Outcomes of laparoscopic feeding jejunostomy tube placement in 299 patients.

BACKGROUND: Jejunostomy catheters for jejunal feeding are an effective method to improve nutritional status in malnourish patients. However, this procedure is commonly being performed using an open approach, which can be associated with more postoperative pain and prolonged recovery. The objective of this study was to assess the outcomes of patients who underwent placement of feeding jejunostomy using a laparoscopic approach. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of patients who underwent laparoscopic jejunostomy tube placement between 1998 and 2014. Main outcome measures included indication for catheter placement, rate of conversion rate to open surgery, perioperative and late morbidity and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Two hundred and ninety-nine consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic jejunostomy during the study period. The mean age was 64 years, and 81% of patients were male. The mean BMI was 26.2 kg/m(2). The most common indications for catheter placement were resectable esophageal cancer (78%), unresectable esophageal cancer (10%) and gastric cancer (6%). There were no conversions to open surgery. The 30-day complication rate was 4.0% and included catheter dislodgement (1%), intraperitoneal catheter displacement (0.7%), catheter blockage (1%) or breakage (0.3%), site infection requiring catheter removal (0.7%) and abdominal wall hematoma (0.3%). The late complication rate was 8.7% and included jejuno-cutaneous fistula (3.7%), jejunostomy tube dislodgement (3.3%), broken or clogged J-tube (1.3%) and small bowel obstruction (0.3%). The 30-day mortality was 0.3% for a patient with stage IV esophageal cancer who died in the postoperative period secondary to respiratory failure. CONCLUSION: In this large consecutive series of feeding jejunostomy, the laparoscopic approach is feasible and safe and associated with a low rate of small bowel obstruction and no intraabdominal catheter-related infection.

Use and Outcomes of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy vs Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass: Analysis of the American College of Surgeons NSQIP.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is gaining popularity in the United States. However, few studies have examined outcomes of sleeve gastrectomy compared with those of the "gold standard" bariatric operation: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. STUDY DESIGN: Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, clinical data were obtained for all patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or laparoscopic gastric bypass between 2010 and 2011. Main outcomes measures were risk-adjusted 30-day serious morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: We analyzed 24,117 patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or laparoscopic gastric bypass for the treatment of morbid obesity. Gastric bypass comprised 79.5% of cases and sleeve gastrectomy comprised 20.5%; the proportion of sleeve gastrectomy cases increased from 14.6% in 2010 to 25.8% in 2011. On univariate analysis, sleeve gastrectomy had a shorter mean operative time (101 vs 133 minutes, p < 0.01), a lower rate of blood loss requiring transfusion (0.6% vs 1.5%, p < 0.01), a lower rate of deep wound infections (0.06% vs 0.20%, p = 0.05), lower serious morbidity rate (3.8% vs 5.8%, p < 0.01), and 30-day reoperation rate (1.6% vs 2.5%, p < 0.01), but a higher rate of deep venous thrombosis (0.47% vs 0.21%, p < 0.01). Compared with sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass patients had higher risk-adjusted 30-day serious morbidity (odds ratio [OR] 1.32; 95% CI1.11 to 1.56, p < 0.01). Patients who were older, had higher BMI, smoked, or had hypertension were at significantly greater risk of serious morbidity. The 30-day mortality was similar between groups (0.10% for sleeve vs 0.15% for bypass). CONCLUSIONS: Use of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is increasing on a national level. Compared with laparoscopic gastric bypass, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is associated with lower 30-day risk-adjusted serious morbidity and equivalent 30-day mortality.

