Long-term mortality in obese subjects undergoing malabsorptive surgery (biliopancreatic diversion and biliointestinal bypass) versus medical treatment.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Aim of this study was to analyze long-term mortality in obese patients receiving malabsorptive bariatric surgery (BS)[biliopancreatic diversion (BPD) and biliointestinal bypass (BIBP)] in comparison to medical treatment of obesity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Medical records of 1877 obese patients [body mass index (BMI) > 35 kg/m2, aged 18-65 years, undergoing BS (n = 472, 111 with diabetes) or non-surgical medical treatment (n = 1405, 385 with diabetes), during the period 1999-2008 (visit 1)] were collected; non-surgical patients were matched for age, sex, BMI, and blood pressure, and life status and causes of death were ascertained through December 2016. Survival was compared across surgery patients and non-surgical patients using Kaplan-Meier plots and Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Observation period was 12.1 ± 3.41 years (mean ± SD). Compared to non-surgical patients, BS patients had reduced all-cause mortality (34/472 (7.2%) vs 181/1,405 (12.9%) patients, χ2 = 11.25, p = 0.001; HR = 0.64, 95% C.I. 0.43-0.93, p = 0.019). Cardiovascular and cancer causes of death were significantly less frequent in surgery vs no-surgery (HR = 0.26, 95% C.I. 0.09-0.72, p = 0.003; HR = 0.21, 95% C.I. 0.09-0.45, p < 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Patients who have undergone BPD and BIBP have lower long-term all-cause, cardiovascular-caused and cancer-caused mortality compared to non-surgical medical weight-loss treatment patients. Malabsorptive bariatric surgery significantly reduces long-term mortality in severely obese patients.

Bariatric Surgery for Patients with Overweight/Obesity. A Comprehensive Grading Methodology and Network Metanalysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on Weight Loss Outcomes and Adverse Events.

This study aims to compare different types of metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) with lifestyle intervention/medical therapy (LSI/MT) for the treatment of overweight/obesity. The present and network meta-analysis (NMA) includes randomized trials. MBS was associated with a reduction of BMI, body weight, and percent weight loss, when compared to LSI/MT, and also with a significant reduction of HbA1c and a higher remission of diabetes. Meta-regression analyses revealed that BMI, a higher proportion of women, and a longer duration of trial were associated with greater effects of MBS. The NMA showed that all surgical procedures included (except greater curvature plication) were associated with a reduction of BMI. MBS is an effective option for the treatment of obesity. The choice of BMI thresholds for eligibility for surgery of patients with different complications should be performed making an evaluation of risks and benefits in each BMI category.

Assessment of surgeon communication skills from the patient perspective: A national evaluation using the Communication Assessment Tool.

OBJECTIVE: The Communication Assessment Tool (CAT) has previously been translated and adapted to the Italian context. This national study aimed to validate the CAT and evaluate communication skills of practicing surgeons from the patient perspective. METHODS: CAT consists of 14 items associated with a 5-point scale (5 = excellent); results are reported as the percent of ''excellent'' scores. It was administered to 920 consenting outpatients aged 18-84 in 26 Italian surgical departments. RESULTS: The largest age group was 45-64 (43.8%); 52.2% of the sample was male. Scores ranged from 44.6% to 66.6% excellent. The highest-scoring items were "Treated me with respect" (66.6%), "Gave me as much information as I wanted" (66.3%) and "Talked in terms I could understand" (66.0%); the lowest was "Encouraged me to ask questions" (44.6%). Significant differences were associated with age (18-24 year old patients exhibited the lowest scores) and geographical location (Northern Italy had the highest scores). CONCLUSION: CAT is a valid tool for measuring communication in surgical settings. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Results suggest that expectations of young people for communication in surgical settings are not being met. While there is room to improve communication skills of surgeons across Italy, patients highlighted the greatest need in the Central and Southern regions.

Predictive factors of recurrence for laparoscopic repair of primary and incisional ventral hernias with single mesh from a multicenter study.

Laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) is a widely practiced treatment for primary (PH) and incisional (IH) hernias, with acceptable outcomes. Prevention of recurrence is crucial and still highly debated. Purpose of this study was to evaluate predictive factors of recurrence following LVHR with intraperitoneal onlay mesh with a single type of mesh for both PH and IH. A retrospective, multicentre study of data collected from patients who underwent LVHR for PH and IH with an intraperitoneal monofilament polypropylene mesh from January 2014 to December 2018 at 8 referral centers was conducted, and statistical analysis for risk factors of recurrence and post-operative outcomes was performed. A total of 1018 patients were collected, with 665 cases of IH (65.3%) and 353 of PH (34.7%). IH patients were older (p < 0.001), less frequently obese (p = 0.031), at higher ASA class (p < 0.001) and presented more frequently with large, swiss cheese type and border site defects (p < 0.001), compared to PH patients. Operative time and hospital stay were longer for IH (p < 0.001), but intraoperative and early post-operative complications and reinterventions were comparable. IH group presented at major risk of recurrence than PH (6.7% vs 0.9%, p < 0.001) and application of absorbable tacks resulted a significative predictive factor for recurrence increasing the risk by 2.94 (95% CI 1.18-7.31). LVHR with a light-weight polypropylene mesh has low intra- and post-operative complications and is appropriate for both IH and PH. Non absorbable tacks and mixed fixation system seem to be preferable to absorbable tacks alone.

