Technical Variations and Considerations around OAGB in IFSO-APC and IFSO-MENAC Chapters, an Expert Survey.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the technical variations of one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) among IFSO-APC and MENAC experts. BACKGROUND: The multitude of technical variations and patient selection challenges among metabolic and bariatric surgeons worldwide necessitates a heightened awareness of these issues. Understanding different perspectives and viewpoints can empower surgeons performing OAGB to adapt their techniques, leading to improved outcomes and reduced complications. METHODS: The scientific team of IFSO-APC, consisting of skilled bariatric and metabolic surgeons specializing in OAGB, conducted a confidential online survey. The survey aimed to assess technical variations and considerations related to OAGB within the IFSO-APC and IFSO-MENAC chapters. A total of 85 OAGB experts participated in the survey, providing their responses through a 35-question online format. The survey took place from January 1, 2024, to February 15, 2024. RESULTS: Most experts do not perform OAGB for children and adolescents younger than 18 years. Most experts create the gastric pouch over a 36-40-F bougie and prefer to create a gastrojejunostomy, at the posterior wall of the gastric pouch. An anti-reflux suture during OAGB is performed in all patients by 51.8% of experts. Most experts set a common limb length of > 4 m in revisional and conversional OAGBs to prevent nutritional complications. CONCLUSION: The ongoing debate among metabolic and bariatric surgeons regarding the technical variations and patient selection in OAGB remains a significant point of discussion. This survey demonstrated the variations in technical aspects and patient selection for OAGB among MBS surgeons in the IFSO-APC and IFSO-MENAC chapters. Standardizing the OAGB technique is crucial to ensure optimal safety and efficacy in this procedure.

The Alarming Rate of Malnutrition after Single Anastomosis Sleeve Ileal Bypass. A single Centre Experience.

BACKGROUND: Single anastomosis sleeve ileal (SASI) bypass is a modification of sleeve gastrectomy with transit bipartition (SG + TB). This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of SASI as a primary metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS). METHODS: This is a retrospective case series of 30 patients who underwent SASI bypass from January to December 2021. All patients completed at least 12 months of follow-up. RESULTS: Among the 30 patients, 93.3% were women, the mean age was 37.4 years, and the mean body mass index (BMI) was 45.6 kg/m2. The percentage of total body weight loss (TWL%) was 42.7%, the percent excess body weight loss (EWL%) was 92.7%, and the mean BMI at 12 months went from 45.6(35.2-58.4) to 25.8 kg/m2 (19.2-33.4). The obesity-associated complications remission rate was 87.5% for type 2 diabetes (T2D), 71.4% for hypertension (HTN) and 100% for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Thirteen patients (43.3%) had diarrhea, 7 (23.3%) had hypoalbuminemia, defined as serum albumin < 3 g/dl, and 6 (20%) underwent reversal of their index SASI. As for other nutritional issues, iron deficiency anemia was present in 21 patients (70%), while 19 patients (63.3%) had vitamin D, and 2(6.6%) had vitamin B12 deficiency. CONCLUSION: Despite good short-term weight loss and improvement of obesity-associated complications, SASI is accompanied by high alarming malnutrition, even in short-term follow-up. Novel MBS should be judged for their long-term effects and compared to well-tested standard operations before they are used in routine clinical practice.

Current recommendations for procedure selection in class I and II obesity developed by an expert modified Delphi consensus.

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is widely considered the most effective option for treating obesity, a chronic, relapsing, and progressive disease. Recently, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) issued new guidelines on the indications for MBS, which have superseded the previous 1991 National Institutes of Health guidelines. The aim of this study is to establish the first set of consensus guidelines for selecting procedures in Class I and II obesity, using an Expert Modified Delphi Method. In this study, 78 experienced bariatric surgeons from 32 countries participated in a two-round Modified Delphi consensus voting process. The threshold for consensus was set at an agreement or disagreement of ≥ 70.0% among the experts. The experts reached a consensus on 54 statements. The committee of experts reached a consensus that MBS is a cost-effective treatment option for Class II obesity and for patients with Class I obesity who have not achieved significant weight loss through non-surgical methods. MBS was also considered suitable for patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and a body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m2 or higher. The committee identified intra-gastric balloon (IGB) as a treatment option for patients with class I obesity and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) as an option for patients with class I and II obesity, as well as for patients with T2DM and a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2. Sleeve gastrectomy (1) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) were also recognized as viable treatment options for these patient groups. The committee also agreed that one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a suitable option for patients with Class II obesity and T2DM, regardless of the presence or severity of obesity-related medical problems. The recommendations for selecting procedures in Class I and II obesity, developed through an Expert Modified Delphi Consensus, suggest that the use of standard primary bariatric endoscopic (IGB, ESG) and surgical procedures (SG, RYGB, OAGB) are acceptable in these patient groups, as consensus was reached regarding these procedures. However, randomized controlled trials are still needed in Class I and II Obesity to identify the best treatment approach for these patients in the future.