Utilization and outcome of laparoscopic versus robotic general and bariatric surgical procedures at Academic Medical Centers.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted general and bariatric surgery is gaining popularity among surgeons. The aim of this study was to analyze the utilization and outcome of laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic techniques for common elective general and bariatric surgical procedures performed at Academic Medical Centers. METHODS: We analyzed data from University HealthSystem Consortium clinical database from October 2010 to February 2014 for all patients who underwent laparoscopic versus robotic techniques for eight common elective general and bariatric surgical procedures: gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy, gastric band, antireflux surgery, Heller myotomy (HM), cholecystectomy (LC), colectomy, rectal resection (RR). Utilization and outcome measures including demographics, in-hospital mortality, major complications, 30-day readmission, length of stay (LOS), and costs were compared between techniques. RESULTS: 96,694 laparoscopic and robotic procedures were analyzed. Utilization of the robotic approach was the highest for RR (21.4%), followed by HM (9.1%). There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality or major complications between laparoscopic versus robotic techniques for all procedures. Only two procedures had improved outcome associated with the robotic approach: robotic HM and robotic LC had a shorter LOS compared to the laparoscopic approach (2.8 ± 3.6 vs. 2.3 ± 2.1; respectively, p < 0.05 for HM and 2.9 ± 2.4 vs. 2.3 ± 1.7; respectively, p < 0.05 for LC). Costs were significantly higher (21%) in the robotic group for all procedures. A subset analysis of patients with minor/moderate severity of illness showed similar results. CONCLUSION: This national analysis of academic centers showed a low utilization of robotic-assisted laparoscopic elective general and bariatric surgical procedures with the highest utilization for rectal resection. Compared to conventional laparoscopy, there were no observed clinical benefits associated with the robotic approach, but there was a consistently higher cost.

Bariatric surgery in the elderly: 2009-2013.

BACKGROUND: Ample evidence supports the safety and effectiveness of bariatric surgery in the general adult population but more information is needed in patients age 60 years and older (elderly). We previously examined the outcome of bariatric surgery performed in the elderly between 1999 and 2005 using the University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC) Clinical Database. The aim of this study was to analyze contemporary outcomes of bariatric surgery in the elderly and to compare them to previous data from 1999-2005. METHODS: Using International Classification of Diseases, 9(th) Revision diagnosis and procedure codes, we obtained data from the UHC database for all elderly (age >60 yr) and adult nonelderly (age 19-60 yr) patients who underwent bariatric surgery for the treatment of morbid obesity between 2009 and 2013. Outcome measures, such as patient characteristics, LOS, morbidity, and observed-to-expected (risk-adjusted) mortality ratio were compared between elderly and nonelderly patients. RESULTS: Bariatric surgery in the elderly made up 2.7% of all bariatric operations in 1999-2005. This represents an increase to 10.1% of all bariatric operations in 2009-2013. In-hospital mortality was .30% for the nonelderly and .70% for the elderly in 1999-2005, whereas contemporary in-hospital mortality has decreased to .11% for the nonelderly and .05% for the elderly. CONCLUSION: Our results show that the number of bariatric procedures performed in the elderly is increasing and now represents 10% of all bariatric operations performed at academic centers. In-hospital mortality in bariatric surgery in the elderly has improved so much that it is now even better than in-hospital mortality in the nonelderly in 1999-2005.

Body mass index is predictive of higher in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing laparoscopic gastric bypass but not laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or gastric banding.

High body mass index (BMI) has been shown to be a factor predictive of increased morbidity and mortality in several single-institution studies. Using the University HealthSystem Consortium clinical database, we examined the impact of BMI on in-hospital mortality for patients who underwent laparoscopic gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy, and gastric banding between October 2011 and February 2014. Outcomes were examined within each procedure according to BMI groups of 35 to 49.9, 50.0 to 59.9, and 60.0 kg/m(2) or greater. Outcome measures included in-hospital mortality, major complications, length of hospital stay, 30-day readmission, and cost. A total of 40,102 bariatric procedures were performed during this time period. For gastric bypass, there was an increase of in-hospital mortality (0.01 and 0.02 vs 0.34%; P < 0.01) and major complications (0.93 and 0.99 vs 2.62%; P < 0.01) in the BMI 60 kg/m(2) or greater group. In contrast, sleeve gastrectomy and gastric banding had no association between BMI and rates of mortality and major complications. Cost increased with increasing BMI groups for all procedures. A strong association was found between BMI 60 kg/m(2) or greater and higher in-hospital mortality and major complication rates for patients who underwent laparoscopic gastric bypass but not in patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy or gastric banding.

