Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease after Sleeve Gastrectomy: Effectiveness of Medical, Endoscopic, and Surgical Therapies.

Introduction: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has become the most frequently performed bariatric operation in the United States. One of the main disadvantages of this procedure is the risk of developing gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) after the operation. We aimed to analyze different approaches for the treatment of GERD after SG. Methods: A literature review was performed to identify all possible treatment options for post-SG GERD. All the studies were assessed for full eligibility by manual assessment of their aims, methodology, results, and conclusions. Records were individually reviewed by the authors comparing outcomes and complications between procedures. Results: Although some studies have shown improvement or even resolution of GERD symptoms after SG, most patients develop or worsen symptoms. Lifestyle modifications along with medical therapy should be started on patients with GERD after SG. For those who are refractory to medication, endoscopic and surgical therapies can be offered. Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is consistently effective in treatment of GERD and is the ideal therapy in patients with associated insufficient weight loss. Endoscopic and alternative surgical procedures are also available and have shown acceptable short-term outcomes. Conclusions: Several treatment options exist for the treatment of GERD after SG. Although conversion to RYGB remains the most effective therapy, other emerging endoscopic and surgical procedures could avoid the potential morbidity of this procedure and should be further evaluated. An evidence-based algorithm for the management of GERD after SG is proposed to guide decision making.

Prevalence of extra-intestinal symptoms according to irritable bowel syndrome subtype.

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) is a functional disorder commonly associated with extra-intestinal symptoms. However, the prevalence of these symptoms according to IBS subtype is not well established. AIM: To compare the prevalence of extra-intestinal symptoms among patients with different subtypes of IBS. METHODS: A descriptive cross-sectional study including patients with IBS according to Rome IV criteria was performed between July 2022 and April 2023. Patients were classified according their subtype of IBS: IBS-D (diarrhea-predominant), IBS-C (constipation-predominant), and IBS-M (mixed bowel habits). Patients completed the IBS severity scoring system questionnaire (IBS-SSS) to determine severity of IBS symptoms and patient health questionnaire- 9 (PHQ-9) to define presence and severity of depressive symptoms. The prevalence of reported extra-intestinal symptoms was also assessed and compared between groups. KEY RESULTS: A total of 4862 patients with IBS were included; 608 IBS-D (12.5%), 1978 IBS-C (40.7%), and 2276 IBS-M (46.8%). Patients with IBS-C had significantly lower IBS-symptoms severity (mean IBS-SSS 290 vs. 310 and 320 for IBS-D and IBS-M, respectively, p = 0.03). The prevalence of obesity was also significantly lower in these patients (17.1% vs. 30.9% IBS-D and 27.9% IBS-M, p = 0.0001). Patients with IBS-D showed a significantly higher prevalence of food intolerance perception (9.5%, p = 0.03), history of cholecystectomy (17.8%, p = 0.03), and fecal incontinence (36.2%, p = 0.0001) as compared to the other groups. Patients with IBS-M had significantly higher mean PHQ-9 score (12.7 vs. 11.1 IBS-D and 10.5 IBS-C, p = 0.001) and prevalence of depressive symptoms (80.0%, p = 0.01). Patients with IBS-M also had higher prevalence of extra-intestinal symptoms such as arthralgia (62.4%, p = 0.0001), extremity numbness (64.5%, p = 0.0001), atopic dermatitis (28.2%, p = 0.02), and chronic cervicalgia (81.0%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES: The prevalence of most extra-intestinal symptoms is higher among patients with IBS-M. Further research is needed to better characterize IBS subtypes, which could potentially help refining tailored therapeutic strategies.

MAGNETIC SPHINCTER AUGMENTATION DEVICE FOR GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE: EFFECTIVE, BUT POSTOPERATIVE DYSPHAGIA AND RISK OF EROSION SHOULD NOT BE UNDERESTIMATED. A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic ring (MSA) implantation in the esophagus is an alternative surgical procedure to fundoplication for the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. AIMS: The aim of this study was to analyse the effectiveness and safety of magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). METHODS: A systematic literature review of articles on MSA was performed using the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (Medline) database between 2008 and 2021, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A random-effect model was used to generate a pooled proportion with 95% confidence interval (CI) across all studies. RESULTS: A total of 22 studies comprising 4,663 patients with MSA were analysed. Mean follow-up was 27.3 (7-108) months. The weighted pooled proportion of symptom improvement and patient satisfaction were 93% (95%CI 83-98%) and 85% (95%CI 78-90%), respectively. The mean DeMeester score (pre-MSA: 34.6 vs. post-MSA: 8.9, p=0.03) and GERD-HRQL score (pre-MSA: 25.8 vs. post-MSA: 4.4, p<0.0001) improved significantly after MSA. The proportion of patients taking proton pump inhibitor (PPIs) decreased from 92.8 to 12.4% (p<0.0001). The weighted pooled proportions of dysphagia, endoscopic dilatation and gas-related symptoms were 18, 13, and 3%, respectively. Esophageal erosion occurred in 1% of patients, but its risk significantly increased for every year of MSA use (odds ratio - OR 1.40, 95%CI 1.11-1.77, p=0.004). Device removal was needed in 4% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although MSA is a very effective treatment modality for GERD, postoperative dysphagia is common and the risk of esophageal erosion increases over time. Further studies are needed to determine the long-term safety of MSA placement in patients with GERD.

Colorectal Cancer Prevention: Is Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer (Chat GPT) ready to Assist Physicians in Determining Appropriate Screening and Surveillance Recommendations?

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a publicly available advanced language model could help determine appropriate colorectal cancer (CRC) screening and surveillance recommendations. BACKGROUND: Poor physician knowledge or inability to accurately recall recommendations might affect adherence to CRC screening guidelines. Adoption of newer technologies can help improve the delivery of such preventive care services. METHODS: An assessment with 10 multiple choice questions, including 5 CRC screening and 5 CRC surveillance clinical vignettes, was inputted into chat generative pretrained transformer (ChatGPT) 3.5 in 4 separate sessions. Responses were recorded and screened for accuracy to determine the reliability of this tool. The mean number of correct answers was then compared against a control group of gastroenterologists and colorectal surgeons answering the same questions with and without the help of a previously validated CRC screening mobile app. RESULTS: The average overall performance of ChatGPT was 45%. The mean number of correct answers was 2.75 (95% CI: 2.26-3.24), 1.75 (95% CI: 1.26-2.24), and 4.5 (95% CI: 3.93-5.07) for screening, surveillance, and total questions, respectively. ChatGPT showed inconsistency and gave a different answer in 4 questions among the different sessions. A total of 238 physicians also responded to the assessment; 123 (51.7%) without and 115 (48.3%) with the mobile app. The mean number of total correct answers of ChatGPT was significantly lower than those of physicians without [5.62 (95% CI: 5.32-5.92)] and with the mobile app [7.71 (95% CI: 7.39-8.03); P < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Large language models developed with artificial intelligence require further refinements to serve as reliable assistants in clinical practice.

Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Pathophysiology and Management.

Introduction: Patients with obesity are often affected by gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is considered the ideal operation for patients with severe obesity and GERD. Although the majority of patients improve their reflux with the operation, some might persist symptomatic and others can even develop de novo GERD. The aim of this study was to determine pathophysiologic factors involved in the development of GERD after RYGB surgery and define potential treatments for this condition. Materials and Methods: Studies including patients with GERD before and after RYGB and/or analyzing possible GERD therapies were analyzed by the authors. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases. Results: GERD can persist, worsen, or develop after RYGB. There are certain technical elements of the operation identified as potential risk factors for GERD. Medical therapy is effective in the majority of patients. Both endoscopic and surgical procedures can also help resolving GERD after RYGB. Conclusions: Although the majority of patients with GERD after RYGB can be effectively managed with medical therapy, some may require endoscopic or surgical treatment. Critical technical elements of RYGB should be considered to reduce the risk of postoperative GERD.

