A 4-tier Protocolized Radiological Classification System for Leaks Following Sleeve Gastrectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a classification of sleeve gastrectomy leaks able to reliably predict outcomes, from protocolized computed tomography (CT) findings and readily available variables. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Leaks post sleeve gastrectomy remain morbid and resource-consuming. Incidence, treatments, and outcomes are variable, representing heterogeneity of the problem. A predictive tool available at presentation would aid management and predict outcomes. METHODS: From a prospective database (2009-2018) we reviewed patients with staple line leaks. A Delphi process was undertaken on candidate variables (80-20). Correlations were performed to stratify 4 groupings based on outcomes (salvage resection, length of stay, and complications) and predictor variables. Training and validation cohorts were established by block randomization. RESULTS: A 4-tiered classification was developed based on CT appearance and duration postsurgery. Interobserver agreement was high (κ = 0.85, P < 0.001). There were 59 patients, (training: 30, validation: 29). Age 42.5 ± 10.8 versus 38.9 ± 10.0 years (P = 0.187); female 65.5% versus 80.0% (P = 0.211), weight 127.4 ± 31.3 versus 141.0 ± 47.9 kg, (P = 0.203). In the training group, there was a trend toward longer hospital stays as grading increased (I = 10.5 d; II = 24 d; III = 66.5 d; IV = 72 d; P = 0.005). Risk of salvage resection increased (risk ratio grade 4 = 9; P = 0.043) as did complication severity (P = 0.027).Findings were reproduced in the validation group: risk of salvage resection (P = 0.007), hospital stay (P = 0.001), complications (P = 0.016). CONCLUSION: We have developed and validated a classification system, based on protocolized CT imaging that predicts a step-wise increased risk of salvage resection, complication severity, and increased hospital stay. The system should aid patient management and facilitate comparisons of outcomes and efficacy of interventions.

Long-Term Matched Comparison of Adjustable Gastric Banding Versus Sleeve Gastrectomy: Weight Loss, Quality of Life, Hospital Resource Use and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

BACKGROUND: Comparisons of bariatric procedures across a range of outcomes are required to better inform selection of procedures and optimally allocate health care resources. AIMS: To determine differences in outcomes between laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) across nine outcome domains. METHODS: Matched primary LSG or LAGB across age, weight and surgery date were recruited. Data were collected from a prospective database and patient-completed questionnaires. RESULTS: Patients (n = 520) were well-matched (LAGB vs. LSG; age 41.8 ± 11.2 vs. 42.7 ± 11.7 years, p = 0.37; male 32.4% vs. 30.2%, p = 0.57; baseline weight 131.2 ± 30.5 vs. 131.0 ± 31.1 kg, p = 0.94). Follow-up rate was 95% at a mean of 4.8 years. LAGB attended more follow-up visits (21 vs. 13, p < 0.05). Mean total body weight loss was 27.7 ± 11.7% vs. 19.4 ± 11.1% (LSG vs. LAGB, p < 0.001). LAGB had more complications (23.8% vs. 10.8%, p < 0.001), re-operations (89 vs. 13, p < 0.001) and readmissions (87 vs. 32, p < 0.001). However, early post-operative complications were higher post-LSG (2.6 vs. 9.2%, p = 0.007). Length of stay (LOS) was higher post-LSG compared with LAGB (5.2 ± 10.9 vs. 1.5 ± 2.2 days, p < 0.001). LSG patients reported better quality of life (SF-36 physical component score 54.7 ± 7.9 vs. 47.7 ± 10.8, p = 0.002) and satisfaction (9.2 ± 1.9 vs. 8.4 ± 1.6, p = 0.001) and less frequent regurgitation (1.2 ± 1.2 vs. 0.7 ± - 1.1, p = 0.032) and dysphagia (2.0 ± 1.3 vs. 1.3 ± 1.6, p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: This study showed high long-term follow-up rates in a large cohort of well-matched patients. Weight loss was greater with LSG. LAGB reported more re-operations and less satisfaction with the outcome. LOS was driven by patients with complications. This study has reinforced the need for comprehensive measurement of outcomes in bariatric surgery.