Changes in high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels after laparoscopic gastric stapling procedures versus laparoscopic gastric banding.

Obesity, hypertension, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia are risk factors for the development of coronary artery disease. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) is an inflammatory biomarker that has been shown to be an independent predictor for cardiovascular risk. The aim of the current study was to examine the changes in cardiovascular risk profile in morbidly obese patients who underwent laparoscopic gastric stapling procedures (bypass and sleeve) compared with laparoscopic gastric banding. Levels of hs-CRP were measured preoperatively and at 12 to 24 months postoperatively. Based on hs-CRP levels, cardiovascular risk was categorized as low (less than 1 mg/L), moderate (1 to 3 mg/L), or high (greater than 3 mg/L). A total of 52 patients underwent gastric stapling procedures and 49 underwent gastric banding and both had preoperative and postoperative hs-CRP levels measured. There were no significant differences in age, gender, or preoperative body mass index (BMI) between groups. At baseline, 48.0 per cent of patients undergoing gastric stapling and 38.8 per cent of patients undergoing gastric banding had moderate or high cardiovascular risk. BMI at 24 months was significantly lower in the gastric stapling compared with the gastric banding group (30.4 ± 5.4 vs 36.1 ± 5.5 kg/m(2), respectively, P < 0.01). Of the patients with elevated cardiovascular risk, 64.0 per cent of gastric stapling versus 57.8 per cent of gastric banding patients had a reduction in risk category at 12 to 24 months follow-up, whereas 1.9 per cent of patients undergoing gastric stapling versus 4.1 per cent of patients undergoing gastric banding had an increase in risk category. The mean reduction in hs-CRP level for patients with elevated cardiovascular risk was greater for gastric stapling compared with gastric banding procedures (-1.10 ± 0.94 mg/L vs -0.67 ± 0.82 mg/L, respectively, P < 0.05). Cardiovascular risk improved in the majority of patients after bariatric surgery, but a more pronounced improvement occurred in patients who underwent gastric stapling procedures.

One-year outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding for the treatment of morbid obesity.

Sleeve gastrectomy is emerging to be the procedure of choice in the management of severe obesity. The aim of this study was to analyze outcomes between patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) versus laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). A retrospective matched cohort analysis was performed between 150 patients who underwent LSG versus 150 patients who underwent LAGB. The cohorts were matched for age, gender, body mass index (BMI), and preoperative comorbidities. Length of hospital stay (1.6 vs 1.1 days, P < 0.01) was longer in the LSG group. Perioperative complications were similar between groups (4.6% for LSG vs 2.0% for LAGB) but the late complication rate was significantly lower in the LSG group (1.3 vs 8.0%). The 30-day reoperation (0 vs 0.7%) and readmission (1.3 vs 1.3%) rates were similar between groups. There were no 90-day mortalities in the study. The mean reduction in BMI was significantly higher for LSG (-11.9 kg/m(2) for LSG vs -6.2 kg/m(2) for LAGB, P < 0.01) at 1-year follow-up. The number of medications used to control all comorbidities was significantly lower at follow-up compared with baseline for both groups. The mean reduction in the number medications used to control hypertension was greater in the LSG group (-1.00 ± 0.70 vs -0.35 ± 0.70 medications, P < 0.01). LSG has a perioperative safety profile comparable to that of LAGB but achieved significantly better weight loss and control of hypertension with a lower rate of late complications.