Bariatric Evaluation Through AI: a Survey of Expert Opinions Versus ChatGPT-4 (BETA-SEOV).

BACKGROUND: Recent advancements in artificial intelligence, such as OpenAI's ChatGPT-4, are revolutionizing various sectors, including healthcare. This study investigates the use of ChatGPT-4 in identifying suitable candidates for bariatric surgery and providing surgical recommendations to improve decision-making in obesity treatment amid the global obesity epidemic. METHODS: We devised ten patient scenarios, thoughtfully encompassing a spectrum that spans from uncomplicated cases to more complex ones. Our objective was to delve into the decision-making process regarding the recommendation of bariatric surgery. From July 29th to August 10th, 2023, we conducted a voluntary online survey involving thirty prominent bariatric surgeons, ensuring that there was no predetermined bias in the selection of a specific type of bariatric surgery. This survey was designed to collect their insights on these scenarios and gain a deeper understanding of their professional experience and background in the field of bariatric surgery. Additionally, we consulted ChatGPT-4 in two separate conversations to evaluate its alignment with expert opinions on bariatric surgery options. RESULTS: In 40% of the scenarios, disparities were identified between the two conversations with ChatGPT-4. It matched expert opinions in 30% of cases. Differences were noted in cases like gastrointestinal metaplasia and gastric adenocarcinoma, but there was alignment with conditions like endometriosis and GERD. CONCLUSION: The evaluation of ChatGPT-4's role in determining bariatric surgery suitability uncovered both potential and shortcomings. Its alignment with experts was inconsistent, and it often overlooked key factors, emphasizing human expertise's value. Its current use requires caution, and further refinement is needed for clinical application.

Innovative Bariatric Procedures and Ethics in Bariatric Surgery: the IFSO Position Statement.

With the rise in obesity and bariatric procedures worldwide, there has been a surge in new and innovative procedures that has been increasingly offered to patients. In this position statement, IFSO highlights the importance of surgical ethics in innovation and when offering new procedures. Furthermore, the task force reviewed the current literature to describe which procedures can be offered as mainstream outside research protocols versus those that are still investigational and need further data.

Best practice approach for redo-surgeries after sleeve gastrectomy, an expert's modified Delphi consensus.

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common metabolic and bariatric surgical (MBS) procedure worldwide. Despite the desired effect of SG on weight loss and remission of obesity-associated medical problems, there are some concerns regarding the need to do revisional/conversional surgeries after SG. This study aims to make an algorithmic clinical approach based on an expert-modified Delphi consensus regarding redo-surgeries after SG, to give bariatric and metabolic surgeons a guideline that might help for the best clinical decision. METHODS: Forty-six recognized bariatric and metabolic surgeons from 25 different countries participated in this Delphi consensus study in two rounds to develop a consensus on redo-surgeries after SG. An agreement/disagreement ≥ 70.0% on statements was considered to indicate a consensus. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 62 of 72 statements and experts did not achieve consensus on 10 statements after two rounds of online voting. Most of the experts believed that multi-disciplinary team evaluation should be done in all redo-procedures after SG and there should be at least 12 months of medical and supportive management before performing redo-surgeries after SG for insufficient weight loss, weight regain, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Also, experts agreed that in case of symptomatic GERD in the presence of adequate weight loss, medical treatment for at least 1 to 2 years is an acceptable option and agreed that Roux-en Y gastric bypass is an appropriate option in this situation. There was disagreement consensus on efficacy of omentopexy in rotation and efficacy of fundoplication in the presence of a dilated fundus and GERD. CONCLUSION: Redo-surgeries after SG is still an important issue among bariatric and metabolic surgeons. The proper time and procedure selection for redo-surgery need careful considerations. Although multi-disciplinary team evaluation plays a key role to evaluate best options in these situations, an algorithmic clinical approach based on the expert's consensus as a guideline can help for the best clinical decision-making.

2022 American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) Indications for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.

