p < 0.001). Notably, patients with CKD also had a higher mortality (0.6%vs.0.2%,p = 0.003). No difference was seen between patients with renal insufficiency and patients on dialysis. Conclusion: VSG has been the operation of choice in patients with CKD. Our results showed it is the safer option for patients with CKD compared to RYGB. Although this patient population does have an increased risk of adverse perioperative events, dialysis didn't affect the outcome. Bariatric surgeons who operate on patients with CKD should be well informed and remain vigilant given the increased perioperative risk. The risk is still considerably low, and the potential benefit on renal function and improvement in candidacy for renal transplant outweigh the risk. They should be considered as surgical candidates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Robot-assisted sleeve gastrectomy (RSG) is an increasingly common approach to sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Staple line reinforcement (SLR) is well-discussed in laparoscopic SG literature, but not RSG- likely due to the absence of dedicated robotic SLR devices. However, most RSG cases report SLR. This retrospective analysis compares outcomes in RSG cases reporting (1) any staple line treatment (SLT) vs none and (2) SLR vs oversewing. Methods: MBSAQIP was queried for adults who underwent RSG from 2015 to 2019. Open procedures, Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery, hand-assisted, single-incision, concurrent procedures, and illogical BMIs were excluded (n = 3444). Final sample included 52,354 patients. Two comparisons were made: SLT (n = 34,886) vs none (n = 17,468) and SLR (n = 22,217) vs oversew (n = 5620). We fitted multivariable regression models to estimate risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) and performed propensity score analysis with inverse probability of treatment weight based on patient factors. Results: Most RSG cases utilized SLT (66.6%). Cases with SLT had a reduced risk of organ space SSI (RR 0.68 [0.49, 0.94]), 30-day reoperation (RR 0.77 [0.64, 0.93]), 30-day re-intervention (RR 0.80 [0.67, 0.96]), sepsis (RR 0.58 [0.35, 0.96]), unplanned intubation (RR 0.59 [0.37, 0.93]), extended ventilator use (RR 0.46 [0.23, 0.91]), and renal failure (RR 0.40 [0.19, 0.82]) compared to no-treatment cases. In single-treatment cases (n = 27,837), most utilized SLR (79.8%). Cases with oversew had a higher risk of any SSI (RR 1.70 [1.19, 2.42]), superficial incisional SSI (RR 1.71 [1.06, 2.76]), septic shock (RR 6.47 [2.11, 19.87]), unplanned intubation (RR 2.18 [1.06, 4.47]), and extended ventilator use (> 48 h) (RR 4.55 [1.63, 12.71]) than SLR. Conclusions: Our data suggest SLT in RSG is associated with reduced risk of some adverse outcomes vs no-treatment. Among SLT, SLR demonstrated lower risk than oversewing. However, risk of all-cause mortality, cardiac arrest, and unplanned ICU admission were not significant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

Background: Obesity rates in Hispanics and African Americans (AAs) are higher than in Caucasians in the USA, yet the rate of metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) for weight loss remains lower for both Hispanics and AAs. Methods: Patient demographics and outcomes of adult AA and Hispanic patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) procedures were analyzed using the MBSAQIP dataset [2015–2018] using unmatched and propensity-matched data. Results: In total, 173,157 patients were included, of whom 98,185 were AA [56.7%] [21,163-RYGB; 77,022-SG] and 74,972 were Hispanic [43.3%] [20,282-RYGB; 54,690-SG]). Preoperatively, the AA cohort was older, had more females, and higher BMIs with higher rates of all tracked obesity-related medical conditions except for diabetes, venous stasis, and prior foregut surgery. Intra- and postoperatively, AAs were more likely to experience major complications including unplanned ICU admission, 30-day readmission/reintervention, and mortality. After propensity matching, the differences in ED visits, treatment for dehydration, 30-day readmission, 30-day intervention, and pulmonary embolism remained for both SG and RYGB cohorts. Progressive renal insufficiency and ventilator use lost statistical significance in both cohorts. Conversely, 30-day reoperation, postoperative ventilator requirement, unplanned intubation, unplanned ICU admission, and mortality lost significance in the RYGB cohort, but not SG patients. Conclusion: Outcomes for AA patients were worse than for Hispanic patients, even after propensity matching. After matching, differences in major complications and mortality lost significance for RYGB, but not SG. These data suggest that outcomes for RYGB may be driven by the presence and severity of pre-existing patient-related factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The laparoscopic approach is utilized in greater than 90% of bariatric surgeries. With the growing prevalence of robotic-assisted surgery in bariatrics, there has been limited consensus on the superiority of either laparoscopic or robotic approaches, especially in revisional procedures (conversion from sleeve gastrectomy (SG) to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB)). Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of the MBSAQIP PUF database of patients who underwent conversion from SG to RYGB procedures in either laparoscopic or robotic-assisted approaches. The groups underwent 2:1 propensity matching and primary outcomes included post-conversion days until discharge (POD), conversion operation length, total and major morbidity, 30-day readmission, 30-day reoperation, 30-day reintervention, and 30-day mortality after conversion. Results: After 2:1 propensity score matching, 3411 patients (2274 laparoscopic vs 1137 robotic) were included in the study. Intraoperatively, no significant difference was found in total morbidity (6.5% lap vs 5.9% robotic) or major morbidity (1.9% lap vs 1.7% robotic); however, the operative times were significantly longer robotically (126 min vs 164 min). Post-operatively, no significant differences were found in discharge day (1.8 lap vs 1.8 robotic), 30-day readmission (7.6% lap vs 8.6% robotic), reoperation rate (2.9% lap vs 3.7% robotic), additional intervention rate (2.5% lap vs 3.3% robotic), or 30-day mortality (0.1% vs 0.1%). Conclusion: There is no significant difference in perioperative or intraoperative outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic-assisted SG to RYGB conversion procedures other than a longer operative time in the robotic approach, suggesting increased efficiency with the laparoscopic approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The link between obesity and adverse cardiovascular events is well-established. With the rising prevalence of metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), a greater number of patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) may present with preoperative therapeutic anticoagulation (AC)., Objectives: This study evaluated perioperative outcomes of SG and RYGB in patients on preoperative AC., Setting: Patients reported to the 2015-2021 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database., Methods: Adults undergoing primary SG or RYGB with and without preoperative anticoagulation (SG-AC or RYGB-AC and non-SG-AC or non-RYGB-AC, respectively) were analyzed from the 2015-2021 MBSAQIP database. Differences in baseline characteristics by AC status for each MBS were adjusted using entropy-balanced weights. Multivariable logistic and linear regressions were developed to analyze the independent association between AC and outcomes of interest., Results: Of 1,178,090 patients included, 72.0% (n = 850,682) had SG and 28.0% (n = 327,408) had RYGB, of which 1.8% (n = 15,021) and 1.9% (n = 6201) had AC, respectively. Compared to non-SG-AC and non-RYGB-AC, both SG-AC and RYGB-AC encountered higher absolute 30-day rates of anastomotic leak, deep vein thrombosis and gastrointestinal bleeding. Following multivariable adjustment, SG-AC was associated with significantly greater odds of adverse cardiovascular events, anastomotic leak, gastrointestinal bleeding, and greater operative length and length of stay. RYGB-AC was associated with higher odds of readmission, unplanned ICU admission, and ED visit., Conclusions: While preoperative AC may confer distinct outcomes between SG and RYGB, this 7-year study of MBSAQIP demonstrated an overall association with greater postoperative morbidity. Management of MBS patients with preoperative AC requires consideration of thrombohemorrhagic risks., (Copyright © 2024 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is an American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS)-endorsed bariatric surgery. As utilization of OAGB increases, it is important that the safety profile of OAGB be rigorously assessed., Objectives: We studied the 30-day safety of OAGB compared to a similar gastro-jejunal anastomotic procedure, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB)., Setting: Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) participating bariatric centers in the United States., Methods: A matched case-control study was conducted of patients who underwent primary gastric bypass surgery 2021-2022, identified in the MBSAQIP database. Each patient who underwent OAGB was matched to 4 controls who underwent RYGB on age (±10), sex, race, body mass index (BMI) (±5 kg/m 2 ), preoperative functional status, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, and 13 comorbidities. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed., Results: A total of 1569 patients who underwent OAGB were matched to 6276 controls. Matched baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Operative time, length of stay (LOS), and overall complication rate were lower in the OAGB cohort (P < .001) with higher 30-day BMI loss percentage (P = .048). Specifically, OAGB was associated with a significantly lower bowel obstruction rate, as compared to RYGB (.1% versus 1.0%, P < .001). On logistic regression adjusting for all variables used in matching, OAGB was associated with a 27% decrease in overall complication rate (odds ratio [OR] .73, 95% confidence interval [CI] .62-.87, P < .001)., Conclusions: Although OAGB is minimally utilized, the 30-day safety profile appears favorable. As compared to RYGB, OAGB was associated with shorter operative time and LOS, and a lower complication rate, partially due to minimization of small bowel obstructions with a loop anatomy. Further evidence in the comparative long-term safety profile is still needed., (Copyright © 2024 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Early small bowel obstruction (eSBO) (within 30-days) is a rare but important complication that is associated with high rates of morbidity, including readmission, reintervention, and reoperation., Objectives: To identify patient-specific and operation-specific characteristics that predispose patients to eSBO and to identify at-risk individuals preoperatively., Setting: 2015-2021 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP)., Methods: Utilizing the 2015-2021 MBSAQIP PUF, 1,016,484 records were analyzed. Pediatric, revisional, open-conversion, and cases with incomplete data in sex, body mass index, operative-time, 30-day-follow-up variables were excluded. Case details were compared using Fisher's exact & Wilcoxon -Mann -Whitney tests to identify at-risk patients. The likelihood of eSBO was modeled with rare event logistic regression., Results: Incidence of eSBO was .40%. Of the 4103 occurrences of eSBO, RYGB (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass), SG (sleeve gastrectomy), and DS (duodenal switch) accounted for 79.4%, 19.3%, and 1.3%, respectively. Many patient-specific characteristics were significantly associated with eSBO. History of prior foregut surgery, a non-metabolic surgery trained operator, and longer operative times were all associated with increased eSBO (P < .0001). While simultaneously controlling for these factors, eSBO remained higher in DS (OR 9.55, P < .0001) and RYGB (OR 5.18, P < .0001) compared to SG. Increased length of operation (OR 1.03, P < .0001) and non -MS-trained operators (OR 1.33, P < .0001) remained highly significant. Male-sex (OR .70, P < .0001) and diabetes (OR .78, P < .0001) were both protective., Conclusions: In the largest analysis to date, eSBO remains a rare event. RYGB accounts for the largest proportion of eSBO, however, DS has a higher risk adjusted rate of eSBO., (Copyright © 2024 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Bariatric surgery revisions and emergencies are associated with higher morbidity and mortality compared to primary bariatric surgery. No formal outcome benchmarks exist that distinguish MBSAQIP-accredited centers in the community from unaccredited institutions. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted on 53 bariatric surgery revisions and 61 bariatric surgical emergencies by a single surgeon at a high-volume community hospital accredited program from 2018 to 2020. Primary outcomes were complications or deaths occurring within 30-days of the index procedure. Secondary outcomes included operative time, leaks, surgical site occurrences (SSOs), and deep surgical site infections. Results: There were no significant differences in the demographic characteristics of the study groups. Mean operative time was significantly longer for revisions as compared to emergency operations (149.5 vs. 89.4 min). Emergencies had higher surgical site infection (5.7% vs. 21.3%, p < 0.05) and surgical site occurrence (SSO) (1.9% vs. 29.5%, p < 0.05) rates compared to revisions. Logistic regression analysis identified several factors to be predictive of increased risk of morbidity: pre-operative albumin < 3.5 g/dL (p < 0.05), recent bariatric procedure within the last 30 days (p < 0.05), prior revisional bariatric surgery (p < 0.05), prior duodenal switch (p < 0.05), and pre-operative COPD (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Bariatric surgery revisions and emergencies have similar morbidity and mortality, far exceeding those of the primary