A decade analysis of trends and outcomes of bariatric surgery in Medicare beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: In 2006, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issued a National Coverage Determination (NCD), which mandates that bariatric procedures be performed only at accredited centers. The aim of this study was to analyze outcomes of Medicare beneficiaries who underwent bariatric surgery before (2001 through 2005) vs after (2006 through 2010) implementation of the NCD. STUDY DESIGN: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was used to analyze data on patients who underwent bariatric surgery between 2001 and 2010. Main outcomes measures were demographics, length of stay, risk-adjusted inpatient morbidity and mortality, and cost. RESULTS: There were 775,040 patients who underwent bariatric surgery, with 16% of the patients Medicare beneficiaries. There was an overall trend for improved in-hospital mortality during the decade (0.35% in 2001 to 0.10% in 2010). Medicare patients who underwent bariatric surgery had higher rates of comorbidities and a higher rate of in-hospital mortality than non-Medicare patients. After the NCD, there was a significant reduction of the in-hospital mortality (0.56% vs 0.23%; p < 0.01) and serious morbidity (9.92% vs 6.98%; p < 0.01) for Medicare patients and a similar reduction of the in-hospital mortality (0.18% vs 0.08%; p < 0.01) and serious morbidity (6.84% vs 5.08%; p < 0.01) for non-Medicare patients. Compared with patients who underwent stapling bariatric procedures at accredited centers, patients at nonaccredited centers had higher risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality (odds ratio = 3.53; 95% CI, 1.01-6.52) and serious morbidity (odds ratio = 1.18; 95% CI, 1.07-1.30). After the NCD, use of bariatric surgery within Medicare beneficiaries increased by 71%. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes of bariatric surgery in Medicare beneficiaries have improved substantially since the 2006 NCD. Facility accreditation appears to be a contributing factor to the observed improvement in outcomes.

Impact of accreditation in bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have shown improved outcomes associated with accredited bariatric centers. The aim of our study was to examine the outcomes of bariatric surgery performed at accredited versus nonaccredited centers using a nationally representative database. Additionally, we aimed to determine if the presence of bariatric surgery accreditation could lead to improved outcomes for morbidly obese patients undergoing other general laparoscopic operations. METHODS: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, for data between 2008 and 2010, clinical data of morbidly obese patients who underwent bariatric surgery, laparoscopic antireflux surgery, cholecystectomy, and colectomy were analyzed according to the hospital's bariatric accreditation status. RESULTS: A total of 277,068 bariatric operations were performed during the 3-year period, with 88.4% of cases performed at accredited centers. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower at accredited compared to nonaccredited centers (.08% versus .19%, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that nonaccredited centers had higher risk-adjusted mortality for bariatric procedures compared to accredited centers (odds ratio [OR] 3.1, P<.01). Post hoc analysis showed improved mortality for patients who underwent gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy at accredited centers compared to nonaccredited centers (.09% versus .27%, respectively, P<.01). Patients with a high severity of illness who underwent bariatric surgery also had lower mortality rates when the surgery was performed at accredited versus nonaccredited centers (.17% versus .45%, respectively, P<.01). Multivariate analysis showed that morbidly obese patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (OR 2.4, P<.05) and antireflux surgery (OR 2.03, P<.01) at nonaccredited centers had higher rates of serious complications. CONCLUSION: Accreditation in bariatric surgery was associated with more than a 3-fold reduction in risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality. Resources established for bariatric surgery accreditation may have the secondary benefit of improving outcomes for morbidly obese patients undergoing general laparoscopic operations.

Minimally invasive resection of benign gastric tumors in challenging locations: prepyloric region or gastroesophageal junction.

