Conversion of gastric sleeve to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and biliopancreatic diversion/duodenal switch: safe and viable options.

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) remains the most performed bariatric surgery. As numbers of SG increase, so do the numbers of patients requiring conversion for insufficient weight loss or weight regain. However, the literature has cited complication rates as high as 30% for reoperative bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVE: With the recent inclusion of conversion surgery variables in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database, we compared the safety and efficacy of SG conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) versus biliopancreatic diversion and duodenal switch (BPD/DS). SETTING: MBSAQIP database. METHODS: Analysis of the 2020 MBSAQIP Participant Use Files revealed 6020 patients who underwent SG conversion to RYGB (5348) and BPD/DS (672). We examined 30-day outcomes including death, anastomotic leak, readmission, any complication, dehydration, and weight loss. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in mortality (.12% versus 0%) or; complication rate (6.5% versus 5.1%) with SG conversion to RYGB or BPD/DS. There was a statistically significant difference in anastomotic leak (.5% versus 1.2%, P = .024). Interestingly, BPD/DS was less likely to require dehydration treatments (4.2% versus 2.2%, P = .009) and had fewer readmissions within 30 days (7.3% versus 5.4%, P = .043). CONCLUSIONS: Complication rates after conversion of SG to RYGB or BPD/DS may be significantly lower than previously reported and only slightly higher than after primary weight loss surgery. SG conversion to either RYGB or BPD/DS remain safe, viable options for patients who had insufficient weight loss or regain, and BPD/DS may be the better option in the appropriate patient.

Comparison of Infectious Complications after Surgical Fixation versus Epidural Analgesia for Acute Rib Fractures.

Background: Surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) is associated with decreased mortality and respiratory complications. Patients who are not offered SSRF are often treated with epidural analgesia (EA) to reduce pain and improve pulmonary mechanics. We sought to compare infectious complications in patients undergoing either SSRF or EA. We hypothesized that infectious complications are equivalent between the two treatment groups. Patients and Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult trauma patients with acute rib fractures within the Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) 2017 dataset and used International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) codes to identify patients who underwent SSRF or EA. We excluded patients who received both treatments in the same admission. Our primary outcome was the development of sepsis. Secondary outcomes were specific infections including ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), catheter-associated urinary tract infection (CAUTI), and central line-associated blood stream infections (CLABSI). Multiple logistic regression analyses were used to adjust for age, injury severity score (ISS), chest Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS), flail chest, traumatic brain injury (TBI), and comorbidities. Results: We identified 2,252 and 1,299 patients who underwent SSRF and EA, respectively. Patients with SSRF were younger with higher ISS and longer length of stay (LOS). There was no difference in mortality, however, SSRF had higher rate of sepsis (1.6% vs. 0.5%; p = 0.001), VAP (5.1% vs. 0.9%; p < 0.001), CAUTI (1.7% vs. 0.5%; p = 0.001), and CLABSI (0.2% vs. 0%; p = 0.05). On multiple regression, SSRF was associated with higher odds of sepsis (odds ratio [OR], 2.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-6.63), CAUTI (OR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.11-7.88), and VAP (OR, 3.24; 95% CI, 1.73-6.06). Among those who developed sepsis, there was no significant difference in mortality or LOS between groups. Conclusions: Despite no difference in mortality, SSRF was associated with increased risk of septic complications in patients with rib fractures compared to epidural analgesia. Identifying, and addressing, risk factors of sepsis in this patient population is a critical performance improvement process to optimize outcomes without increased adverse events.