operation. Outcomes comparable to those reported by urban academic centers can be achieved in community hospital MBSAQIP-accredited centers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) has emerged as a potentially safe and effective weight-loss procedure. Worldwide, OAGB is the third most commonly performed primary bariatric procedure, comprising 4% of the annual volume. In the USA, OAGB has yet to be endorsed as a primary bariatric procedure and can only be performed under research protocols or as a revision procedure. Materials and Methods: We performed an observational cohort study to describe the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative characteristics of adult patients who underwent primary or revision OAGB from 2015 to 2019 at MBSAQIP centers. Exclusion criteria included emergent surgery, incomplete 30-day follow-up, and non-laparoscopic- or robotic approach. Results: During the study period, 803,906 bariatric procedures were performed and 645 (0.08%) were OAGB. Among these, 436 (67.6%) were primary and 209 (32.4%) were revision OAGB. The mean operation time was 89 min (SD, 59) and 8% were performed using a robotic approach. The overall complication rate was 7.4% and there was one death (0.2%). The post-operative complication rates were generally higher than the early complication rate (3.4%) reported in the YOMEGA trial, an RCT from France. Revision OAGB had a longer mean operation time of 141 min (SD, 85, p < 0.001). Conclusion: Primary OAGB was a rarely performed bariatric procedure at MBSAQIP-accredited centers comprising only 0.05% compared to 4% worldwide. Future studies should compare safety of OAGB to that of established bariatric procedures like Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Among bariatric surgery patients, body mass index (BMI) does not fully capture the severity of obesity and it may be complicated to stratify patients at higher risk of peri-operative complications. In our study, we surveyed the MBSAQIP database to determine whether bariatric patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS) are at higher risk for peri-operative complications. Methods: MBSAQIP database was used to investigate the correlation between MetS and perioperative outcomes. All patients between 2015 and 2018, ≥ 18 years old, who underwent primary bariatric surgery were included. Patients were excluded if they underwent natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery or had surgery performed by gastroenterologist or interventional radiologist. We modified the International Diabetes Federation definition of MetS for our study to select patients with BMI > 30 in addition to two or more of the following comorbidities: hypertension, hyperlipidemia, or diabetes. The primary outcome was perioperative mortality. Secondary outcomes included post-operative surgical site infections (SSI), perioperative MI, stroke, acute renal failure, transfusion requirement, readmission, conversion to open and reoperation. Results: Between 2015 and 2018, 760,076 bariatric operations were performed. 670,935 met criteria for analysis. 190,239 patients were identified to have MetS. Patients with MetS were found to have higher odds of death (OR 2.32; 95% CI 1.97–2.72), SSI (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.31–1.48), perioperative MI (OR 4.70; 95% CI 3.42–6.45), stroke (OR 3.30; 95% CI 2.08–5.24), acute renal failure (OR 3.04; 95% CI 2.48–3.72), and transfusion requirement (OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.33–1.39). Conclusion: Patients with metabolic syndrome are at increased odds of peri-operative complications after bariatric surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Decreasing the length of stay following bariatric surgery can reduce pressure on hospitals and surgical costs and increase patient satisfaction. We examine trends in length of hospital stay following bariatric surgery and in post-operative complications. Methods and Procedures: The 2015–2019 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database was used to compile patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy. Patients were categorized into either early discharge (within one day of surgery) or late discharge, and patient and non-patient factors were compared between the two groups. A multivariable logistic regression was carried out to determine predictive factors for early discharge. Results: We evaluated 748,955 patients, with 399,918 (53%) being discharged early. Patients discharged early were younger and had fewer associated medical problems. The rate of early discharge increased between 2015 and 2019 (42.1% in 2015 vs 62.0% in 2019), while complication rates decreased or were unchanged. Multivariable analysis revealed