One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OABG) vs. Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass (SADI) as revisional procedure following Sleeve Gastrectomy: results of a multicenter study.

PURPOSE: Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG) is the most performed bariatric surgery, but a considerable number of patients may require revisional procedures for suboptimal clinical response/recurrence of weight (SCR/RoW). Conversion options include One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) and Single Anastomosis Duodeno-Ileal Bypass (SADI). The study aims to compare SADI vs. OAGB as revisional procedures in terms of early and mid-term complications, operative time, postoperative hospital stay and clinical outcomes. METHODS: All patients who underwent OAGB or SADI as revisional procedures following SG for SCR/RoW at three high-volume bariatric centers between January 2014 and April 2021 were included. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed. Demographic, operative, and postoperative outcomes of the two groups were compared. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-eight patients were identified. After PSM, the two groups included 42 OAGB and 42 SADI patients. Early (≤ 30 days) postoperative complications rate did not differ significantly between OAGB and SADI groups (3 bleedings vs. 0, p = 0.241). Mid-term (within 2 years) complications rate was significantly higher in the OAGB group (21.4% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.007), mainly anastomotic complications and reflux disease (12% of OAGBs). Seven OAGB patients required conversion to another procedure (Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass-RYGB) vs. none among the SADI patients (p = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: SADI and OAGB are both effective as revisional procedures for SCR/RoW after SG. OAGB is associated with a significantly higher rate of mid-term complications and a not negligible rate of conversion (RYGB). Larger studies are necessary to draw definitive conclusions.

Implementation of updated enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery guidelines: adapted protocol in a single tertiary center.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of an adapted protocol of enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery (ERABS) on outcomes. This is a single-center observational study comparing patients managed according to adapted ERABS protocol (March-May 2022) with a control group of old method (January 2021-February 2022). Totally, 253 bariatric patients were included in the study (n = 68) and control (n = 185) groups. Patients were mostly females (57.3% vs 70.2%; p = 0.053), of mean age 38.8 years and body mass index 41 ± 6.53 vs. 44.60 ± 7.37 kg/m2 (p = 0.007) in study and control groups, respectively. The majority (90.5%) underwent primary bariatric surgery. Adapted ERABS protocol compliance was 98.5%. The study group had shorter hospital stay (mean 2.86 ± 0.51 vs. 4.03 ± 0.28 days; p < 0.001), similar rates of total (3% vs. 2.7%, p = 0.92) and major complications (1.5% vs. 0, p = 0.10). Readmission rates were similar (1.5% vs 1.6%, p = 0.92). Applied only in the study group, early ambulation (p < 0.001), opioid restriction, and preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), resulted in satisfactory scores (mean total visual analogue score 1.93 ± 0.80, morphine milligram equivalent 34.0 ± 14.5, and mean total PONV grade 0.17 ± 0.36). In conclusion, implementing adapted ERABS guidelines improved patients' postoperative care, raising awareness to pain management. Length of stay was shortened without safety compromise. Efforts to abandon old-school routines seem worthwhile, even if ERABS is partially implemented.