Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery in Patients with Obesity Class V (BMI > 60 kg/m2): a Modified Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is the preferred method to achieve significant weight loss in patients with Obesity Class V (BMI > 60 kg/m2). However, there is no consensus regarding the best procedure(s) for this population. Additionally, these patients will likely have a higher risk of complications and mortality. The aim of this study was to achieve a consensus among a global panel of expert bariatric surgeons using a modified Delphi methodology. METHODS: A total of 36 recognized opinion-makers and highly experienced metabolic and bariatric surgeons participated in the present Delphi consensus. 81 statements on preoperative management, selection of the procedure, perioperative management, weight loss parameters, follow-up, and metabolic outcomes were voted on in two rounds. A consensus was considered reached when an agreement of ≥ 70% of experts' votes was achieved. RESULTS: A total of 54 out of 81 statements reached consensus. Remarkably, more than 90% of the experts agreed that patients should be notified of the greater risk of complications, the possibility of modifications to the surgical procedure, and the early start of chemical thromboprophylaxis. Regarding the choice of the procedure, SADI-S, RYGB, and OAGB were the top 3 preferred operations. However, no consensus was reached on the limb length in these operations. CONCLUSION: This study represents the first attempt to reach consensus on the choice of procedures as well as perioperative management in patients with obesity class V. Although overall consensus was reached in different areas, more research is needed to better serve this high-risk population.

Endoscopic Revisional Gastroplasty After Bariatric Surgery with a Single-Channel Endoscope.

BACKGROUND: Less invasive endoscopic bariatric procedures are under development for the management of recurrence of obesity. The purpose of the current manuscript was to evaluate the safety of the endoscopic revisional gastroplasty (ERG) for patients with recurrence of weight gain following different bariatric procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective single-center study over 22 patients using the ERG between January 2020 to July 2022 at Bouchard Private Hospital (Marseille, France). The demographic data, past surgical history, obesity complications, time interval between the surgical and endoscopic procedures, and intra and postoperative parameters and outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 22 patients underwent ERG: 19 female (86.4%) with a mean age of 34.2 years and a mean BMI of 32.9 kg/m2 (± 3.4). Average time between the revisional bariatric surgery and ERG was 14.4 months (range 5-36). There were 14 cases of LSG (77.8%), 9 cases of RYGBP (19.4%), and 3 cases with previous gastric band. All procedures were completed by endoscopy with no complication and a mean length of hospital stay of 1.1 days (± 0.9). The weight loss results at 1-year follow-up were available for 17 of the 22 patients: two patients were lost to follow-up (4%) and 3 patients had less than a 1-year follow-up from the ERG. The mean BMI, 1 year after ERG, was 28.7 kg/m2 (± 7.4); the mean BMI loss and %EWL were, respectively, 4.2 kg/m2 (± 4.7) and 53.1% (± 17). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic revisional gastroplasty represents a safe minimal invasive approach that can be considered an effective and well-tolerated procedure for patients with previous bariatric surgery.

Classification of Slippage Following Laparoscopic BariClip Gastroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic BariClip gastroplasty (LBCG) is a new reversible gastric sleeve-like procedure without gastrectomy proposed to minimize the risk of severe complications. Still one of the possible complications described with LBCG is slippage. The purpose of the current manuscript is to analyze different cases of slippage and propose a classification of this complication. METHODS: A number of 381 patients who underwent LBCG in 8 different centers were analyzed concerning the risk of slippage. All cases with documented slippage were carefully reviewed in terms of patients' symptomatology (presence of satiety, vomiting), history of weight loss, radiological data, and management of their slippage. A new classification was proposed depending on the anatomy, the symptomatology, and the time of occurrence. RESULTS: We have identified a total of 17 cases (4.46%) of slippage following LBCG. In 11 patients, the slippage was symptomatic with repetitive vomiting and nausea, and in the remaining 6 patients, the slippage was identified by radiological studies for insufficient weight loss, weight regain, or routine radiological follow-up. Depending on the interval time, the slippage was classified as either immediate (in first 7 days) in 6 cases, early (in less than 90 days) in 4 cases, and late (after 3 months) in 7 cases. Evaluation of the radiological studies in these cases identified the following: anterosuperior displacement (type A) in 9 cases, posteroinferior displacement (type B) in 6 cases (one case after 3 months), and lateral displacement (type C) in the remaining 2 cases. The management of the slippage consisted of BariClip removal in 7 cases, repositioning in 5 cases, and conservative treatment in the remaining 5 cases. All patients with conservative treatment were recorded at the beginning of the experience. CONCLUSIONS: Slippage is a possible complication after LBCG. This classification of the different types of slippage can benefit the surgeon in the management and treatment of this complication of LBCG.

