Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Protocol in Bariatric Surgery Leads to Decreased Complications and Shorter Length of Stay.

PURPOSE: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs have been shown in some specialties to improve short-term outcomes following surgical procedures. There is no consensus regarding the optimal perioperative care for bariatric surgical patients. The purpose of this study was to develop a bariatric ERAS protocol and determine whether it improved outcomes following surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An IRB-approved prospectively maintained database was retrospectively reviewed for all patients undergoing bariatric surgery from October 2018 to January 2020. Propensity matching was used to compare post-ERAS implementation patients to pre-ERAS implementation. RESULTS: There were 319 patients (87 ERAS, 232 pre-ERAS) who underwent bariatric operations between October 2018 and January 2020. Seventy-nine patients were kept on the ERAS protocol whereas 8 deviated. Patients who deviated from the ERAS protocol had a longer length of stay when compared to patients who completed the protocol. The use of any ERAS protocol (completed or deviated) reduced the odds of complications by 54% and decreased length of stay by 15%. Furthermore, patients who completed the ERAS protocol had an 83% reduction in odds of complications and 31% decrease in length of stay. Similar trends were observed in the matched cohort with 74% reduction in odds of complications and 26% reduction in length of stay when ERAS was used. CONCLUSIONS: ERAS protocol decreases complications and reduces length of stay in bariatric patients.

Factors that promote successful endoscopic management of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy leaks.

INTRODUCTION: Staple line leaks following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Endoluminal techniques, including stent placement and endoluminal vacuum therapy (EVAC), have become viable options to treat these patients without the need for additional surgery. The purpose of this study was to define the conditions where certain endoscopic therapies are most likely to succeed compared to surgery. METHODS: An IRB approved prospectively maintained database was retrospectively reviewed for all patients treated for gastrointestinal leaks from July 2013 to March 2019. All patients who were treated for gastrointestinal leaks following LSG were included. Endpoints include success of leak closure and hospital-related morbidity for the patients treated solely by endoscopic only methods (EP) compared to the additional surgery group (SP). RESULTS: There were 39 patients (33 females; 6 males) with a median age of 45.9 years. The EP group included 23 patients (59%), whereas SP included 16 patients (31%). On average, the SP had longer days from sentinel surgery to our hospital admission (70 vs 41), a higher percentage of previous bariatric surgery prior to sentinel LSG (50% vs 17%), and a higher readmission rates following discharge (50% vs 39%). Total length of stay was also higher in the SP compared to the EP (45.4 vs 11). Using this data, a treatment algorithm was developed to optimally treat future patients who suffer from gastrointestinal leaks following LSG. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic therapies, such as EVAC, stent placement, internal drainage, and over-the-scope clips, have a higher chance of success if performed earlier to their sentinel surgery and if patients have had no prior bariatric surgeries. Patients who require additional surgery tend to have longer hospital stays and readmission rates. Using the treatment algorithm provided can help determine when endoscopic therapies are likely to succeed.

Frequency distribution of weight loss percentage after gastric bypass and adjustable gastric banding.

BACKGROUND: The results of surgical procedures for weight loss are often described in terms of the percentage of excess weight lost. Expressing outcomes using the mean and standard deviation might not adequately describe the clinical experience. This could in part be because the use of the mean +/- standard deviation assumes a normal or random distribution of outcomes. It has been our perception that the weight loss results after gastric bypass are relatively normally and tightly distributed around the mean, making it relatively predictable. However, we have found that the results after adjustable gastric banding are more highly variable. In fact, there appears to be 2 groups of patients after this restrictive operation. One group, that is able to work well and does not struggle much against the restriction, accepts the limits that it imposes, and another group, that does not easily learn to deal with the restriction and hence mal-adapts. METHODS: To evaluate the validity of our clinical perception, we undertook an analysis of the distribution of weight loss by the percentiles of excess weight lost. All patients with follow-up of > or =1 years after gastric bypass or adjustable banding were evaluated for this analysis. The demographics and percentage of excess weight loss were evaluated. The distribution of the percentage of excess weight loss in 10% increments was evaluated. RESULTS: Both groups were similar with respect to the mean patient age. However, the patients in the gastric bypass group had had a significantly greater mean preoperative body mass index and were more likely to be women. As expected, the weight loss of the gastric bypass patients fell in a normal single-peak distribution for < or =5 years of follow-up. The data from the adjustable gastric band patients at 1 year demonstrated a normal single-peak distribution, with a longer rightward tail. At 2 and 3 years postoperatively, the data from the band patients had a 2-peaked curve. CONCLUSION: The initial weight loss results after gastric banding are less predictable than those after gastric bypass. A similar analysis of long-term outcomes might be enlightening and assist in making clinical decisions.