Revisional surgery after restrictive surgery: midterm outcomes of a tertiary center.

INTRODUCTION: Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) is a challenging type of procedure for the surgeons due to its specific morbidity and efficiency. The RBS has a higher prevalence nowadays and this study may help to improve scarce data upon this specific topic. METHODS: Data from 252 patients undergoing RBS after laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) between 2005 and 2019, were analyzed at 2 years of follow up. A subgroup analysis of third procedure was also performed. RESULTS: Overall morbidity occurred in 35 patients (37%) in the LSG group and 40 patients (25%) in the LAGB group (p = 0.045). At 2 years of RBS, mean weight was 92.8 ± 26.7 kg, BMI was 33.1 ± 8.56 kg/m2 for patients who had RBS after LSG. When RBS was performed after LAGB, mean weight at 2 years was 90.1 ± 20.7 kg and BMI was 32.5 ± 6.45 kg/m2. TWL for RBS performed after LSG was 12.7 ± 16.4% versus 25.5 ± 10.3% after LAGB (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: RBS after LSG seems to lead to higher overall morbidity whereas RBS after LAGB lead to more perioperative issues.

Mid-term Results of an ERAS Program of Bariatric Surgery in a Tertiary Referral Center.

BACKGROUND: To identify preoperative risk factors for discharge failure beyond postoperative day two (POD-2) in bariatric surgery ERAS program in a tertiary referral center. METHODS: all consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic bariatric treated in accordance with ERAS protocol between January 2017 and December 2019 were included. Two groups were identified, failure of early discharge (> POD-2) (ERAS-F) and success of early discharge (≤ POD-2) (ERAS-S). Overall postoperative morbidity, unplanned readmission rates were analyzed at POD-30 and POD-90, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine the independent risk factors for LOS > 2 days (ERAS-F). RESULTS: A total of 697 consecutive patients were included, 148 (21.2%) in ERAS-F group and 549 (78.8%) in ERAS-S group. All postoperative complications at POD 90, whether medical or surgical were significantly more frequent in ERAS-F group than in ERAS-S group. Neither readmission nor unplanned consultations rates at POD 90 were significantly different between both groups. History of psychiatric disorder (p = 0.01), insulin-dependent diabetes (p < 0.0001), use of anticoagulants medicine (p < 0.00001), distance to the referral center > 100 km (p = 0.006), gallbladder lithiasis (p = 0.02), and planned additional procedures (p = 0.01) were independent risk factors for delayed discharge beyond POD-2. CONCLUSIONS: One in five patients with bariatric surgery failed to discharge earlier despite the ERAS program. Knowledge of these preoperative risk factors would allow us to identify patients who need more recovery time and a tailored approach to the ERAS protocol.

Development of the "OS-SEV90 Score" to Predict Severe Postoperative Complications at 90 Days Following Bariatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery may be associated with severe postoperative complications (SPC). Factors associated with the risk of SPC have not been fully investigated. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to identify preoperative risk factors of SPC within 90 days and to develop a risk prediction model based on these factors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective single-center cohort study based on a prospectively maintained database of obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery from October 2005 to May 2019. All SPC occurring up to the 90th postoperative day were recorded according to the Dindo-Clavien classification. Associations between potential risk factors and SPC were analyzed using a logistic regression model, and the risk prediction ("OS-SEV90 score") was computed. Based on the OS-SEV90 score, the patients were grouped into 3 categories of risk: low, intermediate, and high. RESULTS: Among 1963 consecutive patients, no patient died and 82 (4.2%) experienced SPC within 90 days. History of gastric or esophageal surgery (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.040, 95% confidence interval; CI 1.78-5.20, p< 0.0001), past of thromboembolic event aOR 2.26, 95%; CI 1.12-4.55, p = 0.0225), and surgery performed by a junior surgeon (aOR 1.99, 95%; CI 1.26-3.13, p = 0.003) were all independently associated with risk for SPC, adjusting for ASA physical status system (ASA) score ≥ 3, severe OSA, psychiatric disease, asthma, a history of abdominal surgery, alcohol, cardiac disease, and dyslipidemia. "the OS-SEV90 score" based on these factors was constructed to classify patients into 3 risk groups: low (≤2), intermediate (3-4), and high (≥5). According to "the OS-SEV90 score," SPC increased significantly from 2.9% in the low-risk group, 7.7% in the intermediate-risk group, and 23.3% in the high-risk group. CONCLUSIONS: A predictive model of SPC within 90 days "the OS-SEV90 score" has been developed using 9 baseline risk factors. The use of the OS-SEV90 score may help the multidisciplinary team to identify the specific risk of each patient and inform them about and optimize the comorbidities before the surgery. Further studies are warranted to validate this score in a new independent cohort before using it in clinical practice.