Benign gastric tumors in a prepyloric location or within 3 cm adjacent of the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) are often challenging to resect using minimally invasive surgical techniques. The aim of this study was to examine the outcomes of patients who underwent minimally invasive enucleation or resection of benign gastric tumors at these difficult locations. The charts of patients undergoing minimally invasive resection of benign-appearing submucosal gastric tumors between June 2001 and December 2012 were reviewed. Data on tumor size and location, type of minimally invasive surgical resection, perioperative complications, 90-day mortality, pathology, and recurrence were collected. A total of 70 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic resection of benign-appearing submucosal gastric tumors; there were 24 patients with lesions close to the GEJ and nine patients with lesions close to the prepyloric region. All lesions were successfully resected laparoscopically. For prepyloric tumors, surgical approaches included enucleation (n = 1), wedge resection (n = 2), and distal gastrectomy with reconstruction (n = 6). For tumors close to the GEJ, surgical approaches included enucleation (n = 16), wedge resection (n = 3), and esophagogastrectomy (n = 5). Complications in this series of 33 patients included late strictures requiring endoscopic dilation in three patients who underwent esophagogastrectomy. The 90-day mortality rate was zero. There were no recurrences over a mean follow-up of 15 months (range, 1 to 86 months). Minimally invasive enucleation or formal anatomic resection of submucosal tumors located adjacent to the GEJ or at the prepyloric region is safe and carries a low risk for tumor recurrence. Submucosal gastric lesions adjacent to the GEJ are amenable to laparoscopic enucleation or wedge resection unless they extend proximally into the esophagus. Prepyloric lesions often require formal anatomic resection with reconstruction.

Initial outcomes of laparoscopic paraesophageal hiatal hernia repair with mesh.

The use of mesh in laparoscopic paraesophageal hiatal hernia repair (LHR) may reduce the risk of late hernia recurrence. The aim of this study was to evaluate initial outcomes and recurrence rate of 92 patients who underwent LHR reinforced with a synthetic bioabsorbable mesh. Surgical approaches included LHR and Nissen fundoplication (n = 64), LHR without fundoplication (n = 10), reoperative LHR (n = 9), LHR with a bariatric operation (n = 6), and emergent LHR (n = 3). The mean length of hospital stay was 2 ± 3 days (range, 1 to 30 days). There were no conversions to open laparotomy and no intraoperative complications. One of 92 patients (1.1%) required intensive care unit stay. The 90-day mortality was zero. Minor complications occurred in 3.3 per cent, major complications in 2.2 per cent, and late complications in 5.5 per cent of patients. There were no perforations or early hernia recurrence. The 30-day reoperation rate was 1.1 per cent. For patients with available 1-year follow-up, the overall recurrence rate was 18.5 per cent with a mean follow-up of 30 months (range, 12 to 51 months). LHR repair with mesh is associated with low perioperative morbidity and no mortality. The use of bioabsorbable mesh appears to be safe with no early hiatal hernia recurrence or late mesh erosion. Longer follow-up is needed to determine the long-term rate of hernia recurrence associated with LHR with mesh.

Changes in the makeup of bariatric surgery: a national increase in use of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is gaining popularity in the US; however, there has been no study examining the use of sleeve gastrectomy at a national level and its impact on the use of other bariatric operations. The aim of this study was to examine contemporary changes in use and outcomes of bariatric surgery performed at academic medical centers. METHODS: Using ICD-9 diagnosis and procedure codes, clinical data obtained from the University HealthSystem Consortium database for all bariatric procedures performed for the treatment of morbid obesity between October 1, 2008 and September 30, 2012 were reviewed. Quartile trends in use for the 3 most commonly performed bariatric operations were examined, and a comparison of perioperative outcomes between procedures was performed within a subset of patients with minor severity of illness. RESULTS: A total of 60,738 bariatric procedures were examined. In 2008, the makeup of bariatric surgery consisted primarily of gastric bypass (66.8% laparoscopic, 8.6% open), followed by laparoscopic gastric banding (23.8%). In 2012, there was a precipitous increase in use of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (36.3 %), with a concurrent reduction in the use of laparoscopic (56.4%) and open (3.2%) gastric bypass, and a major reduction in laparoscopic gastric banding (4.1%). The length of hospital stay, in-hospital morbidity and mortality, and costs for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy were found to be between those of laparoscopic gastric banding and laparoscopic gastric bypass. CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of academic medical centers, there has been a recent change in the makeup of bariatric surgery. There has been an increase in the use of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, which has had an impact primarily on reducing the use of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding.