Gastrointestinal symptoms and patient satisfaction more than 1 year after laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication.

BACKGROUND: Symptoms from poorly controlled gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) such as heartburn and regurgitation often resolve after laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. Unfortunately, new gastrointestinal symptoms such as bloating may occur for some patients. Accurate data regarding the gastrointestinal symptoms experienced by patients who have had a laparoscopic fundoplication may help patients to make more informed decisions about pursuing surgery for their reflux disease. METHODS: Patients more than 12 months after a laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication were mailed symptom surveys. Before surgery, all the patients had medically refractory esophageal symptoms (heartburn, regurgitation, or both). Surveys included the Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index (GIQLI) and questions regarding satisfaction, reintervention, and medication use. Responses for individual GIQLI items were evaluated to determine the gastrointestinal symptoms experienced by fundoplication patients and the relationship of these symptoms to patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Of the 76 patients eligible for inclusion in the survey, 48 returned complete surveys (63%). The mean time since surgery was 28±9 months. No patient experienced frequent regurgitation, and few (10%) reported frequent heartburn at follow-up assessment. No patient required redo fundoplication during the follow-up period. Acid reduction medications were resumed by 25% of the patients, but not all of these patients resumed medications for recurrent GERD symptoms (15% total). After surgery, frequent bloating (21%) and excessive flatus (46%) were often noted. Satisfaction with the results of surgery was high, including 83% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Few patients report frequent regurgitation or heartburn after laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. Although some patients resume acid reduction medications, many do so for reasons other than recurrent GERD symptoms. Most fundoplication patients are quite satisfied with the symptomatic results of surgery, although frequent functional gastrointestinal symptoms are common.

Vitamin D status of morbidly obese bariatric surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: Abnormal vitamin D levels are common in bariatric surgery patients. The incidence of deficiencies and the response to therapy is not accurately delineated. The purpose of this study was to define the vitamin D status of patients who undergo either a malabsorptive (gastric bypass) or restrictive (adjustable gastric band) bariatric surgery both prior to and after surgery. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients to undergo bariatric surgery from July 2002 to February 2007. Serum levels of vitamin D (Vit D), parathyroid hormone (PTH), and calcium were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 45 y; 82% of patients were women. Of 127 total patients, 84% were Vit D deficient preoperatively. These patients had a higher preoperative body mass index (BMI) than those with normal Vit D levels on initial assessment (BMI 44 versus 50 kg/m(2), P < 0.01). A correlation was found between preoperative BMI and Vit D (r(2) = 0.12, P < 0.01) and PTH levels (r(2) = 0.07, P < 0.01). One year following gastric bypass surgery, 20% of patients with elevated PTH levels had normal Vit D levels. The incidence of observed deficiencies for adjustable gastric band versus gastric bypass did not differ statistically at any interval. CONCLUSIONS: Morbidly obese patients seeking bariatric surgery are often deficient in Vit D, a fact that should be accounted for when evaluating the impact of bariatric surgery on Vit D levels. Elevated BMI and increasing degrees of obesity may be risk factors for both Vit D deficiency and secondary hyperparathyroidism. Despite normal Vit D levels, some gastric bypass patients continue to show elevated levels of PTH.

Preoperative predictors of significant symptomatic response after 1 year of gastric electrical stimulation for gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND: In cases of gastroparesis where significant symptoms fail to respond to standard medical therapy, gastric electrical stimulation (GES) may be of benefit. Unfortunately, not all patients improve with this therapy. Reliable preoperative predictors of symptomatic response to GES may allow clinicians to offer this expensive and invasive treatment to only those patients most likely to benefit. METHODS: Therapy was initiated in 15 patients more than 12 months prior to this retrospective review of our prospectively maintained data. All patients completed a Total Symptom Score (TSS) survey at every encounter as well as the SF-36 quality-of-life instrument prior to surgery. A failure of GES therapy was considered to have occurred when after 1 year of treatment, preoperative TSS had not decreased by at least 20%. RESULTS: Four patients (4 idiopathic) failed to improve more than 20% on multiple assessments after a year of therapy. All diabetic patients experienced a durable symptomatic improvement with GES. Review of individual items of the TSS revealed that nonresponders experienced less severe vomiting preoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetic gastroparesis patients respond best to GES. Responders tend to have more severe vomiting preoperatively. Patients with idiopathic gastroparesis who do not experience severe vomiting should be cautioned about a potentially higher rate of poor response to GES and may be better served with alternative treatments.

