Early safety of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty in super obesity (body mass index > 50).

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of super obesity (body mass index [BMI] > 50) continues to rise. However, the adoption of bariatric surgery in this population remains very low. There are limited studies evaluating the utility of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) in super obesity. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the short-term safety profile of ESG in patients with super obesity using data from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database. SETTING: United States. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent ESG and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) from 2016 to 2021. Patients with BMI >50 who underwent ESG were compared to ESG patients with BMI <50 and also SG patients with BMI >50. Primary outcomes included the incidence of severe adverse events (AEs), hospital readmission, reintervention, and reoperation within 30 days of the primary procedure. Secondary outcomes included procedure time, hospital length of stay, and total body weight loss at 30 days. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in AE, reoperations, hospital readmissions, or reinterventions for patients with super obesity undergoing ESG, compared to patients with BMI below 50. Mean total body weight loss was greater in patients with super obesity. There were no significant differences in AEs for patients with super obesity who underwent ESG versus SG, although ESG patients had more hospital readmissions, reinterventions, and reoperations. CONCLUSIONS: ESG may be performed safely, with comparable safety to SG, in patients with BMI as high as 70. However, further studies are needed to validate the feasibility and long-term efficacy prior to clinical implementation.

Metabolic Bariatric Surgery-A Vastly Underused Treatment.

This Viewpoint discusses the disease of obesity: treatment options, disease management, and the need for legislation for obesity-related discrimination.

Judgment Errors in Surgical Care.

BACKGROUND: Human error is impossible to eliminate, particularly in systems as complex as healthcare. The extent to which judgment errors in particular impact surgical patient care or lead to harm is unclear. STUDY DESIGN: The American College of Surgeons NSQIP (2018) procedures from a single institution with 30-day morbidity or mortality were examined. Medical records were reviewed and evaluated for judgment errors. Preoperative variables associated with judgment errors were examined using logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the surgical patients who experienced a morbidity or mortality, 18% (31 of 170) experienced an error in judgment during their hospitalization. Patients with hepatobiliary procedure (odds ratio [OR] 5.4 [95% CI 1.23 to 32.75], p = 0.002), insulin-dependent diabetes (OR 4.8 [95% CI 1.2 to 18.8], p = 0.025), severe COPD (OR 6.0 [95% CI 1.6 to 22.1], p = 0.007), or with infected wounds (OR 8.2 [95% CI 2.6 to 25.8], p < 0.001) were at increased risk for judgment errors. CONCLUSIONS: Specific procedure types and patients with certain preoperative variables had higher risk for judgment errors during their hospitalization. Errors in judgment adversely impacted the outcomes of surgical patients who experienced morbidity or mortality in this cohort. Preventing or mitigating errors and closely monitoring patients after an error in judgment is prudent and may improve surgical safety.

Acute Respiratory Failure Complicating Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty: A Case Report.

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a safe and minimally invasive procedure for the treatment of obesity. We report the case of a patient with obesity who underwent ESG complicated by postprocedural respiratory failure. During the procedure, she developed a Pao2/fraction of inspired oxygen (Fio2) ratio that necessitated postoperative mechanical ventilation. Chest radiography demonstrated massively dilated loops of bowel, cephalad displacement of both hemidiaphragms, lung volume reduction, and atelectasis. With absorption of luminal carbon dioxide, she was weaned from mechanical ventilation to supplemental oxygen, and she recovered completely. This case highlights postoperative respiratory failure associated with mechanical loading of the respiratory system following ESG.

Characterization of the robotic surgery experience in minimally invasive surgery fellowships from 2010 to 2021.