Indications and efficacy of endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure therapy for upper gastrointestinal perforations.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure (EndoVAC) therapy is a recent innovation described for use in upper gastrointestinal perforations and leaks, with reported success of 80-90%. It provides sepsis control and collapses the cavity preventing stasis, encouraging healing of the defect. Whilst promising, initial reports of this new technique have not established clear indications, feasibility and optimal technique. METHODS: We analysed all patients who underwent EndoVAC therapy between 2014 and 2016. The technique involved a standard gastroscope, nasogastric tube and vacuum-assisted closure dressing kit, with endoscopic placement of the polyurethane sponge. Data were collected on indication, technique, sepsis control, outcomes and drainage volumes. RESULTS: Ten patients were treated. Average age was 56.7 ± 12.3 years. There were three mortalities. EndoVAC placement was feasible in nine patients and successful healing was observed in six patients. Failure was more likely in the cases of large (>8 cm), chronic or complex cavities. A three-phase response was seen in successful cases, with initial reduction in external drainage (average: 143-17 mL/day within 1 week), followed by a progressive reduction in inflammatory markers (2 weeks) and finally a healing phase with reduction in cavity size (3 weeks). CONCLUSION: EndoVAC therapy is a potentially useful adjunct to conventional treatments of a subset of upper gastrointestinal leaks and perforations when there is a contained cavity <8 cm. It appears less effective in an uncontained perforation or chronically established tract. It has clear advantages of being easily applied with readily available equipment and disposables.

Endoscopic management of refractory gastrointestinal non-variceal bleeding using Histoacryl (N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate) glue.

BACKGROUND: Histoacryl glue (N-butyl-2-cyanoacrylate) has well-established utility in the endoscopic management of gastrointestinal variceal bleeding. The role of Histoacryl glue in non-variceal bleeding is less clear, and there are few articles describing its use in this setting. METHODS: Six patients with intractable non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding were managed using injection of Histoacryl glue. All patients had previously failed conventional endostasis and/or interventional angioembolization and were not suitable for emergency salvage surgery due to serious comorbidities or unacceptable anaesthetic risk. An endoscopic Lipiodol-Histoacryl-Lipiodol sandwich injection technique was used in these patients. The clinical outcomes and complications were evaluated. RESULTS: There were four females and two males with a mean age of 55 years. Bleeding lesions included gastric ulcers (n = 2), duodenal ulcers (n = 2), duodenal gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) (n = 1) and rectal ulcers (n = 1). All patients had successful Histoacryl endostasis without the requirement for salvage surgery. There was no treatment-related morbidity and no mortality. Two patients had further bleeding after initial Histoacryl endostasis, which was successfully controlled with further endoscopic Histoacryl injection. CONCLUSION: Histoacryl endostasis should be included in the treatment algorithm for refractory non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding.

Liver resection: a regional hospital experience.

BACKGROUND: Liver resection is a significant operation usually limited to large metropolitan hospitals. Liver resections were first performed at the Launceston General Hospital (LGH), a regional centre (bed capacity 280), in May 2000. This is a summary of liver resection at LGH. METHODS: Data of liver resections performed between May 2000 and March 2008 at LGH were collected retro-prospectively and reviewed with attention to patient survival, post-operative complications and mortality. RESULTS: There were 102 consecutive liver resections during the study period. Metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma was the most frequent pathology (n = 61). Six patients had metastases from primaries other than colorectal cancer. There were 13 resections for primary liver malignancy, 2 from invasion by gallbladder carcinoma, 1 for contiguous invasion by gastric cancer and 19 were for benign conditions. Thirteen patients had post-operative wound infections and six had significant bile leaks. There were five deaths in-hospital (surgical mortality 4.9%). At the end of the study period, 51 cancer patients were still alive (14 with disease recurrences) and 30 have died (23 from recurrent diseases). Patients operated for colorectal cancer metastases achieved a 44% 5-year survival rate (median survival = 46 months). Patients with hepatocellular carcinoma had 3-year survival rate of 15% (median survival = 24 months). CONCLUSION: Resection provides the best hope of cure for patients with primary or secondary hepatic malignancy. With adequate expertise, liver resections can be performed safely in a regional hospital.