Current state of the definition and terminology related to weight recurrence after metabolic surgery: review by the POWER Task Force of the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.

Bariatric surgery continues to be the most reliable treatment for the disease of obesity. Despite excellent results, some patients experience weight recurrence with or without concomitant recurrence of co-morbidities. There is currently no standard definition for clinically significant weight recurrence after bariatric surgery so that patients and clinicians have a platform from which to plan treatment. The Post-Operative Weight Recurrence (POWER) Task Force was formed by the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery to address this aspect of the disease of obesity. This article reviews the literature of existing definitions for weight recurrence and their limitations. Furthermore, the term weight recurrence is introduced to replace weight regain or recidivism, and the term nonresponder is introduced to replace inadequate weight loss after surgery.

The SAGES MASTERS program presents the 10 seminal articles for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

BACKGROUND: One of the eight clinical pathways of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Masters Program is bariatric surgery which includes three anchoring procedures. For each anchoring procedure sentinel articles have been identified to enhance participant surgeon lifelong learning. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is one of the 3 anchoring procedures for the Bariatric Pathway. In this article we present the top 10 seminal articles regarding the RYGB which surgeons should be familiar with. METHODS: The literature was systematically searched to identify the most cited papers on RYGB. The SAGES Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery committee reviewed the most cited article list and using expert consensus selected the seminal articles that every bariatric surgeon should read. These articles were reviewed in detail by committee members and are presented here. RESULTS: The top 10 most cited sentinel papers on RYGB focus on operative safety, outcomes, surgical technique, and physiologic changes after the procedure. A summary of each paper is presented here, including expert appraisal and commentary. CONCLUSION: The seminal articles presented here have supported the widespread acceptance and use of the RYGB by bolstering the understanding of its mechanism of action and by demonstrating its safety and excellent patient outcomes. All bariatric surgeons should be familiar with these 10 landmark articles.

Assessing national provision of care: variability in bariatric clinical care pathways.

BACKGROUND: The American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) Quality Improvement and Patient Safety (QIPS) Committee hypothesized that collecting and sharing clinical pathways could provide a valuable resource to new and existing bariatric programs. OBJECTIVE: To shed light on the variability in practice patterns across the country by analyzing pathways. SETTING: United States Centers of Excellence METHODS: From June 2014 to April 2015, clinical pathways pertaining to preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative management of bariatric patients were solicited from the ASMBS executive council (EC), QIPS committee members, and state chapter presidents. Pathways were de-identified and then analyzed based on predetermined metrics pertaining to preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care. Concordance and discordance were then analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 31 pathways were collected; response rate was 80% from the EC, 77% from the QIPS committee, and 21% from state chapter presidents. The number of pathways sent in ranged from 1 to 10 with a median of 3 pathways per individual or institution. The majority of pathways centered on perioperative care (80%). Binary assessment (presence or absence) of variables found a high concordance (defined by greater than 65% of pathways accounting for that parameter) in only 6 variables: nutritional evaluation, psychological evaluation, intraoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis, utilization of antiemetics in the postoperative period, a dedicated pain pathway, and postoperative laboratory evaluation. CONCLUSION: There is considerable national variation in clinical pathways among practicing bariatric surgeons. Most pathways center on Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accredited Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) accreditation parameters, patient satisfaction, or Surgical Care Improvement Protocol (SCIP) measures. These pathways provide a path toward standardization of improved care.

Broad clinical utilization of NOTES: is it safe?