BACKGROUND: Robotic surgery has experienced exponential growth in the past decade. Few studies have evaluated the impact of robotics within minimally invasive surgery (MIS) fellowship training programs. The purpose of our study was to examine and characterize recent trends in robotic surgery within MIS fellowship training programs. METHODS: De-identified case log data from the Fellowship Council from 2010 to 2021 were evaluated. Percentage of operations performed with robot assistance over time was assessed and compared to the laparoscopic and open experience. Case logs were further stratified by operative category (e.g., bariatric, hernia, foregut), and robotic experience over time was evaluated for each category. Programs were stratified by percent robot use and the experience over time within each quartile was evaluated. RESULTS: MIS fellowship training programs with a robotic platform increased from 45.1% (51/113) to 90.4% (123/136) over the study period. The percentage of robotic cases increased from 2.0% (1127/56,033) to 23.2% (16,139/69,496) while laparoscopic cases decreased from 80.2% (44,954/56,033) to 65.3% (45,356/69,496). Hernia and colorectal case categories had the largest increase in robot usage [hernia: 0.7% (62/8614) to 38.4% (4661/12,135); colorectal 4.2% (116/2747) to 31.8% (666/2094)]. When stratified by percentage of robot utilization, current (2020-2021) programs in the > 95th percentile performed 21.8% (3523/16,139) of robotic operations and programs in the > 50th percentile performed 90.0% (14,533/16,139) of all robotic cases. The median number of robotic cases performed per MIS fellow significantly increased from 2010 to 2021 [0 (0-6) to 72.5 (17.8-171.5), p < 0.01]. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic use in MIS fellowship training programs has grown substantially in the past decade, but the laparoscopic and open experience remains robust. There remains an imbalance with the top 50% of busiest robotic programs performing over 90% of robot trainee cases. The experience in MIS programs varies widely and trainees should examine program case logs closely to confirm parallel interests.

Postdoctoral National Institutes of Health F32 Grants: Broken Pipeline in the Development of Surgeon-Scientists.

OBJECTIVE: We examined trainees in surgery and internal medicine who received National Institutes of Health (NIH) F32 postdoctoral awards to determine their success rates in obtaining future NIH funding. BACKGROUND: Trainees participate in dedicated research years during residency (surgery) and fellowship (internal medicine). They can obtain an NIH F32 grant to fund their research time and have structured mentorship. METHODS: We collected NIH F32 grants (1992-2021) for Surgery Departments and Internal Medicine Departments from NIH RePORTER, an online database of NIH grants. Nonsurgeons and noninternal medicine physicians were excluded. We collected demographic information on each recipient, including gender, current specialty, leadership positions, graduate degrees, and any future NIH grants they received. A Mann-Whitney U test was used for continuous variables, and a χ 2 test was utilized to analyze categorical variables. An alpha value of 0.05 was used to determine significance. RESULTS: We identified 269 surgeons and 735 internal medicine trainees who received F32 grants. A total of 48 surgeons (17.8%) and 339 internal medicine trainees (50.2%) received future NIH funding ( P < 0.0001). Similarly, 24 surgeons (8.9%) and 145 internal medicine trainees (19.7%) received an R01 in the future ( P < 0.0001). Surgeons who received F32 grants were more likely to be department chair or division chiefs ( P =0.0055 and P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery trainees who obtain NIH F32 grants during dedicated research years are less likely to receive any form of NIH funding in the future compared with their internal medicine colleagues who received F32 grants.

Monitoring performance in laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery using risk-adjusted cumulative sum at 2 high-volume centers.

BACKGROUND: Traditional surgical outcomes are measured retrospectively and intermittently, limiting opportunities for early intervention. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to use risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) to track perioperative surgical outcomes for laparoscopic gastric bypass. We hypothesized that RA-CUSUM could identify performance variations between surgeons. SETTING: Two mid-Atlantic quaternary care academic centers. METHODS: Patient-level data from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) were abstracted for laparoscopic gastric bypasses performed by 3 surgeons at 2 high-volume centers from 2014 to 2021. Estimated probabilities of serious complications, reoperation, and readmission were derived from the MBSAQIP risk calculator. RA-CUSUM curves were generated to signal observed-to-expected odds ratios (ORs) of 1.5 (poor performance) and .5 (superior performance). Control limits were set based on a false positive rate of 5% (α = .05). RESULTS: We included 1192 patients: Surgeon A = 767, Surgeon B = 188, and Surgeon C = 237. Overall rates of serious complications, 30-day reoperations, and 30-day readmissions were 3.9%, 2.5%, and 5.2% respectively, with expected rates of 4.7%, 2.2%, and 5.8%. RA-CUSUM signaled lower-than-expected (OR < .5) rates of readmission and serious complication in Surgeon A, and higher-than-expected (OR > 1.5) readmission rate in Surgeon C. Surgeon A further demonstrated an early period of higher-than-expected (OR > 1.5) reoperation rate before April 2015, followed by superior performance thereafter (OR < .5). Surgeon B's performance generally reflected expected standards throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: RA-CUSUM adjusts for clinical risk factors and identifies performance outliers in real-time. This approach to analyzing surgical outcomes is applicable to quality improvement, root-cause analysis, and surgeon incentivization.