lower ASA classification (OR 1.07; CI 1.06–1.09; p < 0.0001) and operative year (2019 vs. 2015 OR 2.26; CI 2.22–2.29; p < 0.0001) to be independently associated with early discharge. Several factors including undergoing RYGB (OR 0.44 CI 0.44–0.45; p < 0.0001), and dialysis dependence (OR 0.50; CI 0.45–0.55; p < 0.0001) among others, were associated with reduced early discharge likelihood. Conclusions: There is a trend in bariatric surgery towards the practice of early discharge, which is safe for patients. Further work is needed to develop a set of criteria to determine which patients are best suited for this practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Differences between complication rates of bariatric surgeries performed by general surgeons (GS) versus those performed by metabolic and bariatric surgeons (MBS) are poorly understood. Methods: We analyzed the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database focusing on RYGB and SG procedures between 2016 and 2019. Our primary objective was to evaluate trends in the number of bariatric procedures performed by GS and MBS. Secondary objectives were assessing for differences in 30-day mortality and the incidence of serious complications. Differences between groups were evaluated by chi-squared analysis for categorical data and ANOVA tests for continuous data. A multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine the influence of subspecialized training on the incidence of serious complications and 30 day mortality. Results: A total of 622,079 patients were analyzed, 15,485 were operated on by GS (2.5%, mean age 44.7 years, mean BMI 45.2 kg/m2), while 606,594 procedures were performed by MBS (97.5%, mean age 44.4 years, mean BMI 45.2 kg/m2). The proportion of procedures being completed by the GS group decreased from n=4662, 3.2% in 2016, to n=3414, 2.1% in 2019. After adjusting for comorbidities, MBS patients did not have differences in death at 30 days (OR 1.26 [0.67–2.38], p=0.467) or serious complications (OR 0.97 [0.89–1.06], p=0.554). Conclusion: The majority of bariatric procedures are being completed by MBS with the proportion completed by GS decreasing. We found no difference in the number of serious complications and 30-day mortality rates across the MBS and GS groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Two large nationwide databases collect data on common operations in the United States. The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) collects bariatric data, whereas the National Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) gathers details on a broader range of general surgical cases. Evaluate the differences in rates of complications between both databases regarding Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy. National databases, United States. We evaluated the MBSAQIP and NSQIP from 2017 to 2019 using the procedure codes 43644 and 43775. Fifteen common complications were evaluated. Propensity-matched analyses (PMAs) were done to control for differences across databases. Significantly different variables after a PMA were included in multivariable models. The data were examined for differences between the 2 databases before and after the PMA, with and without adjustment for operation type. There were 483,361 cases reported in the MBSAQIP and 57,598 in the NSQIP. PMA matched 57,479 cases for each database. Seven complications were different, with higher rates reported in the NSQIP than in the MBSAQIP: myocardial infarction, sepsis, organ/space surgical site infections, deep vein thrombosis, urinary tract infections, pulmonary embolism, ventilator dependence >48 hours, and pneumonia. When adjusting for the procedure performed, sleeve gastrectomy in the NSQIP had higher rates of organ/space surgical site infections, deep vein thrombosis, sepsis, and death. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in the NSQIP had higher rates of organ/space surgical site infections, ventilator dependence >48 hours, urinary tract infections, myocardial infarction, deep vein thrombosis, and sepsis. When compared with the MBSAQIP, the NSQIP reports higher rates of bariatric complications. Further studies are needed to confirm the reasons behind this. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Readmission after bariatric surgery is multifactorial. Understanding the trends in risk factors for readmission provides opportunity to optimize patients prior to surgery identify disparities in care, and improve outcomes. This study compares trends in bariatric surgery as they relate to risk factors for all-cause readmission. Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) participating facilities. The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database was used to analyze 760,076 bariatric cases from 854 centers. Demographics and 30-day unadjusted outcomes were compared between laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB), sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) performed between 2015 and 2018. A multiple logistic regression model determined predictors of readmission. A total of 574,453 bariatric cases met criteria, and all-cause readmission rates decreased from 4.2% in 2015 to 3.5% in 2018 (P <.0001). The percentage of non-Hispanic Black adults who underwent bariatric surgery increased from 16.7% of the total cohort in 2015 to 18.7% in 2018 (P <.0001). The percentage of Hispanic adults increased from 12.1% in 2015 to 13.8% in 2018 (P <.0001). The most common procedure performed was the LSG (71.5%), followed by RYGB (26.9%) and 1.6% LAGB (1.6%) (P <.0001). Men were protected from readmission compared with women (odds ratio [OR]:.87; 95% confidence interval [CI]:.84–.90). Non-Hispanic Black (OR: 1.52; 95% CI: 1.47–1.58)] and Hispanic adults (OR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.09–1.19) were more likely to be readmitted compared with non-Hispanic White adults. LSG (OR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.10–1.48) and RYGB (OR: 2.24; 95% CI: 1.93–2.60) were predictive of readmission compared with LAGB. Readmission rates decreased over 4 years. Women, along with non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic adults, were more likely to be readmitted. Future research should focus on gender and racial disparities that impact readmission. • A total of 569,652 patients were readmitted with racial group and procedure predictive of all-cause readmission (Table 3). Non-Hispanic Black [OR 1.52; 95% CI: 1.47-1.58] or Hispanic [OR 1.14; 95% CI: 1.09-1.19] were more likely to be readmitted when compared to non-Hispanic White adults. • LSG [odds ratio (OR) 1.27; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.10-1.48] and RYGB (OR 2.24; 95% CI: 1.93-2.60) were associated with readmission compared to LAGB. Robotic approach increased from 6.2% in 2015 to 9.8% in 2018 (p<0.0001). LOS > 3 days occurred in 2.9% of laparoscopic procedures vs 3.2% of robotic procedures (P=0.001). The rate of readmission was 3.7% for laparoscopy and 4.3% for robotic surgeries (P<0.0001). • Men comprised < 22% of the total cohort every year. Men, especially Black men, were more likely to present with a BMI ≥ 50kg/m2 compared to women. Interestingly, male gender was protective for readmission (OR 0.87; 95% CI: 0.84-0.90]. It is critical to understand that Black patients, in particular Black men, experience a prolonged LOS more often than White patients. • Further investigation into the intersectionality of race and gender would provide a better understanding of disparities in access and outcomes for bariatric surgery patients. Future studies should review the effects of enhanced recovery protocols across racial groups to better understand readmission after bariatric surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The use of intragastric balloons (IGBs) for the treatment of obesity was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2015. This study aims to characterize preoperative factors and outcomes of patients undergoing IGB therapy compared to bariatric surgery (non-IGB) and evaluate 5-year trends in IGB use. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed by extracting data from the MBSAQIP registry between 2015 and 2019. All non-IGB and IGB procedures were included while revisional and emergency surgeries were excluded. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine independent predictors of patient selection for IGB therapy. Results: Of 652,927 patients identified, only 2910 (0.4%) underwent IGB therapy. Patients who underwent IGB therapy were older (46.7 ± 11.4 years vs 44.4 ± 12.0 years; p < 0.0001), had lower BMI at baseline (37.0 ± 6.2 kg/m2 vs 45.3 ± 7.8 kg/m2; p < 0.0001), and were overall healthier with fewer comorbidities and better functional status. The rate of early nonoperative reintervention was higher in the IGB cohort (7.7% vs 1.1%; p < 0.0001). Age was the only significant predictor of selection for IGB therapy (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.24–1.37; p < 0.0001). The number of IGB procedures reported between 2016 and 2019 declined significantly (953 (0.62%) vs 418 (0.25%); p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Appropriate indications for IGBs appear to be increasingly limited. The ongoing role of IGBs in the treatment of obesity is unclear given the safety and efficacy of modern bariatric surgery and new pharmacological agents for weight loss. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]