Comparative analysis of 5-year efficacy and outcomes of single anastomosis procedures as revisional surgery for weight regain following sleeve gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: It is imperative to assess the results of revisional procedures following Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG), given the substantially growing population of patients who experience weight regain within a few years after undergoing this procedure. OBJECTIVE: Examine the comparative effectiveness of the Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass (SADI-S) and the One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB-MGB) as revisional procedures, with respect to their impact on weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, incidence of complications, and rates of reoperation in patients who had weight regain after SG with up to or more than 5 years of follow-up. SETTING: Hamad General Hospital, Academic tertiary referral center, Qatar. METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed a database of patients who underwent the Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Switch (SADI-S) or the One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass - Mini Gastric Bypass- (OAGB-MGB) as revisional procedures for weight recidivism after a primary Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG). The follow-up period was at least 5 years, during which the impact of both procedures on weight loss, comorbidities, nutritional deficiencies, complications, and outcomes were compared. RESULTS: The study comprised 91 patients, with 42 and 49 in the SADI-S and OAGB-MGB groups, respectively. Significant weight loss (measured by total weight loss percentage, TWL%) was observed at the 5-year follow-up for the SADI-S group compared to the OAGB-MGB group (30.0 ± 18.4 vs. 19.4 ± 16.3, p = 0.008). Remission of comorbidities, specifically diabetes mellitus and hypertension, was more prevalent in the SADI-S group. Notably, the OAGB-MGB group had a higher incidence of complications (28.6% vs. 21.42%) and reoperations (5 patients vs. 1 in the SADI-S group). No mortality events were reported in either group. CONCLUSION: While both the OAGB-MGB and SADI-S have demonstrated efficacy as revisional procedures for weight regain following SG, the SADI-S exhibits superior outcomes compared to the OAGB-MGB with regard to weight loss, resolution of comorbidities, complication rates, and reoperation rates.

One Anastomosis/Mini Gastric Bypass (OAGB-MGB) as revisional bariatric surgery after failed primary adjustable gastric band (LAGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG): A systematic review of 1075 patients.

BACKGROUND: One Anastomosis/Mini Gastric Bypass (OAGB-MGB) is rapidly gaining popularity and is now the third common bariatric procedure performed in the world. The aim of this review is to look at the role of this operation as a revisional bariatric surgery (RBS). METHODS: Literature review was performed following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) and the AMSTAR (Assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews) guidelines. Total 17 studies were eligible. RESULTS: This review reports cumulative results of 1075 revisional OAGB-MGB procedures. Primary procedures included gastric banding (LAGB), Sleeve gastrectomy (SG), vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) and gastric plication. The mean age was 43.1 years and female to male ratio was 3.04: 1. The body mass index (BMI) at primary procedure was 47.05 kg/m2. The mean BMI at revisional surgery was 41.6 kg/m2 (range 28-70.8). The mean time between the primary and the secondary operation was 46.5 months (3-264). The mean follow-up was 2.44 years (6-60 months). The mean operative time was 119.3 min. The mean length of hospital stay was 4.01 days (2-28). The median limb length was 200 cm (range 150-250 cm). Leak rate was 1.54%. Marginal ulcer rate was 2.44%. Anemia rate was 1.9%. Mortality was 0.3%. The excess weight loss (%EWL) at 1 year and 2 years was 65.2% and 68.5% respectively. CONCLUSION: We conclude that there is evidence to consider OAGB-MGB as a safe and effective choice for RBS. Randomised studies with long term follow-up are suggested for the future.

Management Options for Twisted Gastric Tube after Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy.

PURPOSE: This study aims to determine the incidence, etiology, and management options for symptomatic gastric obstruction caused by axially twisted sleeve gastrectomy. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we reviewed medical charts of all morbidly obese patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Patients who developed gastric obstruction symptoms and were diagnosed with twisted sleeve gastrectomy were identified and included in this study. RESULTS: From October 2005 to December 2015, there are 3634 morbidly obese patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Eighty-six (2.3%) patients developed symptoms of gastric obstruction. Forty-five (1.23%) patients were included in this study. The mean time of presentation was 59.8 days after surgery. Upper GI contrast study was done routinely, and it was positive for axial twist in 37 (82%) patients. Abdominal CT with oral and IV contrast was done in eight (18%) when swallow study was equivocal. Endoscopic treatment was successful in 43 patients (95.5%). Sixteen patients were successfully managed by endoscopic stenting, and 29 patients had balloon dilation. The average numbers of dilation sessions were 1.7. Out of these 29 patients, 18 responded well to a single session of dilatation and did not require any further dilatation sessions. Two patients who failed to respond to three subsequent sessions of balloon dilation underwent laparoscopic adhesiolysis and gastropexy. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic stenting is an effective tool in management of axial rotation of sleeved stomach. Balloon dilation can also be effective in selected cases. Few cases might require laparoscopic adhesiolysis and gastropexy.