Gastric electrical stimulation is an effective and safe treatment for medically refractory gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND: Gastroparesis is characterized by delayed gastric emptying in the absence of obstruction. Common symptoms include nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. Severe gastroparesis can result in recurrent hospitalizations, malnutrition, and even death. Gastric electrical stimulation (GES) is a low morbidity treatment that may be effective in patients who are refractory to medical therapy. METHODS: For a period of more than 35 months, 19 GES systems were implanted laparoscopically for refractory gastroparesis of diabetic (DG, n = 10), idiopathic (IG, n = 6), or postsurgical (PSG, n = 3) etiology. Total gastroparesis symptom scores (TSS) and weekly vomiting frequency were assessed. Gastric emptying studies were attained preoperatively and after 6 months. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 38 weeks. There were no major complications. Within 6 weeks, frequency of vomiting decreased in 75% of DG (6/8) and 100% of IG (4/4) patients. No PSG patient complained of vomiting preoperatively. Mean TSS scores improved significantly at all intervals out to 1 year. Gastric emptying studies normalized in 80% of DG patients but in only 1 of the 6 patients with gastroparesis due to other causes. CONCLUSION: GES therapy can lead to improvement in symptoms of gastroparesis and frequency of vomiting within 6 weeks. This therapy is a low morbidity treatment option that may help patients whose symptoms fail to improve with medical therapy.

Impact of routine and long-term follow-up on weight loss after laparoscopic gastric bypass.

BACKGROUND: Weight loss after gastric bypass varies among patients. It is difficult to maintain contact with patients who have undergone surgery several years previously. Continued and long-term follow-up care at a bariatric surgery clinic might be a factor affecting long-term excess weight loss (EWL). METHODS: Patients with 3-4 years of follow-up data after laparoscopic gastric bypass were included in this retrospective analysis. The patients were divided into 3 groups: group 1 patients had attended every scheduled postoperative appointment, group 2 patients had attended every appointment for 1 year before being lost to follow-up, and group 3 patients had been lost to follow-up before 1 year. Comparisons were made to determine the relationship between the length of follow-up and EWL. RESULTS: We identified 34 group 1 patients and 51 group 2 or 3 patients of 130 patients eligible to be included as determined by their date of surgery. The interval since surgery was similar at approximately 3 years. Although the EWL did not differ at 1 year of follow-up (mean EWL 70% for group 1 versus 65% for group 2, P >.05), a significant difference in the EWL was observed at 3-4 years (74% for group 1 versus 61% for group 2 versus 56% for group 3; P <.05). The distance traveled to the clinic was similar for all 3 groups. The most common explanation for missed follow-up appointments was a lack of insurance coverage. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic gastric bypass patients who attended all scheduled follow-up appointments experienced greater long-term weight loss than those who did not. On-going, multidisciplinary care is likely a critical component in maintaining the benefit after surgery. Patients must be encouraged to continue to attend their bariatric medical appointments, and payors should provide coverage for these visits.

The impact of perioperative dexmedetomidine infusion on postoperative narcotic use and duration of stay after laparoscopic bariatric surgery.

Dexmedetomidine (Precedex, Hospira, Lake Forest, IL) is an alpha-2 receptor agonist with sedative and analgesic sparing properties. This medication has not been associated with respiratory suppression, despite occasionally high levels of sedation. For 10 months, all patients undergoing a laparoscopic bariatric procedure received a dexmedetomidine infusion 30 min before the anticipated completion of the procedure (n = 34). A control group was comprised of a similar number of patients to have had laparoscopic bariatric surgery in the time period immediately before these 10 months (n = 37). All pathways and discharge criteria were identical for patients in each group. A total of 73 patients were included in this retrospective chart review. Two gastric bypass patients were excluded for complications requiring additional surgery (one bleed and one leak). Gastric bypass patients who received a dexmedetomidine infusion required fewer narcotics (66 vs 130 mg of morphine equivalents) than control patients and met discharge criteria on post-op day (POD) 1 more often (61% discharged POD 1 vs 26% discharged POD 1, p = 0.02). Vital signs and pain scores were similar in all groups. Dexmedetomidine infusion perioperatively is safe and may help to minimize narcotic requirements and decrease duration of stay after laparoscopic bariatric procedures. This may have important patient safety ramifications in a patient population with a high prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea. A well-organized prospective, randomized, double-blinded trial is necessary to confirm the benefits of dexmedetomidine suggested by this study.