Does the Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Guidelines Improve Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery? A Propensity Score Analysis in 464 Patients.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate whether the implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines according to Thorell and co. in our tertiary referral bariatric center might improve post-operative outcomes. METHODS: ERAS program was introduced in our center since January 1, 2017. Retrospective review of a prospectively collected database identified patients who underwent laparoscopic primary and revisional bariatric surgeries from October 2005 to January 2018. Patients exposed to ERAS program ("ERAS group") were matched in a 1:1 ratio with patients exposed to conventional care (control group) using a propensity score based on age, gender, preoperative body mass index (BMI), diabetes mellitus, and the type of procedures. The primary outcome was total hospital length of stay (LOS) and the secondary outcomes included the post-operative complications and readmission rates. RESULTS: During the study period, 464 patients were included, 232 in each group. Implementation of the ERAS protocol was significantly associated with a reduction of LOS (2.47 ± 1.7 vs 5.39 ± 1.9 days, p < 0.00001). One-third of patients was discharged (77/232, 33%) on the first postoperative day (POD) and more than three quarter of patients on POD 2 (182/232, 77%). At the opposite, no patients of the control group were discharged on POD 2. Overall 30-day and 90-day morbidity and readmission rates were the same in both groups. There was no death in each group. CONCLUSIONS: This large case-matched study using a propensity score analysis suggests that implementation of ERAS program significantly reduced length of hospital stay without significant increases on overall morbidity, and readmission rates.

Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Safe Surgical Opportunity? Results of a Case-Matched Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) after adjustable gastric banding (AGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) compared with primary RYGB, in regard to early and late morbidity, weight, and resolution of obesity-related comorbidities. METHODS: The group of patients undergoing revisional RYGB was matched in a 1:1 ratio with control patient who underwent a primary RYGB, based on age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) score, preoperative body mass index (BMI), and diabetes mellitus. Demographics, anthropometrics, preoperative work-up, and perioperative data were retrieved. RESULTS: One hundred fifteen patients (16 males and 99 females) with a mean age of 45.5 ± 1.5 years underwent revisional RYGB following either LAGB in 82 patients (71.3%) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in 33 patients (28.7%). There was no conversion and no mortality in either group. Revisional RYGB was associated with similar early (16.5 vs 15.6%, ns) and late (42.6% vs 32.2%, ns) morbidity rates with a mean follow-up of 25.3 ± 16.6 months compared to primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The revisional RYGB group had significantly less weight loss (mean %EWL 67.4 ± 20.7 vs 72.7 ± 22.9, p = 0.023 and mean %EBMI 68.1 ± 22 vs 78.3 ± 25.7, p = 0.01) at the time of 1 year. Improvement of comorbidities including hypertension (62.5 vs 70.5%; p > 0.05), diabetes (73.7 vs 79%; p > 0.05), and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (100 vs 97%; p > 0.05) was similar. CONCLUSION: This large case-matched study suggests that conversion of SG or AGB to RYGB is feasible with early and late comparable morbidity in an accredited center; even weight results might be inferior.