Comparison of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty versus surgical sleeve gastrectomy: a Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is an incisionless, transoral, restrictive bariatric procedure designed to imitate sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Comparative studies and large-scale population-based data are limited. Additionally, no studies have examined the impact of race on outcomes after ESG. This study aims to compare short-term outcomes of ESG with SG and evaluate racial effects on short-term outcomes after ESG. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed over 600,000 patients in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database from 2016 to 2020. We compared occurrences of adverse events (AEs), readmissions, reoperations, and reinterventions within 30 days after procedures. Multivariate regression evaluated the impact of patient factors, including race, on AEs. RESULTS: A total of 6054 patients underwent ESG and 597,463 underwent SG. AEs were low after both procedures with no significant difference in major AEs (SG vs ESG: 1.1% vs 1.4%; P > .05). However, patients undergoing ESG had more readmissions (3.8% vs 2.6%), reoperations (1.4% vs .8%), and reinterventions (2.8% vs .7%) within 30 days (P < .05). Race was not significantly associated with AEs after ESG, with black race associated with a higher risk of AEs in SG. CONCLUSIONS: ESG demonstrates a comparable major AE rate with SG. Race did not impact short-term AEs after ESG. Further prospective studies long-term studies are needed to compare ESG with SG.

Impact of Proceduralist Specialty on Outcomes Following Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty.

PURPOSE: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a novel minimally invasive weight loss procedure designed to mimic gastric volume reduction of surgical sleeve gastrectomy. Currently, both bariatric surgeons and gastroenterologists perform ESG, and early reports suggest that ESG is safe and effective for weight loss. However, as gastroenterologists and bariatric surgeons have variations in training backgrounds, it is important to evaluate for potential differences in clinical outcomes. To date, there are no studies comparing the impact of proceduralist specialization on outcomes of ESG. This study aims to assess whether proceduralist specialization impacts short-term safety and efficacy after ESG. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed over 6,000 patients who underwent ESG from 2016 to 2020 in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. ESG patients were stratified into two groups depending on the specialty of the physician performing the procedure, and propensity matched using baseline patient characteristics. We primarily compared adverse events (AE), readmissions, re-operations, and re-interventions within 30 days after procedure. Secondary outcomes included procedure time, length of stay (LOS), early weight loss, and emergency department (ED) visits after procedure. RESULTS: There was no difference in AE in ESG performed by gastroenterologists and bariatric surgeons. ESG performed by bariatric surgeons demonstrated a trend towards higher rate of re-operations within 30 days. ESG performed by gastroenterologists had more ED visits but did not lead to higher rate of re-intervention. LOS was shorter in ESG performed by gastroenterologists, but procedure time was longer. CONCLUSIONS: ESG is safely performed by both gastroenterologists and bariatric surgeons.

Errors in Surgery: A Case Control Study.

OBJECTIVE: While errors can harm patients they remain poorly studied. This study characterized errors in the care of surgical patients and examined the association of errors with morbidity and mortality. BACKGROUND: Errors have been reported to cause <10% or >60% of adverse events. Such discordant results underscore the need for further exploration of the relationship between error and adverse events. METHODS: Patients with operations performed at a single institution and abstracted into the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2018 were examined. This matched case control study comprised cases who experienced a postoperative morbidity or mortality. Controls included patients without morbidity or mortality, matched 2:1 using age (±10 years), sex, and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) group. Two faculty surgeons independently reviewed records for each case and control patient to identify diagnostic, technical, judgment, medication, system, or omission errors. A conditional multivariable logistic regression model examined the association between error and morbidity. RESULTS: Of 1899 patients, 170 were defined as cases who experienced a morbidity or mortality. The majority of cases (n=93; 55%) had at least 1 error; of the 329 matched control patients, 112 had at least 1 error (34%). Technical errors occurred most often among both cases (40%) and controls (23%). Logistic regression demonstrated a strong independent relationship between error and morbidity (odds ratio=2.67, 95% confidence interval: 1.64-4.35, P <0.001). CONCLUSION: Errors in surgical care were associated with postoperative morbidity. Reducing errors requires measurement of errors.