BACKGROUND: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) has been the focus of several studies as a less invasive alternative to conventional laparoscopy to access and treat intracavitary organs. For the last 5 years, much has been accomplished with animal studies, yet the clinical utilization of this novel technique is still modest. After 2 years of experience in the laboratory, we started our clinical experience. We report our experience with clinical utilization of NOTES procedures from 2007 to 2010. METHODS: Under UCSD institutional review board-approved trials, 104 patients were enrolled under seven different NOTES protocols from 2007 to 2010, where a NOTES procedure was offered as an alternative to conventional treatments. The treated pathologies were cholelithiasis, biliary dyskinesia, acute and chronic appendicitis, ventral hernias, morbid obesity, and achalasia. The access routes included transgastric (TG), transvaginal (TV), transesophageal (TE), and perirectal (PR). RESULTS: Among the 104 patients enrolled, 103 underwent a surgical procedure starting with diagnostic laparoscopy, and 94 cases were deemed appropriate to proceed via a NOTES approach. There were 9 aborted NOTES procedures at the time of the initial peritoneoscopy before creating a NOTES access route. The reasons to not proceed with a NOTES procedure in the TV cholecystectomy group (n = 5) were a large amount of pelvic adhesions in 4 patients and a severe inflammation of the gallbladder in 1 patient. In the TG cholecystectomy group (n = 1), it was severe inflammation of the gallbladder. In the TG appendectomy group (n = 1), it was the presence of localized peritonitis. In the TE endoscopic myotomy group (n = 2), it was the presence of megaesophagus with an inability to clean the esophagus of food debris. The NOTES procedures performed were 48 TV cholecystectomies, 4 TV appendectomies, 8 TG cholecystectomies, 2 PR peritoneoscopies, 3 TG appendectomies, 3 TV ventral hernia repairs, 5 TE endoscopic myotomies, 3 TV sleeve gastrectomies, and 18 TG sleeve gastrectomies. The average body mass indexes for those in the sleeve gastrectomy group was 42.1 kg/m(2) (TG route) and 40.6 kg/m(2) (TV route). There were no intraoperative complication and no conversions to standard laparoscopy during these procedures. The average hospital stay was 1-2 days. One patient who underwent TV cholecystectomy required an emergency department visit for nausea and vomiting. To date, 3 patients who underwent TV cholecystectomy have become pregnant and delivered normally. CONCLUSIONS: NOTES is safe, feasible, and reproducible with previous training in the laboratory and a consistent team at a high-volume center. Prospective randomized studies of a large patient population are necessary to assess long-term results.

Transesophageal endoscopic myotomy (TEEM) for the treatment of achalasia: the United States human experience.

BACKGROUND: From our early experience with NOTES, our group has acquired familiarity with transesophageal submucosal dissection and myotomy in swine model, which allowed us to perfect a model to perform purely endoscopic transesophageal myotomy (TEEM) for the treatment of achalasia and apply it into clinical practice. This study was designed to assess the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of TEEM in a series of patients with achalasia. METHODS: Under institutional review board approval, patients were enrolled on our study, where TEEM was offered as an alternative to laparoscopic or robotic Heller myotomy. The inclusion criteria were patients with achalasia confirmed by esophageal manometry, between age 18 and 50 years, and ASA class 2 or lower. The exclusion criteria were pregnancy, prior esophageal surgery, immunosuppression, coagulopathies, and severe medical comorbidities. The procedures were performed under general anesthesia, with the patient in supine position on positive pressure ventilation. With a GIF-180 (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) positioned at 10 cm above the GEJ, a mucosotomy was performed at the 2 o'clock position, and a submucosal space was developed caudally creating a controlled submucosal tunnel extending 2 cm distal to the GEJ. Upon completion of this tunnel the gastroesophageal lumen was inspected for mucosal integrity. The scope was then reinserted into the submucosal tunnel and using a triangle-tip knife, myotomy was performed starting at 5 cm above the GEJ and ending at 2 cm below the GEJ. During this process the circular muscle layer of the esophagus was carefully divided with preservation of the longitudinal layer. At the end of the procedure, the mucosal incision was closed longitudinally with endoscopic clips and surgical glue. RESULTS: Five patients underwent TEEM, with no perioperative complication. All patients reported significant improvement of their dysphagia immediately after the procedure. On the first postoperative day, all barium swallows showed disappearance of the classical bird beak taper, rapid emptying of contrast into the stomach, and absence of leaks. All patients were discharged on the second postoperative day on liquid diet. Two patients reported transient heartburn, which were well controlled with medications. The average preoperative GERD-HRQL was 20, which improved to 11.3 at 7 days postoperative and 2 at 30 days postoperative. To date, three patients have already returned for their 6-month follow-up, reporting adequate swallowing and low LES pressures on esophageal manometry (their mean preoperative LES resting pressure was 36.46 mmHg and residual pressure was 43.16 mmHg, whereas the 6-month follow-up mean LES resting pressure was 10.06 mmHg and residual pressure was 0.43 mmHg). CONCLUSIONS: TEEM seems to be safe, feasible, and effective for the treatment of patients with achalasia. Long-term data are still necessary for wide-spread utilization of this novel technique.