Revisional Surgery After One Anastomosis/Minigastric Bypass: an Italian Multi-institutional Survey.

BACKGROUND: Efficacy and safety of OAGB/MGB (one anastomosis/mini gastric bypass) have been well documented both as primary and as revisional procedures. However, even after OAGB/MGB, revisional surgery is unavoidable in patients with surgical complications or insufficient weight loss. METHODS: A questionnaire asking for the total number and demographics of primary and revisional OAGB/MGBs performed between January 2006 and July 2020 was e-mailed to all S.I.C. OB centres of excellence (annual caseload > 100; 5-year follow-up > 50%). Each bariatric centre was asked to provide gender, age, preoperative body mass index (BMI) and obesity-related comorbidities, previous history of abdominal or bariatric surgery, indication for surgical revision of OAGB/MGB, type of revisional procedure, pre- and post-revisional BMI, peri- and post-operative complications, last follow-up (FU). RESULTS: Twenty-three bariatric centres (54.8%) responded to our survey reporting a total number of 8676 primary OAGB/MGBS and a follow-up of 62.42 ± 52.22 months. A total of 181 (2.08%) patients underwent revisional surgery: 82 (0.94%) were suffering from intractable DGER (duodeno-gastric-esophageal reflux), 42 (0.48%) were reoperated for weight regain, 16 (0.18%) had excessive weight loss and malnutrition, 12 (0.13%) had a marginal ulcer perforation, 10 (0.11%) had a gastro-gastric fistula, 20 (0.23%) had other causes of revision. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) was the most performed revisional procedure (109; 54%), followed by bilio-pancreatic limb elongation (19; 9.4%) and normal anatomy restoration (19; 9.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that there is acceptable revisional rate after OAGB/MGB and conversion to RYGB represents the most frequent choice.

Advice of General Practitioner, of Surgeon, of Endocrinologist, and Self-determination: the Italian Road to Bariatric Surgery.

PURPOSE: Bariatric surgery (BS) is considered the most efficient treatment for severe obesity. International guidelines recommend multidisciplinary approach to BS (general practitioners, endocrinologists, surgeons, psychologists, or psychiatrists), and access to BS should be the final part of a protocol of treatment of obesity. However, there are indications that general practitioners (GPs) are not fully aware of the possible benefits of BS, that specialty physicians are reluctant to refer their patients to surgeons, and that patients with obesity choose self-management of their own obesity, including internet-based choices. There are no data on the pathways chosen by physicians and patients to undergo BS in the real world in Italy. METHODS: An exploratory exam was performed for 6 months in three pilot regions (Lombardy, Lazio, Campania) in twenty-three tertiary centers for the treatment of morbid obesity, to describe the real pathways to BS in Italy. RESULTS: Charts of 2686 patients (788 men and 1895 women, 75.5% in the age range 30-59 years) were evaluated by physicians and surgeons of the participating centers. A chronic condition of obesity was evident for the majority of patients, as indicated by duration of obesity, by presence of several associated medical problems, and by frequency of previous dietary attempts to weight loss. The vast majority (75.8%) patients were self-presenting or referred by bariatric surgeons, 24.2% patients referred by GPs and other specialists. Self-presenting patients were younger, more educated, more professional, and more mobile than patients referred by other physicians. Patients above the age of 40 years or with a duration of obesity greater than 10 years had a higher prevalence of all associated medical problems. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients referred to a tertiary center for the treatment of morbid obesity have a valid indication for BS. Most patients self-refer to the centers, with a minority referred by a GP or by specialists. Self-presenting patients are younger, more educated, more professional, and more mobile than patients referred by other physicians. Older patients and with a longer duration of obesity are probably representative of the conservative approach to BS, often regarded as the last resort in an endless story.

Complications and mortality in a cohort of patients undergoing emergency and elective surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an Italian multicenter study. Teachings of Phase 1 to be brought in Phase 2 pandemic.

Since the beginning of the pandemic due to the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its related disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), several articles reported negative outcomes in surgery of infected patients. Aim of this study is to report results of patients with COVID-19-positive swab, in the perioperative period after surgery. Data of COVID-19-positive patients undergoing emergent or oncological surgery, were collected in a retrospective, multicenter study, which involved 20 Italian institutions. Collected parameters were age, sex, body mass index, COVID-19-related symptoms, patients' comorbidities, surgical procedure, personal protection equipment (PPE) used in operating rooms, rate of postoperative infection among healthcare staff and complications, within 30-postoperative days. 68 patients, who underwent surgery, resulted COVID-19-positive in the perioperative period. Symptomatic patients were 63 (92.5%). Fever was the main symptom in 36 (52.9%) patients, followed by dyspnoea (26.5%) and cough (13.2%). We recorded 22 (32%) intensive care unit admissions, 23 (33.8%) postoperative pulmonary complications and 15 (22%) acute respiratory distress syndromes. As regards the ten postoperative deaths (14.7%), 6 cases were related to surgical complications. One surgeon, one scrub nurse and two circulating nurses were infected after surgery due to the lack of specific PPE. We reported less surgery-related pulmonary complications and mortality in Sars-CoV-2-infected patients, than in literature. Emergent and oncological surgery should not be postponed, but it is mandatory to use full PPE, and to adopt preoperative screenings and strategies that mitigate the detrimental effect of pulmonary complications, mostly responsible for mortality.

