Same Day Discharge after Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery in Adults 65 Years and Older: An Analysis of the 2015 to 2022 MBSAQIP.

Background: There is increasing interest in same day discharge (SDD) after metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS). Among older adults, the safety of SDD is unclear and, as a result, this age group is often excluded from SDD protocols. We aimed to characterize the safety profile of SDD in adults ≥ 65 years.
Methods: The 2015-2022 MBSAQIP was queried for patients ≥ 65 years undergoing primary sleeve gastrectomy or RYGB. Patients were stratified based on postoperative day (POD) of discharge: SDD, POD1, POD2, POD3, and ≥ POD4. Logistic regression was used to examine associations between SDD and 30-day Clavien-Dindo complications and readmissions.
Results: We identified 63,486 patients ≥ 65 years; the median (IQR) age was 68 (4) years. Overall, 2.12% of patients underwent SDD while the majority (52.8%) were discharged on POD1. From 2015 to 2022, the proportion with SDD increased from 1.15% to 4.33%. Compared to those discharged on later days, patients undergoing SDD had proportionally fewer obesity-associated diseases, including insulin-dependent diabetes (SDD 14.2%, POD1 15.5%, POD2 20.4%, POD3 23.2%, POD4 + 26.1%) and COPD (SDD 3.2%, POD1 4.7%, POD2 5.7%, POD3 7.2%, POD4 + 9.6%) (all p < 0.001). Compared to POD1 discharge, SDD was not significantly associated with any class of Clavien-Dindo complications or 30-day readmissions (all p > 0.05).
Conclusions: Though use of SDD after MBS in adults ≥ 65 years has increased from 2015 to 2022, it remains an uncommon practice. Those undergoing SDD have fewer obesity-associated diseases and, in this select cohort of older adults, SDD is not associated with worse postoperative morbidity and mortality. Careful patient selection is critical for safe SDD in adults ≥ 65 years.
Competing Interests: Declarations. Ethical Approval: Our institutional Human Investigation Committee determined that this study did not constitute human participants research and did not require institutional review board approval. Informed Consent: Not applicable. Competing Interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
(© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)