Evolving Technique of Laparoscopic Vertical Gastric Clip Placement.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic BariClip gastroplasty (LBCG) will address a similar tubular restriction than the one achieved with the laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) at the level of the gastric fundus, while maintaining the advantage of simplicity and anatomic preservation. The purpose of the current study was to analyze the risk of slippage and to present the evolving technique by adding gastro-gastric plication of the gastric wall covering the BariClip at those areas where the gastric wall "slips" between the limbs of the clip. METHODS: All patients undergoing LBCG with the evolving technique of gastric plication around the device associated with antral gastroplasty from January 2021 to May 2022 were included in the study group (group A). A control group (group B) was designed with patients who underwent previous LBCG technique between May 2017 and June 2019. This is a case-controlled group with patients matched by gender and BMI. We have analyzed the postoperative complications and more notably the slippage. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-six patients (44 male and 132 female) with a mean age of 33 years (± 11) underwent evolving technique of LBCG. A control group of 67 patients who underwent previous technique of LBCG was included. All procedures were completed by laparoscopy with no intraoperative complication. For the study group, we have recorded a number of 5 slippages (2.8%). The diagnosis occurred during the first 6 months after the operation. The management consisted of repositioning-3 cases-and BariClip removal-2 cases. For the control group, we have recorded a number of 3 slippages (4.3%). All three patients underwent BariClip removal, with no repositioning. CONCLUSIONS: We reported a new technique of placement of the BariClip with additional gastric plication anterior, posterior, and volume reduction in the antrum to potentially reduce the rate of slippage and improve weight loss outcomes.

Is the Surgical Drainage Mandatory for Leak after Sleeve Gastrectomy?

INTRODUCTION: Despite the unanimous acknowledgement of the laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) worldwide, the leak remains its deficiency. For the last decade, the surgical treatment was practically considered mandatory for almost any collection following LSG. The aim of this study is to evaluate the need for surgical drainage for leak following LSG. METHODS: All consecutive patients having gone through LSG from January 2017 to December 2020 were enrolled in our study. Once the demographic data and the leak history were registered, we analyzed the outcome of the surgical or endoscopic drainage, the characteristics of the endoscopic treatment, and the evolution to complete healing. RESULTS: A total of 1249 patients underwent LSG and the leak occurred in 11 cases (0.9%). There were 10 women with a mean age of 47.8 years (27-63). The surgical drainage was performed for three patients and the rest of the eight patients underwent primary endoscopic treatment. The endoscopic treatment was represented with pigtails for seven cases and septotomy with balloon dilation for four cases. In two out of these four cases, the septotomy was anticipated by the use of a nasocavitary drain for 2 weeks. The average number of endoscopic procedures was 3.2 (range 2-6). The leaks achieved complete healing after an average duration of 4.8 months (range 1-9 months). No mortality was recorded for a leak. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of the gastric leak must be tailored to each patient. Although there is still no consensus for the endoscopic drainage of leaks after LSG, the surgical approach can be avoided in up to 72%. The benefits of pigtails and nasocavitary drains followed by endoscopic septotomy are undeniable, and they should be included in the armamentarium of any bariatric center.

Endoscopic Gastric Band Removal.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) procedures have declined worldwide in recent years. A known complication is the intraluminal erosion of the prosthetic material. The endoscopic management of gastric band erosion represents the recommended approach nowadays, and it avoids any additional trauma to the gastric wall already damaged by the migration. The purpose of our study was to assess the feasibility of endoscopic management for intraluminal gastric band erosion following LAGB. METHODS: From January 2009-December 2020, a total of 29 patients were retrospectively reviewed after undergoing endoscopic gastric band removal. The study included all consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic gastric band removal in this period. No patients were excluded from the study. Data on patient demographic characteristics, case history, operative details (procedural time, adverse events), and complications were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients underwent endoscopic gastric band removal: 22 women (75.8%) with a mean age of 45 years (range: 28-63) and mean Body Mass Index (BMI) of 31 ± 4.7 kg/m2 (range: 24-41). The average time to the identification of erosion after LAGB was 42 months (range: 28-137). The initial upper endoscopy found a migrated band of more than half of the diameter in 21 cases, less than a half but more than a third in seven cases and in one case, less than a third (use of a stent). Twenty-seven patients were successfully treated with endoscopic removal, and in two cases, the endoscopic approach failed, and laparoscopy was further performed. CONCLUSIONS: The endoscopic management of intraluminal erosion after LAGB can be safe and effective and should be considered the procedure of choice when treating this complication. The percentage of the band migration is important for the timing of the endoscopic removal.

Best practice approach for redo-surgeries after sleeve gastrectomy, an expert's modified Delphi consensus.

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common metabolic and bariatric surgical (MBS) procedure worldwide. Despite the desired effect of SG on weight loss and remission of obesity-associated medical problems, there are some concerns regarding the need to do revisional/conversional surgeries after SG. This study aims to make an algorithmic clinical approach based on an expert-modified Delphi consensus regarding redo-surgeries after SG, to give bariatric and metabolic surgeons a guideline that might help for the best clinical decision. METHODS: Forty-six recognized bariatric and metabolic surgeons from 25 different countries participated in this Delphi consensus study in two rounds to develop a consensus on redo-surgeries after SG. An agreement/disagreement ≥ 70.0% on statements was considered to indicate a consensus. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 62 of 72 statements and experts did not achieve consensus on 10 statements after two rounds of online voting. Most of the experts believed that multi-disciplinary team evaluation should be done in all redo-procedures after SG and there should be at least 12 months of medical and supportive management before performing redo-surgeries after SG for insufficient weight loss, weight regain, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Also, experts agreed that in case of symptomatic GERD in the presence of adequate weight loss, medical treatment for at least 1 to 2 years is an acceptable option and agreed that Roux-en Y gastric bypass is an appropriate option in this situation. There was disagreement consensus on efficacy of omentopexy in rotation and efficacy of fundoplication in the presence of a dilated fundus and GERD. CONCLUSION: Redo-surgeries after SG is still an important issue among bariatric and metabolic surgeons. The proper time and procedure selection for redo-surgery need careful considerations. Although multi-disciplinary team evaluation plays a key role to evaluate best options in these situations, an algorithmic clinical approach based on the expert's consensus as a guideline can help for the best clinical decision-making.

The Reflux and BariClip: Initial Results and Mechanism of Action.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic BariClip Gastroplasty (LBCG) represents a new bariatric procedure that mimics the principle of the Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG), but using a completely reversible mechanism, which is essential for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The purpose of our study was to evaluate the evolution of GERD following the initial experience with LBCG. METHODS: The first 43 obese patients who underwent LBCG performed by the same surgeon in two different medical centers in May 2018-December 2019 were included in the current study. Twelve patients had issues of reflux, regularly receiving PPIs (proton pump inhibitors) treatment in eight cases, and occasionally in four cases. Thirty-two patients completed the follow-up at one year and the GERD was evaluated using the PPI medications and the GerdQ. RESULTS: The median preoperative GerdQ score was (14.58 ± 1.9). Three patients out of the twelve who had complained about preoperative GERD did not consent to the one year follow-up form. For the rest of nine patients, the median post-operative GerdQ score was (10.11 ± 3.2). The PPIs were used at one year follow-up in six patients: four with occasional use, one patient with regular use showing no improvement, and one who experienced de novo GERD symptomatology (3.1%). No statistically significant difference between the groups was recorded in terms of GERD. We recorded no intraoperative complications. No case of erosion occurred in the post-operative period, but we encountered two cases of slippage. One additional BariClip was removed at 14 months. CONCLUSION: LBCG represents a new bariatric procedure that mimics the principle of the laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, but with a completely reversible mechanism. Even with limited cases, our experience reports several mechanisms of action that will be evaluated and discussed in further prospective clinical trials. After this preliminary clinical study, LBCG's effects on GERD and its safety are highly encouraging.

The Utility of Video Recording in Assessing Bariatric Surgery Complications.

INTRODUCTION: Recording every procedure could diminish the postoperative complication rates in bariatric surgery. The aim of our study was to evaluate the correlation between recording every bariatric surgery and their postoperative analysis in relation to the early or late postoperative complications. METHODS: Seven hundred fifteen patients who underwent a bariatric procedure between January 2018 and December 2019 were included in a retrospective analysis. There were: 589 laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomies (LSGs); 110 Roux-en-Y bypasses (RYGBs) and 16 gastric bands (LAGBs). The video recording was systematically used, and all patients were enrolled in the IFSO registry. RESULTS: There were 15 patients (2.1%) with surgical postoperative complications: 5 leaks, 8 hemorrhages and 2 stenosis. Most complications were consequent to LSG, except for two, which occurred after RYGB. In four cases a site of active bleeding was identified. After reviewing the video, in three cases the site was correlated with an event which occurred during the initial procedure. Three out of five cases of leak following sleeve were treated purely endoscopically, and no potential correlated mechanism was identified. Two other possible benefits were observed: a better evaluation of the gastric pouch for the treatment of the ulcer post bypass and the review of one per operative incident. Two negative diagnostic laparoscopies were performed. The benefit of the systematic video recording was singled out in eight cases. All the other cases were completed by laparoscopy with no conversion. CONCLUSION: To record every bariatric procedure could help in understanding the mechanism of certain complications, especially when the analysis is performed within the team. Still, recording the procedure did not prevent the negative diagnostic laparoscopy, but it could play a significant role for the medico-legal aspect in the future.

Safety of Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty with a Single-Channel Endoscope.

PURPOSE: Less invasive endoscopic bariatric procedures are under development for the management of class I of obesity. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the safety of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) using the new suturing device OverStitch Sx™. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective single-center study over 191 patients using the ESG under general anesthesia with overnight inpatient observation between January 2019 and December 2020. The analyzed variables were adverse effects and change in body weight at 6 and 12 months of follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 191 patients underwent ESG for primary obesity. There were 173 female (90.6%) with a mean age of 36.9 years. The mean BMI was 33.7 kg/m2 (range: 28.9-54). There were no major intra-procedure adverse events. There were two postprocedural complications (1.04%), a transparietal suturing of falciform ligament which needed laparoscopic exploration for severe abdominal pain and a perigastric collection with antibiotic treatment, both with favorable outcome. Considering the weight loss results, the %TWL recorded was 22.4% for 84 patients (43.9%, 6 months' follow-up) and 18.7% for 69 patients (36.1%, 12 months' follow-up) with the mean EWL of 41.6% and respectively 34.7%. A total of 59 patients (30.9%) were lost follow-up and 12 patients underwent revisional bariatric procedure. According to ASGE definition, 53.8% (n = 71) reached > 25% of EWL. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic gastroplasty represents a safe minimal invasive approach with the new device OverStitch Sx™ that can be considered an effective and well-tolerated procedure especially for primary obesity treatment.

Revisional Surgery from Vertical Banded Gastroplasty to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass with Gastric Resection.

Introduction: Vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) was a common bariatric procedure by laparotomy and or at the beginning of the laparoscopy, but nowadays it is almost an abandoned procedure. However, the young generation of bariatric surgeons should be aware about this procedure especially for revisional cases. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is considered the procedure of choice for the revision of VBG. Materials and Methods: The evolution of revisional surgery to RYGB has known several technical steps. At the beginning, the procedure was performed with no gastric resection. Then a limited resection of the ancient staple line along with the fibrous tissue under the previous band or mesh was performed. The purpose of this article is to describe a simplified operative technique to simultaneously resect the ancient staple line and the calibration band. Results: After the initial viscrerolysis, an attempt to distinguish the course of the ancient section line of the stomach during the VBG is done. The dissection can become extremely challenging, with too much fibrosis and nonanatomical planes of dissection. At this point, we counsel to abandon the anterior direct dissection of the upper part of the stomach and to switch to a posterior dissection with the approach of greater curvature. Driven by the potential advantages (no risk of mucocele or gastrogastric fistula), for the past several years, we have changed the technique from resecting only the ancient staple line to perform a partial gastrectomy. The gastrectomy is larger and includes the complete resection of the gastric fundus, ancient staple line, the region with the mesh inside, and part of the gastric body. Once the stomach is extracted, the subsequent steps are similar to those of a primary RYGB. Conclusion: The procedure of choice for the revision of VBG is represented by RYGBP. Associating an atypical gastrectomy of the previous staple line with the region of mesh migration is a safe approach, eliminating the risk of mucocele.

Single Anastomosis Duodeno-ileal Bypass As a Revisional Procedure Following Sleeve Gastrectomy: Review of the Literature.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomies (LSGs) can experience weight-loss failure and conversion to another bariatric procedure. An analysis of the bariatric literature concerning the single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) as revisional surgery after LSG in terms of safety and efficacy identified 607 studies. Fifty-nine studies were analyzed for full content review and 9 primary studies (398 patients) were included. Revisional single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI) was performed in 294 patients at a mean interval of 37.7 months (range 11-179). Total weight loss (%) varies from 20.5% to 46.2%. Early complications after surgery occurred in 4.1% surgeries including leak (7 cases -1.9%). Mortality was nil. SADI after LSG, after failed sleeve gastrectomy or as a sequential procedure, offers a satisfactory weight loss result. Both early and late term complications are acceptable.

Leak After Sleeve Gastrectomy: Updated Algorithm of Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is currently the most common procedure performed worldwide, and still the leak is considered the main limitation. After an initial enthusiasm for stents, the endoscopic treatment evolved including in the current management the septotomy with balloon dilatation and pigtails insertions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the updated algorithm of endoscopic treatment of leak following LSG including septotomy and balloon dilatation. METHODS: All consecutive patients treated by endoscopy between January 2018 and March 2020 for leak following LSG were included in the current study. After recording the demographic and the leak history, we have analyzed the number of endoscopic sessions, the duration of treatment, and the healing rate of endoscopic treatment for 3 groups: A, small orifice (< 10 mm); B, large orifice (> 10 mm) and acute leak; and group C with large orifice and late leak. RESULTS: A total of 53 patients received endoscopic treatment for leak following LSG. The leaks achieved complete healing after average duration of 3.2 months (range 1-7 months), 2.3 months for group A, 4.2 months for group B, and 3.7 months for group C. The average number of endoscopic procedures was 2.8 (range 2-6) and was required for general population: for group A, 2.3 sessions; in group B, 3.4 sessions; and in group C, 2.7 sessions. Two out of 53 patients (3.8%) required additional treatment outside of the current algorithm, one in group A and another in group B. One patient was transferred for pulmonary abscess, and for another patient, the leak was considered chronic after a total of 14 months, and a laparoscopic fistula-jejunostomy was performed with favorable outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is still no consensus for endoscopic management of leaks after LSG, the benefits of pigtails and the septotomy are undeniable, and it should be included in the armamentarium of any bariatric endoscopic service.

Bariatric surgery in patients with previous COVID-19 infection.

BACKGROUND: The process of reintroducing bariatric surgery to our communities in a COVID-19 environment was particular to each country. Furthermore, no clear recommendation was made for patients with a previous COVID-19 infection and a favorable outcome who were seeking bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the risks of specific complications for patients with previous COVID-19 infection who were admitted for bariatric surgery. SETTING: Eight high-volume private centers from 5 countries. METHODS: All patients with morbid obesity and previous COVID-19 infection admitted for bariatric surgery were included in the current study. Patients were enrolled from 8 centers and 5 countries, and their electronic health data were reviewed retrospectively. The primary outcome was to identify early (<30 d) specific complications related to COVID-19 infection following bariatric surgery, and the secondary outcome was to analyze additional factors from work-ups that could prevent complications. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients with a mean age of 40 years (range, 21-68 yr) and a mean body mass index of 44.3 kg/m2 (±7.4 kg/m2) with previous COVID-19 infection underwent different bariatric procedures: 23 cases of sleeve (65.7 %), 7 cases of bypass, and 5 other cases. The symptomatology of the previous COVID-19 infection varied: 15 patients had no symptoms, 12 had fever and respiratory signs, 5 had only fever, 2 had digestive symptoms, and 1 had isolated respiratory signs. Only 5 patients (14.2 %) were hospitalized for COVID-19 infection, for a mean period of 8.8 days (range, 6-15 d). One patient was admitted to an intensive care unit and needed invasive mechanical ventilation. The mean interval time from COVID-19 infection to bariatric surgery was 11.3 weeks (3-34 wk). The mean hospital stay was 1.7 days (±1 d), and all patients were clinically evaluated 1 month following the bariatric procedure. There were 2 readmissions and 1 case of complication: that case was of a gastric leak treated with laparoscopic drainage and a repeated pigtail drain, with a favorable outcome. No cases of other specific complications or mortality were recorded. CONCLUSION: Minor and moderate COVID-19 infections, especially the forms not complicated with invasive mechanical ventilation, should not preclude the indication for bariatric surgery. In our experience, a prior COVID-19 infection does not induce additional specific complications following bariatric surgery.

The first modified Delphi consensus statement on sleeve gastrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the commonest bariatric procedure worldwide. Yet there is significant variation in practice concerning its various aspects. This paper report results from the first modified Delphi consensus-building exercise on SG. METHODS: We established a committee of 54 globally recognized opinion makers in this field. The committee agreed to vote on several statements concerning SG. An agreement or disagreement amongst ≥ 70.0% experts was construed as a consensus. RESULTS: The committee achieved a consensus of agreement (n = 71) or disagreement (n = 7) for 78 out of 97 proposed statements after two rounds of voting. The committee agreed with 96.3% consensus that the characterization of SG as a purely restrictive procedure was inaccurate and there was 88.7% consensus that SG was not a suitable standalone, primary, surgical weight loss option for patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) without dysplasia. There was an overwhelming consensus of 92.5% that the sleeve should be fashioned over an orogastric tube of 36-40 Fr and a 90.7% consensus that surgeons should stay at least 1 cm away from the angle of His. Remarkably, the committee agreed with 81.1% consensus that SG patients should undergo a screening endoscopy every 5 years after surgery to screen for BE. CONCLUSION: A multinational team of experts achieved consensus on several aspects of SG. The findings of this exercise should help improve the outcomes of SG, the commonest bariatric procedure worldwide, and guide future research on this topic.

The First Modified Delphi Consensus Statement for Resuming Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery in the COVID-19 Times.

The purpose of this study was to achieve consensus amongst a global panel of expert bariatric surgeons on various aspects of resuming Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery (BMS) during the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. A modified Delphi consensus-building protocol was used to build consensus amongst 44 globally recognised bariatric surgeons. The experts were asked to either agree or disagree with 111 statements they collectively proposed over two separate rounds. An agreement amongst ≥ 70.0% of experts was construed as consensus as per the predetermined methodology. We present here 38 of our key recommendations. This first global consensus statement on the resumption of BMS can provide a framework for multidisciplinary BMS teams planning to resume local services as well as guide future research in this area.

Aortic injuries following stents in bariatric surgery: our experience.

BACKGROUND: Due to the large number of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) performed over the last decade, the management of the leak following LSG has been increasingly reported. The role of covered Self Expandable Metal Stents (cSEMS) for the treatment of the leak is still controversial because of the poor tolerance and high risk of complications. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to analyze the foregut wall perforation and aorta injuries, a very rare but potentially fatal complication, related to the treatment of the leak following LSG using cSEMS. SETTING: Private hospital, France. METHODS: An audit was conducted in 2 French tertiary bariatric endoscopic centers focusing on aortic injuries after cSEMS use for leak. We examined and classified the initial procedure, leak characteristics, primary endoscopic treatment, and outcome of endoscopic complication for each eligible case. RESULTS: A total of 5 patients were identified with foregut wall perforation and aorta injuries. All stents were deployed for staple line leak following LSG. The recorded mortality in case of esophageal-aortic injuries related to cSEMS use was 80%. CONCLUSION: cSEMS are potentially effective tools for the management of foregut leaks in bariatric surgery. The biggest challenges with this approach are stent migration and poor quality of life. Caution is required due to the risk of fatal complications such as foregut wall perforation and aortic injury.

Aortic Injuries Following Stent Deployments in Bariatric Surgery-Review of Literature.

Introduction: Consecutive to an increase in the number of bariatric surgeries worldwide, the number of articles reporting complications have also increased. The most dreadful bariatric complication is represented by the leak, and the endoscopic stent is still the standard treatment for some bariatric teams despite the poor quality of life and associated complications. The purpose of this review was to identify the very rare cases of aortic injuries associated with stent use in bariatric surgery. Methods: Aortic injuries related to stent use was the main criteria to summarize the literature by a careful assessment of PubMed/MEDLINE databases. Leak characteristics, primary endoscopic treatment, and the outcome of endoscopic complication were retrieved and categorized from each eligible article. Results: Thirty-five articles were selected for analysis. After abstract analysis, 22 studies were excluded, and 13 articles were reviewed in full-text version. Four articles were confirmed with aortic injury following stent use for complications after different bariatric procedures. These contained one retrospective case series and three retrospective case reports. There were 4 patients involved with complications following bariatric surgery: Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass-3 cases and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy-1 case. The reported mortality of the aorto-esophageal fistula was 50%. Conclusions: Using stents in the treatment of leaks following bariatric surgery could be an efficient treatment, despite the poor quality of life and the stent migration. Even though it is rare, the aortic injury is a dreaded complication related to stent use and associated with high mortality rates.