Dramatic decrease of surgical emergencies during COVID-19 outbreak.

BACKGROUND: During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, a general decrease in surgical activity was observed. There is perception that this phenomenon has involved also surgical emergency, but no extensive data have been presented to date. The aim of this study was to analyze the real number of admissions and procedures for emergency surgical disease during COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This is a multicenter study including 18 general surgery units performing emergency surgery in hospitals of the "Red Zone" in Lombardy. Data about admissions from emergency department and surgical emergency procedures performed during March 2019 and March 2020 were collected in an online database. Additional data were collected according to the different indications for surgical treatment. The primary outcomes were the overall rate of admissions for emergent surgical disease and the overall rate of emergency surgical procedures in the study periods. The secondary outcome was the overall surgical rates (among all the diagnosed surgical diseases). RESULTS: Emergency surgical admissions and surgical operations significantly decreased with a fall in value of 45% (p < 0.001) and 41% (p = 0.001), respectively. This reduction was confirmed by the analysis according to different surgical indications, with the exceptions of admissions and operations for gastrointestinal bleeding and operations for abdominal trauma. The overall ratio between surgical procedures and diseases was not significantly different (54% vs. 63%; p = 0.619). This ratio was significantly different only for bowel obstruction and for gastrointestinal perforation. CONCLUSIONS: It seems correct to consider "true" the dramatic decrease of surgical problems during COVID-19 outbreak, despite any therapeutic strategies and logistic difficulties. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Epidemiological, level III.

Bariatric surgery and the COVID-19 pandemic: SICOB recommendations on how to perform surgery during the outbreak and when to resume the activities in phase 2 of lockdown.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and its related disease, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has been rapidly spreading all over the world and is responsible for the current pandemic. The current pandemic has found the Italian national health system unprepared to provide an appropriate and prompt response, heavily affecting surgical activities. Based on the limited data available in the literature and personal experiences, the Società Italiana di Chirurgia dell'OBesità e Malattie Metaboliche (SICOB) provides recommendations regarding the triage of bariatric surgical procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic defining a dedicated path for surgery in morbidly obese patients with known or suspected COVID-19 who may require emergency operations. Finally, the current paper delineates a strategy to resume outpatient visits and elective bariatric surgery once the acute phase of the pandemic is over. Models developed during the COVID-19 crisis should be integrated into hospital practices for future use in similar scenarios. Surgeons are presented with a golden opportunity to embrace systemic change and to drive their professional future.

Incidence of Diabetes Mellitus, Cardiovascular Diseases, and Cancer in Patients Undergoing Malabsorptive Surgery (Biliopancreatic Diversion and Biliointestinal Bypass) vs Medical Treatment.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Bariatric surgeries such as gastric banding (LAGB), gastric bypass (RYGB), vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG), and sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) decrease body weight in morbid obesity, leading to the resolution of coexisting diabetes mellitus and arterial hypertension in the majority of cases as well as improvements of renal function and liver steatosis. BS (LAGB, RYGB, VBG, and LSG) also reduce incident cases of diabetes, of cardiovascular diseases, and of cancer; these therapeutic and preventive effects on comorbidities of obesity have not been analyzed for malabsorptive surgeries such as biliopancreatic diversion (BPD) or biliointestinal bypass (BIBP). The aim of this study was to analyze the incidence of comorbidities, i.e., diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer, in obese subjects undergoing BPD and BIBP, in comparison with standard medical treatment of obesity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Medical records of 1983 obese patients (body mass index (BMI) > 35 kg/m2, aged 18-65 years, undergoing surgery (n = 472, of which 111 with diabetes) or medical treatment (n = 1511, of which 422 with diabetes), during the period 1999-2008 (visit 1)) were collected; incident cases of comorbidities were ascertained through December 31, 2016. RESULTS: Observation period was 12.0 ± 3.48 years (mean ± SD). Compared to non-surgical patients matched for age, body mass index, and blood pressure, malabsorptive surgeries were associated with reduced new incident cases of diabetes (p = 0.001), cardiovascular diseases (p = 0.001), hyperlipidemia (p = 0.001), oculopathy (p = 0.021), and cancer (p = 0.001). The preventive effect of BS was similar in both nondiabetic and diabetic patients for cardiovascular diseases and hyperlipidemia (both p = 0.001). The preventive effect was significant in nondiabetic subjects for coronary heart disease and for cancer, not significant in diabetic subjects. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing malabsorptive bariatric surgery show less incident cases of diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, hyperlipidemia, oculopathy, and cancer than controls receiving medical treatment.