Strengths and weaknesses of telemedicine: Survey analysis in a single center bariatric surgery program.

BACKGROUND: Despite Telemedicine being considered by most patients as the preferred follow-up method, bariatric surgery programs that include virtual consults still exhibit high attrition rates. This study analyzed the strengths and weaknesses of telemedicine in a single-center bariatric surgery program. METHODS: We developed a 5-minute, 10-question online survey via Qualtrics and examined the results between 108 patients under telehealth visits by the bariatric team at the University of Illinois at Chicago from August to November 2022. RESULTS: Most patients reported telehealth utilization was easy (91%). Virtual visits were chosen as the preferred method for follow-up (88%), while avoidance of having to take time off work/school was mentioned as the leading reason. However, a small fraction (6%) considered that connecting with the bariatric team took some time/effort. CONCLUSION: Telemedicine is a fundamental tool to overcome several barriers that hinder access to obesity treatment among patients. Understanding its weaknesses will increase compliance with bariatric surgery programs.

Impact of an Educational Mobile App on Inflammatory Bowel Disease Colonoscopy Report Quality.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate endoscopic assessment of disease activity might lead to suboptimal treatment of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). AIMS: We aimed to determine if the implementation of an educational mobile app could help improving the quality of colonoscopy reports in patients with IBD. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed a consecutive series of colonoscopy reports in patients with IBD during the period 2016-2023. The sample was divided into two groups: before and after the implementation of an educational mobile app (JEDII app ™). The main outcome was the inclusion of validated activity assessment scoring systems and previously stablished reporting required elements. RESULTS: A total of 883 IBD colonoscopy reports were included for analysis; 621 (70.3%) procedures were performed before the implementation of the app and 262 (29.7%) after. An IBD scoring system was included in 201 (32.4%) and 148 (56.5%) colonoscopy reports before and after the adoption of the mobile app, respectively (p < 0.001). The mean number of recommended elements for quality IBD colonoscopy reporting was significantly increased after the app implementation (4.3 vs. 1.9, p < 0.001). Diagnosis of ulcerative colitis, gastroenterologist as endoscopist, endoscopist with IBD clinical interest, and the implementation of the educational mobile app were independently associated with the inclusion of an IBD score in the colonoscopy report. CONCLUSION: The inclusion of scoring systems and recommended elements for quality IBD colonoscopy report significantly increased after the implementation of an educational mobile app. E-health technologies should be further explored to improve quality of care in patients with IBD.

Management of Long-Segment Barrett's Esophagus.

Background: Gastroesophageal reflux disease is a common gastrointestinal disorder with one of its most feared complications being Barrett's esophagus (BE). Currently, most of the recommendations of BE management are driven by the level of dysplasia. However, the length of BE might also be related to the risk of dysplasia/malignant transformation. We aimed to determine the appropriate management of BE based on its length. Materials and Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted with searches made on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Long-segment BE (LSBE) was defined as 3 cm or longer and short-segment BE (SSBE) as under 3 cm. Studies evaluating the behavior and management of SSBE and/or LSBE were included for analysis. Results: LSBE have greater risk of dysplasia or progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma compared to SSBE. Despite this greater risk, LSBE and SSBE are currently managed similarly based on the presence and degree of dysplasia. Endoscopic and ablative techniques may have higher level of success and less complications in SSBE, compared to LSBE. Decreasing time interval between surveillance may be a viable option for managing LSBE. Conclusions: Although many algorithms of monitoring and treatment of BE remain the same regardless of segment length, current evidence suggests that more aggressive management for LSBE might be needed due to its higher risk of malignant progression.

Postoperative Follow-up Compliance: The Achilles' Heel of Bariatric Surgery.