Comparison of two specimen retrieval techniques in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: what is the role of endobag?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become a popular stand-alone treatment for morbid obesity. However, removal of the gastric specimen could be a challenging step due to its large size relative to the width of the trocar site. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare a simplified retrieval technique for extraction of the gastric specimen without an endobag with conventionally performed specimen retrieval using an endobag. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted recruiting patients undergoing LSG. Patient's demographics, preoperative characteristics, intra-operative, and postoperative variables were compared between the two groups according to the technique of gastric specimen removal. RESULTS: A total of 193 patients (60.6% female) were enrolled into case (n = 100) and control groups (n = 93). Mean ± SD age and BMI of patients were 35.64 ± 11.84 years and 47.28 ± 8.22 Kg/m2, respectively with no significant difference between groups. Median (25th, 75th inter-quartile), extraction time was significantly reduced in the non-endobag group compared to the endobag group (3.5 [2.5-4.5] min vs. 6.5 [3.4-8.2] min, p = 0.03).Patients of both groups had similar intra-operative and trocar site complications (hernia and wound infection) (3% for endobag group and 3.3 % for non-endobag group). The median (25-75% [IQR]) LOS was also comparable between endobag and non-endobag patients (3[2-3] vs. 3[2-4] days, p = 0.84). No difference was observed between the two groups for weight loss and comorbidity resolution. CONCLUSION: Non-endobag technique for gastric specimen retrieval is safe and feasible with substantial saving in operative time and comparable intra-operative and postoperative outcomes to the conventional retrieval technique.

Efficacy of First-Time Intragastric Balloon in Weight Loss: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: The intragastric balloon (IGB) is an adjunctive treatment for obesity. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IGB treatment by reviewing randomized controlled trials (RCTs). METHODS: A total of 20 RCTs involving 1195 patients were identified. Weight loss results before and after 3 months were analyzed separately. The weight loss results of patients with and without IGB treatment were compared. RESULTS: Our meta-analysis calculated the following significant effect sizes: 1.59 and 1.34 kg/m2 for overall and 3-month BMI loss, respectively; 14.25 and 11.16 % for overall and >3-month percentage of excess weight loss, respectively; 4.6 and 4.77 kg for overall and 3-month weight loss, respectively; and 2.81, 1.62, and 4.09 % for overall, 3-month, and >3-month percent of weight loss, respectively. A significant effect size was calculated that favored fluid-filled IGBs over air-filled IGBs. Flatulence (8.75 vs. 3.89 %, p = 0.0006), abdominal fullness (6.32 vs. 0.55 %, p = 0.001), abdominal pain (13.86 vs. 7.2 %, p = 0.0001), abdominal discomfort (4.37 vs. 0.55 %, p = 0.006), and gastric ulcer (12.5 vs. 1.2 %, p < 0.0001) were significantly more prevalent among IGB patients than among non-IGB control patients. No mortality was reported from IGB treatment. CONCLUSION: IGB treatment, in addition to lifestyle modification, is an effective short-term modality for weight loss. However, there is not sufficient evidence confirming its safety or long-term efficacy.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in patients with abdominoplasty: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Abdominoplasty is increasingly performed after weight loss surgery. However, performing a laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) after abdominoplasty poses technical challenges. OBJECTIVE: The present study aimed to compare operative events and postoperative outcomes between LSG patients with and without a history of prior abdominoplasty. SETTING: University hospital, Qatar. METHODS: A case-control study was conducted on 2 groups of patients with (n = 33) and without (n = 69) prior abdominoplasty who underwent LSG. Patient demographics, baseline characteristics, as well as operative and postoperative events were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients with an average age of 39.6±7.7 years and body mass index (BMI) of 42.8±5.9 kg/m2 were included. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of demographic characteristics, preoperative BMI, and co-morbidities. The number of ports required was significantly higher in the LSG patients with a history of prior abdominoplasty than in the nonabdominoplasty patients. The operation time was also significantly longer in the abdominoplasty patients than in the nonabdominoplasty patients (90.3±36.7 minutes versus 57.1±17.7 minutes; P<.0001). However, no significant differences were observed in terms of postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and weight loss results. CONCLUSION: LSG after abdominoplasty is associated with longer operative times and the need for additional port placement to overcome the decreased working space. However, operative strategies should be considered to overcome the technical challenges during LSG in patients who underwent a prior abdominoplasty.

Bariatric manipulation of gastric arteries: A systematic review on the potential concept for treatment of obesity.

BACKGROUND: Gastric artery embolization (GAE) has recently received attention as a minimally invasive intervention in bariatric setting. AIMS: The current systematic review aimed to gather and categorizes the existing data in the literature regarding bariatric gastric artery manipulation. This will highlight the importance of this potential concept as a therapeutic modality. METHODS: A PubMed/Medline search was conducted to identify animal and human studies investigating the effect of gastric artery manipulation on weight, ghrelin, obesity, and tissue adiposity. RESULTS: A total of 9 studies including 6 animal experiments with 71 subjects and 3 human studies with a total of 25 patients were retrieved. Animal subjects underwent chemical embolization while particle embolization was only used in human subjects. Five animal studies and 1 human study reported decreased ghrelin concentration. Three animal experiments and 2 human studies showed a significant weight change following GAE. There was no report regarding a serious adverse event requiring surgical or interventional management. CONCLUSION: Currently, data regarding the potential role of gastric artery manipulation in decreasing the ghrelin and potential weight loss is scarce.