The SAGES MASTERS program presents the 10 seminal articles for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

BACKGROUND: One of the eight clinical pathways of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Masters Program is bariatric surgery which includes three anchoring procedures. For each anchoring procedure sentinel articles have been identified to enhance participant surgeon lifelong learning. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is one of the 3 anchoring procedures for the Bariatric Pathway. In this article we present the top 10 seminal articles regarding the RYGB which surgeons should be familiar with. METHODS: The literature was systematically searched to identify the most cited papers on RYGB. The SAGES Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery committee reviewed the most cited article list and using expert consensus selected the seminal articles that every bariatric surgeon should read. These articles were reviewed in detail by committee members and are presented here. RESULTS: The top 10 most cited sentinel papers on RYGB focus on operative safety, outcomes, surgical technique, and physiologic changes after the procedure. A summary of each paper is presented here, including expert appraisal and commentary. CONCLUSION: The seminal articles presented here have supported the widespread acceptance and use of the RYGB by bolstering the understanding of its mechanism of action and by demonstrating its safety and excellent patient outcomes. All bariatric surgeons should be familiar with these 10 landmark articles.

Compliance with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education duty hours in a general surgery residency program: Challenges and solutions in a teaching hospital.

BACKGROUND: The inception of work hour restrictions for resident physicians in 2003 created controversial changes within surgery training programs. On a recent Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education survey at our institution, we noted a discrepancy between low recorded violations of the duty hour restrictions and the surgery resident's perception of poor duty hour compliance. We sought to identify factors that lead to duty hour violations and to encourage accurate reporting among surgery trainees. METHODS: The A3/Lean methodology, an industry-derived, systematic, problem-solving approach, was used to investigate barriers to accurate reporting of duty hours by residents within the Department of Surgery at our academic institution. In partnership with our office of Graduate Medical Education, we encouraged a 6-month period where residents were asked to record duty hour accurately and to provide honest, descriptive explanations of violations without punitive effects on residents or the program. We performed a 6-month before-and-after analysis of duty hours violations after the A3/Lean implementation. Quantitative analysis was used to elucidate trends in violations by post graduate year and rotation. Qualitative evaluation by key thematic areas revealed resident attitudes and opinions about duty hour violations. RESULTS: Residents reported concern for personal and programmatic, punitive measures, desire to retain control of their education, and frustration with the administrative burden after violations as deterrents to honest duty hour reporting. The intervention was successful in changing logging behavior with 10 total violations prior to A3 meeting and 179 violations afterward (P = .003). This change was driven largely from an increase in short break violations (4 vs 134, P = .021). Analysis of violations revealed trends by post-graduate year, rotation, and weekend cross-coverage. Key findings including less than anticipated violations of the 80-hour work week despite high rates of short break violations. The ability to participate in procedures voluntarily and a sense of professional responsibility emerged as the prevailing themes among surgery residents describing violations. CONCLUSION: Systematic evaluation of duty hour reporting within a surgery training program can identify structural and cultural barriers to accurate reporting of duty hours. Accurate reporting can identify program-specific trends in duty hour violations that can be addressed though programmatic intervention.

