The Utility of EndoFLIP for Measuring Gastrojejunal Anastomosis Diameter and Distensibility in Patients Experiencing Weight Regain Post Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.

A dilated gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA) diameter is an independent predictor of weight regain following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Despite this, there is no standardized method for GJA diameter measurement. We performed a retrospective analysis to compare endoscopic visual estimation and endoluminal functional impedance planimetry (EndoFLIP) for measuring GJA diameter in patients with weight regain post-RYGB. Visual estimation was found to overestimate GJA diameter by a mean of 4.2mm ± 4.6mm when compared with EndoFLIP. Furthermore, we identified symptomatic patients with normal GJA diameter but increased distensibility, which may represent a previously unrecognized subgroup. Our findings suggest the potential utility of EndoFLIP in the evaluation of post-RYGB weight regain and support the need for prospective studies to investigate the relationship between GJA distensibility and weight regain.

Outcomes of a hybrid technique using EMR and endoscopic full-thickness resection for polyps not amenable to standard techniques (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The full-thickness resection device (FTRD) offers a safe and effective approach for resection of complex colorectal lesions but is limited to lesions <2 cm in size. A hybrid approach-combining EMR with the FTRD-significantly expands the pool of lesions amenable to this technique; however, its safety and efficacy has not been well established. METHODS: We report a single-center retrospective study of consecutive patients who underwent full-thickness resection (FTR) of colorectal lesions, either with a standalone FTRD or a hybrid (EMR + FTRD) approach. Outcomes of technical success, clinical success (macroscopically complete resection), R0 resection, and adverse events (AEs) were evaluated. RESULTS: Sixty-nine FTR procedures (38 standalone FTR and 31 hybrid EMR + FTR) were performed on 65 patients. The most common indications were nonlifting polyp (43%) or suspected high-grade dysplasia or carcinoma (38%). Hybrid EMR + FTR permitted resection of significantly larger lesions (mean, 39 mm; range, 15-70 mm) compared with standalone FTR (mean, 17 mm; range, 7-25 mm; P < .01). Clinical success (91%), technical success (83%), and R0 resection (81%) rates did not differ between standalone and hybrid groups. Most patients (96%) were discharged home on the day of the procedure. Three AEs occurred, including 2 patients who developed acute appendicitis. CONCLUSIONS: A hybrid approach combining EMR and FTRD maintains safety and efficacy while permitting resection of significantly larger lesions than FTRD alone.

Transoral outlet reduction: could additional sutures cause more harm?

BACKGROUND: The double purse-string pattern (DPSP) of transoral outlet reduction (TORe) should conceivably result in a more robust scaffolding for the gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA). However, there is a paucity of literature pertaining to post-TORe stenosis as an adverse event. Our aim was to determine the rate of stenosis, its potential predictors, and other complications of DPSP TORe. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of 129 consecutive patients who underwent DPSP TORe between December 2015 and August 2019. RESULTS: The adverse event rate of TORe was 17.1 % (n = 22), with a 13.3 % (n = 17) rate of stenosis. Stenosis was not significantly associated with any baseline characteristics. GJA diameter pre- and post-TORe, the difference between these values, and procedure duration were not predictive of stenosis. Of patients who developed stenosis, 10 (58.8 %) responded to endoscopic balloon dilation and 7 (41.2 %) required stent placement. CONCLUSION: As the DPSP technique is a challenging procedure, with high complication rate and limited benefit, it should not be used for TORe.

Building an endobariatric program: lessons learned.

The emphasis on treating obesity has never been more critical, yet the complexity of delivering care has become more intricate due to new procedures, variable insurance coverage, and inconsistent reimbursement. This is our experience building an endobariatric program and treating overweight and obese patients with endobariatric therapies (EBTs) over 3 years. The primary intention of this manuscript was to educate the reader on how to build an endobariatric program, identify barriers, and provide succinct solutions to establish a successful program. The secondary aim was weight loss outcomes of procedures offered at our institution. We compiled a list of lessons learned, based on the difficulties we experienced to make it easy for others embarking on this journey. Herein, we present a business development strategy to overcome impediments, whilst offering high quality service. The high cost and lack of insurance coverage are significant barriers. Marketing can be costly and is often a factor that is ignored particularly early on, when finances are limited. However, it is an integral component of growing the program. The percentage total body weight loss (%TBWL) at 6 and 12 months post ESG was 17.8 ±â€Š6.48 and 20.6 ±â€Š8.3 ( P  < 0.001), respectively. The %TBWL at 6 months post IGB was 14.9 ±â€Š9.8 for the Orbera IGB and 12.6 ±â€Š7.4 for the Reshape IGB. There was a trend of preference for ESG compared to IGB placement over the 3 years. The key to building a successful endobariatric program is a motivated physician leader, collaborative bariatric surgeons, institutional support, and marketing. Insurance coverage will likely occur in the near future and programs must be prepared to manage the massive influx of patients that will likely request these procedures.

Correction to: Anatomical Configuration of the Stomach Post-Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty (ESG)-What Are the Sutures Doing?

The name of author Vivek Kumbhari was misspelled in the original article.

Anatomical Configuration of the Stomach Post-Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty (ESG)-What Are the Sutures Doing?

INTRODUCTION AND AIM: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a procedure in which endoscopically placed sutures involute the stomach and promote weight loss. There is limited data on the durability of these sutures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a single center series of 5 patients who underwent ESG performed by a single endoscopist. Patients underwent repeat endoscopy for different clinical indications. RESULTS: ESGs were successfully reversed at 3 weeks and 1 month following index ESG without significant fibrosis or scaring. At 8 and 14 months, a few sutures had dehisced though there were extensive areas of fibrosis. By 2 years, most of the sutures had dehisced; however, the gastric volume remained reduced. CONCLUSION: This case series offers an intriguing evaluation of the anatomical changes induced by ESG.

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus high-intensity diet and lifestyle therapy: a case-matched study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a safe and effective minimally invasive bariatric procedure. This study compared weight loss in patients undergoing ESG with that of matched patients undergoing high-intensity diet and lifestyle therapy (HIDLT). METHODS: In this case-matched study, patients were matched 2/3:1 (HIDLT/ESG) by age, sex, and body mass index (BMI). One hundred five patients (30 men) who underwent ESG + low-intensity diet and lifestyle therapy (LIDLT) between 2016 and 2018 were compared with 281 patients (92 men) who underwent HIDLT at the Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions from 2013 to 2014. Weight was evaluated 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after beginning HIDLT or post-ESG to determine the mean percent total body weight loss (%TBWL). RESULTS: Mean age across both cohorts was 48.0 ± 12.1, and baseline BMI was 40.0 ± 7.7 kg/m2. In multivariable analysis controlling for age, sex, and baseline BMI, the mean %TBWL at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months was significantly higher in patients undergoing ESG than matched patients undergoing HIDLT. Specifically, at 3 months, the mean %TBWL in the ESG cohort was 14.0% compared with 11.3% in the HIDLT cohort (P <.011), and at 12 months the mean %TBWL in the ESG cohort was 20.6% versus 14.3% in the HIDLT cohort (P < .001). ESG patients with baseline BMI ≤40 kg/m2 continued to show significantly greater %TBWL than those of the same BMI group in the HIDLT group at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after intervention (3 months, coefficient = 3.43 [P < .001]; 12 months, coefficient = 8.14 [P < .001]). CONCLUSIONS: Through 12 months of follow-up, patients who underwent ESG achieved significantly greater weight loss than patients enrolled in HIDLT. ESG appears to be a valuable alternative for patients who experience difficulty complying with HIDLT.