Robotic gastric bypass may lead to fewer complications compared with laparoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Robotic technology leads to improved visualization and precision over laparoscopy but also higher cost of care. The benefits of this technology to patient outcomes are controversial. Our objective was to assess whether the application of robotic surgery to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) would lead to improved patient outcomes. METHODS: A prospectively collected database at a bariatric center of excellence was reviewed for all RYGB procedures performed by one surgeon between 2007 and 2015. Procedures performed laparoscopically (transoral circular stapling technique) versus robotically (hand-sewn anastomosis) were compared; the transition in technique occurred in 2011. Patient demographics, baseline weight, BMI, operation duration, estimated blood loss (EBL), length of hospital stay (LOS), morbidity and mortality, and percent excess weight loss (%EWL) at 1-year follow-up were compared between groups. Morbidity up to 1-year postop was assessed using the Clavien-Dindo classification. RESULTS: Of 246 patients, 125 underwent robotic and 121 laparoscopic RYGB. Patients in the robotic group were older and heavier but achieved similar  %EWL to the laparoscopic group. The operative duration was longer but the mean patient LOS was shorter with the robotic approach. There were no leaks and no mortality. Based on the Clavien-Dindo classification, fewer overall and fewer severe complications occurred in the robotic compared with the laparoscopic approach. CONCLUSION: In our experience, the use of robotic technology for the creation of gastric bypass led to longer operative times, similar %EWL but decreased LOS and number and severity of complications compared with the laparoscopic approach. Since our findings may have been influenced by the type of anastomotic technique used with each approach they need confirmation by a controlled trial.

Impact of Bariatric Surgery on Hiatal Hernia Repair Outcomes.

Large hiatal hernias are notorious for their high recurrence rates after conventional repair. Recurrence rates have been described to be higher in obese patients due to increased intra-abdominal pressure. We hypothesized that patients who undergo hiatal hernia repair (HHR) with bariatric surgery (BAR) will have a lower hernia recurrence rate when compared to patients who undergo HHR with fundoplication (FP) due to the decrease in intra-abdominal pressure observed with weight loss. This was an Institutional Review Board approved retrospective review. The outcomes of patients who underwent HHR+BAR as well as patients who had HHR+FP only from 2007 to 2014 were reviewed. Patients who had small hiatal hernias (<2 cm), underwent an anterior repair, or had gastropexy only were excluded. The primary outcome was hernia recurrence and reflux resolution. The outcomes of 58 patients who had HHR+BAR were compared with 30 patients with HHR+FP. Hernia recurrence rate for HHR+BAR was 12 per cent, whereas hernia recurrence rate for HHR+FP was 38 per cent (P < 0.01). Reflux resolution for HHR+FP was 78 per cent, whereas reflux improvement rate for HHR+BAR was 84 per cent (P = n.s.). Combining HHR with BAR leads to a lower hernia recurrence rate when compared to patients who undergo HHR with FP.

How frequently and when do patients undergo cholecystectomy after bariatric surgery?

BACKGROUND: Rapid weight loss after bariatric surgery is associated with gallstone formation, and cholecystectomy is required in up to 15% of patients. Prophylactic cholecystectomy or prophylactic ursodiol administration in the postoperative period have been suggested to address this problem. The objectives of this study were to investigate the frequency and timing of cholecystectomies after bariatric surgery and to determine the associated risk factors in patients who underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB), or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). METHODS: Data prospectively collected in an institutional database were analyzed. Differences among the 3 procedures and the effects of ursodiol administration, patient demographic characteristics, postoperative weight loss, and individual surgeon practices on cholecystectomy rates were examined. Survival analysis and proportional hazard models were used. RESULTS: Of 1398 patients, 109 (7.8%) underwent cholecystectomy with a median follow-up of 49 (range 12-103) months. Cholecystectomy frequency was 10.6% after LRYGB, significantly higher than 2.9% after LAGB (P < .001), and 3.5% after LSG (P = .004). The frequency was highest within the first 6 months (3.7%), but declined over time to < 1% per year after 3 years. Ursodiol administration did not affect cholecystectomy rates (P = .97), and significant intersurgeon variability was noted. Excess weight loss (EWL)>25% within the first 3 months was the strongest predictor of postoperative cholecystectomy (P<.001). Cox hazards model revealed 1.25 odds ratio per 10% EWL within 3 months, and odds ratio .77 per decade of life. In addition, white patients had 1.45 times higher cholecystectomy rates than did black patients. Preoperative body mass index, gender, and surgeon did not affect cholecystectomy rates. CONCLUSION: Bariatric surgery is associated with a low frequency of postoperative cholecystectomy, which is highest early after surgery and mainly determined by the amount of EWL within the first 3 months. The results of the present study do not support routine prophylactic cholecystectomy at the time of bariatric surgery in asymptomatic patients.

Duodenal- jejunal bypass sleeve: a totally endoscopic device for the treatment of morbid obesity.

Morbid obesity affects over 15 million people in the United States. Nonsurgical management produces sustained weight loss in less than 5% of patients. Despite associated comorbidities, less than 1% of obese patients seek surgical intervention. Less invasive procedures have been developed with varying success. The Endobarrier( trade mark) (GI Dynamics(trade mark), Watertown, MA) duodenal-jejunal bypass sleeve is a totally endoscopically delivered device designed to produce weight loss in the morbidly obese. We describe the first placement of a duodenal-jejunal bypass sleeve in a patient in the United States. A blinded, randomized, prospective clinical trial was approved by the Food and Drug Administration to evaluate safety and efficacy of a novel device for weight loss in the obese. The first patient enrolled was a 36-year-old woman with body mass index of 45.2. After informed consent, endoscopic placement of the device under general anesthesia was performed using fluoroscopy to confirm positioning. The device was placed without complications. At conclusion of the 3-month study period, the device was removed endoscopically. Total weight lost by the patient was 9.09 kg. Described herein is the first deployment of the duodenal-jejunal bypass sleeve in North America. The device is delivered in a totally endoscopic manner in morbidly obese patients. In our patient, total weight loss at 3 months was 9.09 kg. Continued follow-up and enrollment is ongoing to demonstrate patient safety and efficacy. Additional studies are being performed to elucidate mechanism of weight loss and future clinical applications of this device.

Colonoscopic perforations: incidence, management, and outcomes.

Fiberoptic colonoscopy provides superior diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities in the treatment of lower gastrointestinal disease processes. A well-recognized, but uncommon, complication during the procedure is perforation. The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of colonoscopic perforation, define risk factors, assess the management of these complications, and evaluate outcomes. From January 1997 through December 2003, 43,609 colonoscopies were performed in our medical center. There were 14 (0.032%) perforations (1 in 3115 procedures); 7 from diagnostic and 7 from therapeutic procedures. General surgeons performed 1243 procedures (2.9%), and their rate of perforation was 0.080 per cent compared with 0.031 per cent for gastroenterologists during the same period. Half of the perforations occurred in the rectosigmoid, and the most common mechanism was mechanical (n = 6). Perforation was identified immediately during endoscopy in 50 per cent of the patients. Thirteen of 14 perforations were treated within 24 hours; 1 was delayed 48 hours. Initial surgical management was undertaken in 11/14 patients. Initial nonoperative treatment was attempted in three and was successful in only one patient. The mean length of stay following perforation was 11.2 days (range, 4-36 days). Three patients (21.4%) had 7 postoperative complications. Colonoscopic perforations are uncommon but can be recognized early and managed surgically with acceptable morbidity and postoperative length of stay.