MAJOR UPDATES TO 1991 NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH GUIDELINES FOR BARIATRIC SURGERY: Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is recommended for individuals with a body mass index (BMI) >35 kg/m2, regardless of presence, absence, or severity of co-morbidities.MBS should be considered for individuals with metabolic disease and BMI of 30-34.9 kg/m2.BMI thresholds should be adjusted in the Asian population such that a BMI >25 kg/m2 suggests clinical obesity, and individuals with BMI >27.5 kg/m2 should be offered MBS.Long-term results of MBS consistently demonstrate safety and efficacy.Appropriately selected children and adolescents should be considered for MBS.(Surg Obes Relat Dis 2022; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2022.08.013 ) © 2022 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. All rights reserved.

2022 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO): Indications for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.

Major updates to 1991 National Institutes of Health guidelines for bariatric surgery.

Innovative Bariatric Procedures and Ethics in Bariatric Surgery: the IFSO Position Statement.

With the rise in obesity and bariatric procedures worldwide, there has been a surge in new and innovative procedures that has been increasingly offered to patients. In this position statement, IFSO highlights the importance of surgical ethics in innovation and when offering new procedures. Furthermore, the task force reviewed the current literature to describe which procedures can be offered as mainstream outside research protocols versus those that are still investigational and need further data.

Patient Selection in One Anastomosis/Mini Gastric Bypass-an Expert Modified Delphi Consensus.

PURPOSE: One anastomosis/mini gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB) is up to date the third most performed obesity and metabolic procedure worldwide, which recently has been endorsed by ASMBS. The main criticisms are the risk of bile reflux, esophageal cancer, and malnutrition. Although IFSO has recognized this procedure, guidance is needed regarding selection criteria. To give clinicians a daily support in performing the right patient selection in OAGB/MGB, the aim of this paper is to generate clinical guidelines based on an expert modified Delphi consensus. METHODS: A committee of 57 recognized bariatric surgeons from 24 countries created 69 statements. Modified Delphi consensus voting was performed in two rounds. An agreement/disagreement among ≥ 70.0% of the experts was considered to indicate a consensus. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved for 56 statements. Remarkably, ≥ 90.0% of the experts felt that OAGB/MGB is an acceptable and suitable option "in patients with Body mass index (BMI) > 70, BMI > 60, BMI > 50 kg/m2 as a one-stage procedure," "as the second stage of a two-stage bariatric surgery after Sleeve Gastrectomy for BMI > 50 kg/m2 (instead of BPD/DS)," and "in patients with weight regain after restrictive procedures. No consensus was reached on the statement that OAGB/MGB is a suitable option in case of resistant Helicobacter pylori. This is likely as there is a concern that this procedure is associated with reflux and its related long-term complications including risk of cancer in the esophagus or stomach. Also no consensus reached on OAGB/MGB as conversional surgery in patients with GERD after restrictive procedures. Consensus for disagreement was predominantly achieved "in case of intestinal metaplasia of the stomach" (74.55%), "in patients with severe Gastro Esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)(C,D)" (75.44%), "in patients with Barrett's metaplasia" (89.29%), and "in documented insulinoma" (89.47%). CONCLUSION: Patient selection in OAGB/MGB is still a point of discussion among experts. There was consensus that OAGB/MGB is a suitable option in elderly patients, patients with low BMI (30-35 kg/m2) with associated metabolic problems, and patients with BMIs more than 50 kg/m2 as one-stage procedure. OAGB/MGB can also be a safe procedure in vegetarian and vegan patients. Although OAGB/MGB can be a suitable procedure in patients with large hiatal hernia with concurrent hiatal hernia, it should not be offered to patients with grade C or D esophagitis or Barrett's metaplasia.

Religious Fasting of Muslim Patients After Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: a Modified Delphi Consensus.

BACKGROUND: Fasting during Ramadan is one of the five pillars of the Muslim faith. Despite the positive effects of fasting on health, there are no guidelines or clear recommendations regarding fasting after metabolic/bariatric surgery (MBS). The current study reports the result of a modified Delphi consensus among expert metabolic/bariatric surgeons with experience in managing patients who fast after MBS. METHODS: A committee of 61 well-known metabolic and bariatric surgeons from 24 countries was created to participate in the Delphi consensus. The committee voted on 45 statements regarding recommendations and controversies around fasting after MBS. An agreement/disagreement ≥ of 70.0% was regarded as consensus. RESULTS: The experts reached a consensus on 40 out of 45 statements after two rounds of voting. One hundred percent of the experts believed that fasting needs special nutritional support in patients who underwent MBS. The decision regarding fasting must be coordinated among the surgeon, the nutritionist and the patient. At any time after MBS, 96.7% advised stopping fasting in the presence of persistent symptoms of intolerance. Seventy percent of the experts recommended delaying fasting after MBS for 6 to 12 months after combined and malabsorptive procedures according to the patient's situation and surgeon's experience, and 90.1% felt that proton pump inhibitors should be continued in patients who start fasting less than 6 months after MBS. There was consensus that fasting may help in weight loss, improvement/remission of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, dyslipidemia, hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus among 88.5%, 90.2%, 88.5%, 85.2% and 85.2% of experts, respectively. CONCLUSION: Experts voted and reached a consensus on 40 statements covering various aspects of fasting after MBS.