Bariatric surgery reduces long-term rates of cardiac events and need for coronary revascularization: a propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Obesity and obesity-related comorbidities are associated with increased risk of coronary artery disease (CAD). Bariatric surgery results in durable weight loss and improvement in numerous CAD risk factors, yet limited data exist on CAD-related outcomes. We hypothesized that bariatric surgery would lead to decreased risk of CAD and reduced rates of coronary revascularization procedures. METHODS: All patients who underwent bariatric surgery at a single medical center from 1985 to 2015 were identified. A control population of morbidly obese patients who did not undergo bariatric surgery was identified using an institutional clinical data repository over the same study period, propensity score matched 1:1 on patient demographics and comorbidities including cardiac history. Univariate analyses were performed to compare outcomes in the surgery and non-surgery groups. RESULTS: A total of 3410 bariatric surgery patients and 45,750 non-surgical patients were identified. After 1:1 propensity-score matching, a total of 3242 patients in each group were found to be well balanced in baseline characteristics and risk factors. With a median follow-up of greater than 6 years, the surgery group had significantly lower rates of myocardial infarction (1.8% vs. 10.0%; RR 0.18), coronary catheterization (1.9% vs. 8.8%; RR 0.22), percutaneous coronary intervention (0.4% vs. 7.8%; RR 0.05), and coronary artery bypass grafting (0.6% vs. 2.3%; RR 0.26). Similar benefits were observed for subgroups of patients with and without diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery was associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of myocardial infarction as well as lower rates of coronary revascularization in a propensity-matched cohort of morbidly obese patients. Though the retrospective nature of this study may have introduced a degree of selection bias, these outcomes support increased utilization of bariatric surgery for the prevention of heart disease.

Bariatric surgery is associated with reduction in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis and hepatocellular carcinoma: A propensity matched analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Obesity is a risk factor for non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Bariatric surgery can provide durable weight-loss, but little is known about the later development of NASH and HCC after surgery. METHODS: Bariatric surgery (n = 3,410) and obese controls (n = 46,873) from an institutional data repository were propensity score matched 1:1 by demographics, comorbidities, BMI, and socioeconomic factors. Comparisons were made through paired univariate analysis and conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: Total of 4,112 patients were well matched with no significant baseline differences except initial BMI (49.0 vs 48.2, p = 0.04). Bariatric group demonstrated fewer new-onset NASH (6 0.0% vs 10.3%, p < 0.0001) and HCC (0.05% vs 0.34%, p = 0.03) over a median follow-up of 7.1 years. After risk-adjustment, bariatric surgery was independently associated with reduced development of NASH (OR 0.52, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery is associated with reduced incidence of NASH and HCC in this large propensity matched cohort. This further supports the use of bariatric surgery for morbidly obese patients to ameliorate NASH cirrhosis and development of HCC.

The impact of bariatric surgery on qualitative and quantitative breast density.

BACKGROUND: Obesity and breast density are associated with breast cancer in postmenopausal women. Bariatric surgery effectively treats morbid obesity, with sustainable weight loss and reductions in cancer incidence. We evaluated changes in qualitative and quantitative density; hypothesizing breast density would increase following bariatric surgery. METHODS: Women undergoing bariatric surgery from 1990 to 2015 were identified, excluding patients without a mammogram performed both before and after surgery. Changes in body mass index (BMI), time between mammograms and surgery, and American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) scores were assessed. VolparaDensity™ automated software calculated volumetric breast density (VBD), fibroglandular volume (FGV), and total breast volume for the 82 women with digital data available. Differences between pre- and postsurgery values were assessed. RESULTS: One hundred eighty women were included. Median age at surgery was 50.0 years, with 8.8 months between presurgery mammogram and surgery and 62.3 months between surgery and postsurgery mammogram. Median BMI significantly decreased over the study period (46.0 vs 35.4 kg/m2 ; P < 0.001). No change in BI-RADS scores was seen between the pre- and postsurgery mammograms. Eighty-two women had VolparaDensity™ data available. While VBD increased in these patients, FGV and total breast volume both decreased following bariatric surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Increased VBD, decreased FGV, and decreased total breast volume were seen following bariatric surgery-induced weight loss. There was no difference in qualitative breast density, highlighting the discrepancy between BI-RADS and VolparaDensity™ measurements. Further investigation will be required to determine how differential changes in components of breast density may affect breast cancer risk.