Regular postoperative follow-up appointments are critical for assessing the effectiveness of the operation and ensuring adequate nutrition, as well as for prompt identification of any complications. In this study, we aimed to determine compliance to follow-up appointments after bariatric surgery and examine factors associated with compliance. We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent bariatric surgery at the University of Illinois at Chicago between January 1st 2019 and December 30th 2019. Demographics, socio-economic variables (type of insurance, education, income, distance to hospital), type of consultation (in person vs. telehealth), and type of surgery were ascertained. Follow-up rates at the 3-month, 6-month, 12-month and 24-month visits were 61.9%, 41.2%, 29.6%, and 6.5%, respectively. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, White patients (OR 5.13 95% CI 2.03-12.95) and those using telehealth (OR 5.84, 95% CI 3.01 - 11.38) were significantly more likely to be compliant with follow-up. Strategies for improving patient adherence to postoperative follow-up are needed, particularly among persons from racial/ethnic minority backgrounds who also experience both a disparately high burden of severe obesity and poor access to quality care.

Current standards of lymphadenectomy in gastric cancer.

Gastric cancer remains the 5th most common cancer and the 3rd most common cause of cancer mortality. Most patients diagnosed with gastric cancer still have a poor prognosis due to its advanced presentation at diagnosis, even in countries with developed screening programs. Surgery is the cornerstone of the treatment for gastric cancer, often combined with perioperative chemotherapy. Lymph node dissection is a crucial component of the surgical treatment of gastric cancer. D1 lymphadenectomy is currently recommended for early stage tumors. The extent of lymphadenectomy in advanced gastric cancer, however, is still a matter of debate between Eastern and Western surgeons. Although a D2 dissection is the current standard recommended by most guidelines, there might be a place for more limited dissections such as D1 + in selected cases. This evidence-based review will help defining the optimal lymphadenectomy for patients with gastric cancer.

Sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis for perforated diverticulitis with peritonitis: To divert or not to divert-A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The role of proximal diversion in patients undergoing sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis for diverticulitis with generalized peritonitis is unclear. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis and sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with a proximal diversion in perforated diverticulitis with diffuse peritonitis. METHOD: A systematic literature search on sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis and sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with proximal diversion for diverticulitis with diffuse peritonitis was conducted in the Medline and EMBASE databases. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies reporting the primary outcome of interest (30-day mortality) were included. Secondary outcomes were major morbidity, anastomotic leak, reoperation, stoma nonreversal rates, and length of hospital stay. A meta-analysis of proportions and linear regression models were used to assess the effect of each procedure on the different outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies involving 544 patients (sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis: 287 versus sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with proximal diversion: 257) were included. Thirty-day mortality (odds ratio 1.12, 95% confidence interval 0.53-2.40, P = .76), major morbidity (odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval 0.80-2.44, P = .24), anastomotic leak (odds ratio 0.34, 95% confidence interval 0.099-1.20, P = .10), reoperation (odds ratio 0.49, 95% confidence interval 0.17-1.46, P = .20), and length of stay (sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis: 12.1 vs resection and primary anastomosis with diverting ileostomy: 15 days, P = .44) were similar between groups. The risk of definitive stoma was significantly lower after sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis (odds ratio 0.05, 95% confidence interval 0.006-0.35, P = .003). CONCLUSION: Sigmoid resection and primary anastomosis with or without proximal diversion have similar postoperative outcomes in selected patients with diverticulitis and diffuse peritonitis. However, further randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these results.

Esophageal high-resolution manometry demands visual interpretation in addition to mathematical software-based analysis.

PURPOSE: Esophageal high-resolution manometry (HRM) revolutionized esophageal function testing due to the intuitive colorful and agreeable-to-the-eyes plots (Clouse plots). HRM execution and interpretation is guided by the Chicago Classification. The well-established metrics for interpretation allows a reliable automatic software analysis. Analysis based on these mathematical parameters, however, ignores the valuable visual interpretation unique to human eyes and based on expertise. METHODS: We compiled some situations where visual interpretation added useful information for HRM interpretation. RESULTS: Visual interpretation may be useful in cases of hypomotility, premature waves, artifacts, segmental abnormalities of peristalsis, and extra-luminal non-contractile findings. CONCLUSION: These extra findings can be reported apart from the conventional parameters.