The Hardship of Recovering a Patient from Liver Failure after One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass.

BACKGROUND: The one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) was first described in 2001 as a safe and effective procedure that meets the criteria for the "ideal" weight loss operation. However, revisions for malnutrition and liver failure were reported. CASE REPORT: We report a patient who was transferred to our institution with protein calorie malnutrition and liver failure after undergoing OAGB. METHODS: A 42-year-old morbidly obese female patient underwent a laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in 2012 followed by conversion to OAGB in 2018 for weight regain at another institution. Nine months after conversion, she was transferred to our institution with dehydration, vomiting, dysphagia, generalized edema, and steatorrhea (7 times/day). She had become wheelchair bound. On examination, there was gross edema, protein-calorie malnutrition, dermatitis, and muscle wasting. She had anemia (8 g/dl) reference range (11.5-15.5 g/dl), bilirubin (1.8 mg/dl) (0.2-1.2 mg/dl), hypoalbuminemia (1.4 g/dl) (3.5-5 g/dl), and elevated international normalized ratio (INR). The patient was admitted to the hospital and was started on total parenteral nutrition (TPN), with thiamine, vitamins, iron injections, and trace mineral replacement. Her course was complicated by multiple episodes of line sepsis and bacteremia. After 6 weeks, we succeeded in raising her albumin to 2.9 g/dl and proceeded with surgery. TECHNIQUE: Laparoscopic exploration started with identifying the anatomy and measuring the biliopancreatic limb (BPL = 430 cm) and the common channel (CC = 380 cm). First, we restored the continuity of the small bowel. Then the long gastric pouch was trimmed. Finally, the patient was converted to a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) with a 30 cm BP limb and 70 cm Roux limb. The patient had an uneventful recovery and was discharged home on the fourth postoperative day. At 3 months of follow-up, her symptoms resolved, her laboratory work up normalized, and she regained mobility. CONCLUSION: Malnutrition and liver failure after OAGB are not uncommon. It is encountered with configurations of longer BP limb. BPL length of 150 to 200 cm seems to reduce such complications. Preoperative nutritional optimization is key. Conversion to a proximal RYGB is a safe and feasible approach.

The IFSO Worldwide One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Survey: Techniques and Outcomes?

INTRODUCTION: One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) has become one of the most commonly performed gastric bypass procedures in some countries. OBJECTIVES: To assess how surgeons viewed the OAGB, perceptions, indications, techniques, and outcomes, as well as the incidence of short- and long-term complications and how they were managed worldwide. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to all IFSO members in all 5 chapters to study the pattern of practice and outcomes of OAGB. RESULTS: Seven hundred and forty-two surgeons responded. The most commonly performed procedures were sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and OAGB. Preoperatively, 70% of the surgeons performed endoscopy routinely. In regards to weight loss, 83% (570 surgeons) responded that OAGB produces better weight loss than SG, and 49% (342 surgeons) responded that OAGB produces better weight loss than RYGB. The most common length of the biliopancreatic limb (BPL) utilized was 200 cm. Sixty-seven percent of surgeons did not measure the total length of the small bowel. In patients with reflux disease and history of smoking, 53% and 22% of surgeons respectively still offered OAGB as a treatment option. Postoperatively, leak was documented in 963 patients, and it was the leading cause for mortality. Leak management was conservative in 35%. Conversion to RYGB was performed in 31%. In 16% the anastomosis was reinforced, 6% of the patients were reversed, and other procedures were performed in 12%. Revision of OAGB for malnutrition/steatorrhea or severe bile reflux was reported at least once by 37% and 45% of surgeons, respectively (200 cm was the most commonly encountered biliopancreatic limb BPL in those revised for malnutrition). Most common strategy for revision was conversion to RYGB (43%), reversal to normal anatomy (32%), shortening of the BPL (20%), and conversion to SG (5%). Nevertheless, 5 out of 98 mortalities (5%) were due to liver failure/malnutrition. CONCLUSION: There are infrequent but potentially severe specific complications including malnutrition, liver failure, and bile reflux that may require surgical correction after OAGB.