Socioeconomically Distressed Communities Associated With Long-term Mortality After Bariatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgical outcomes are affected by socioeconomic status, yet these factors are poorly accounted for in clinical databases. We sought to determine if the Distressed Communities Index (DCI), a composite ranking by zip code that quantifies socioeconomic risk, was associated with long-term survival after bariatric surgery. METHODS: All patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (1985-2004) at a single institution were paired with DCI. Scores range from 0 (no distress) to 100 (severe distress) and account for unemployment, education, poverty, median income, housing vacancies, job growth, and business establishment growth. Distressed communities, defined as DCI ≥75, were compared with all other patients. Regression modeling was used to evaluate the effect of DCI on 10-year bariatric outcomes, whereas Cox Proportional Hazards and Kaplan-Meier analysis examined long-term survival. RESULTS: Gastric bypass patients (n = 681) come from more distressed communities compared with the general public (DCI 60.5 ± 23.8 versus 50 ± 10; P < 0.0001). A total of 221 (32.3%) patients came from distressed communities (DCI ≥75). These patients had similar preoperative characteristics, including BMI (51.5 versus 51.7 kg/m2; P = 0.63). Socioeconomic status did not affect 10-year bariatric outcomes, including percent reduction in excess body mass index (57% versus 58%; P = 0.93). However, patients from distressed communities had decreased risk-adjusted long-term survival (hazard ratio, 1.38; P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with low socioeconomic status, as determined by the DCI, have equivalent outcomes after bariatric surgery despite worse long-term survival. Future quality improvement efforts should focus on these persistent disparities in health care.

Bariatric surgery is independently associated with a decrease in the development of colorectal lesions.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a risk factor for colorectal cancer and possibly the formation of precancerous, colorectal polyps . Bariatric surgery is very effective for long-term weight loss; however, it is not known whether bariatric surgery decreases the risk of subsequent colonic neoplasia. We hypothesized that bariatric surgery would decrease the risk of developing colorectal lesions (new cancer and precancerous polyps). METHODS: We reviewed all patients (n = 3,676) who underwent bariatric surgery (gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy, or gastric banding) at the University of Virginia (Charlottesville, VA) 1985-2015. Obese, nonoperative patients (n = 46,873) from an institutional data repository were included as controls. Cases and controls were propensity score matched 1:1 by demographics, comorbidities, body mass index, and socioeconomic factors. The matched cohort was compared by univariate analysis and conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 4,462 patients (2,231 per group) with a median follow-up of 7.8 years were well-matched with no statistically significant baseline differences in initial body mass index (48 vs 49 kg/m2), sex, and age in addition to other comorbidities (all P > .05). The operative cohort had more weight loss (55.5% vs -1.4% decrease in excess body mass index, P < .0001). The operative cohort developed fewer colorectal lesions (2.4% vs 4.8%, P < .0001). We observed no differences in polyp characteristics or staging for patients who developed cancer (all P > .05). After risk adjustment, bariatric surgery was independently associated with a decrease in new colorectal lesions (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.42-0.91, P = .016). CONCLUSION: Bariatric surgery was associated with lesser, risk-adjusted incidence of new colorectal lesions in this large population of propensity matched patients undergoing bariatric surgery compared with a control group not undergoing bariatric surgery. These results suggest the benefits of bariatric surgery may extend beyond weight loss and mitigation of comorbidities.

Investigating racial disparities in bariatric surgery referrals.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies investigating racial, socioeconomic, and/or insurance disparities with regard to access to care and outcomes in bariatric surgery have been performed with varying results. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to determine if racial or ethnic disparities exist in referral patterns for bariatric surgery at a single center. METHODS: An institutional, retrospective chart review from January 2012 through June 2017 was performed for patients meeting referral criteria to bariatric surgery. Data collection was limited to patients referred to the bariatric surgery clinic from on-site primary care clinics. RESULTS: In total, 4736 patients were eligible for bariatric surgery during the study period. Patients were 63.8% female (n = 3022), and 36.2% male (n = 1714); 53.9% white (n = 2553), 37.8% black (n = 1790), and 8.3% Hispanic (n = 393). Female patients were more likely to be referred than male patients (5.5% versus 4.1%, χ2 4.59, P = .032). On univariate comparison, Hispanic patients were less likely to be referred compared with black or white patients (2.0% versus 5.3% and 5.2%, χ2 7.88, P = .019). CONCLUSION: Hispanic patients were less likely to be referred at our institution for bariatric surgery compared with white or black patients. A barrier to referral may be explained by the disproportionate number of Hispanic patients that were designated as "self-pay" rather than private insurance or Medicaid/Medicare coverage that is required for bariatric surgery referral. This finding underscores the need for further research surrounding barriers to access to care for Hispanic patients.