Obesity and Risk for Incomplete Stone Clearance in Patients with Bile Duct Stones Undergoing ERCP.

INTRODUCTION: Obesity degrades fluoroscopic image quality and could impact on the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) outcomes. Our study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and adverse events (AEs) between obese and non-obese patients undergoing ERCP for biliary stone-related conditions. METHODS: Patients who underwent ERCP for biliary-stone related conditions were included. The analyzed outcomes included the rates of successful bile duct cannulation, incomplete bile duct stone clearance, recurrent bile duct stones, and AEs. RESULTS: A total of 229 patients (116 obese patients and 113 non-obese patients) were included. All patients had successful bile duct cannulation. The rates of incomplete bile duct stone clearance (11.3% vs. 9.0%, P = 0.51), recurrent bile duct stones (1.9% vs. 4.2%, P = 0.24), and AEs (1.8% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.43) were not significantly different between the two groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates no associations between obesity and the rates of incomplete stone clearance, recurrent stones, successful cannulation, or AEs in patients undergoing ERCP for biliary stone-related disease.

Lumen-apposing metal stents with or without coaxial plastic stent placement for the management of pancreatic fluid collections.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Coaxial double-pigtail plastic stent (DPPS) placement is often performed within lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs) to prevent adverse events (AEs) such as stent occlusion and bleeding. This study compares the safety and outcomes of LAMSs alone versus LAMSs with coaxial DPPSs for PFC management. METHODS: Patients undergoing drainage of a PFC with LAMSs were retrospectively identified and categorized as LAMS or LAMS/DPPS based on initial drainage strategy. The AE rate, AE type, and clinical success were extracted by chart review. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-five individuals (83 LAMS, 102 LAMS/DPPS) were identified. No significant differences were found in rates of clinical success (75.9% LAMS vs 69.6% LAMS/DDPS, P = .34) or overall AEs (15.7% LAMS vs 15.7% LAMS/DPPS, P = .825). CONCLUSIONS: In this comparative single-center study, placement of a coaxial DPPS for drainage of PFCs with LAMSs did not affect rates of AEs or clinical success.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy for the management of gastric outlet obstruction: A large comparative study with long-term follow-up.

Background and study aims Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is traditionally managed with surgical gastroenterostomy (surgical-GE) and enteral stenting (ES). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is now a third option. Large studies assessing their relative risks and benefits with adequate follow-up are lacking. We conducted a comparative analysis of patients who underwent EUS-GE, ES, or surgical-GE for GOO. Patients and methods In this retrospective comparative cohort study, consecutive patients presenting with GOO who underwent EUS-GE, ES, or surgical-GE at two academic institutions were reviewed and independently cross-edited to ensure accurate reporting. The primary outcome was need for reintervention. Secondary outcomes were technical and clinical success, length of hospital stay (LOS), and adverse events (AEs). Results A total of 436 patients (232 EUS-GE, 131 ES, 73 surgical-GE) were included. The median duration of follow-up of the entire cohort was 185.5 days (interquartile range 55.25-454.25 days). The rate of reintervention in the EUS-GE group was lower than in the ES and surgical-GE groups (0.9 %, 12.2 %, and 13.7 %, P  < 0.0001). Technical success was achieved in 98.3 %, 99.2 %, and 100 % ( P  = 0.58), and clinical success was achieved in 98.3 %, 91.6 %, and 90.4 % ( P  < 0.0001) in the EUS-GE, ES, and surgical-GE groups, respectively. The EUS-GE group had a shorter LOS (2 days vs. 3 days vs. 5 days, P  < 0.0001) and a lower AE rate than the ES and surgical-GE groups (8.6 % vs. 38.9 % vs. 27.4 %, P  < 0.0001). Conclusion This large cohort study demonstrates the safety and palliation durability of EUS-GE as an alternative strategy for GOO palliation in select patients.

Hiatal hernia repair with transoral incisionless fundoplication versus Nissen fundoplication for gastroesophageal reflux disease: A retrospective study.

Background and study aims Concomitant hiatal hernia (HH) repair with transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) is a therapeutic option for patients with HH > 2 cm and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Data comparing this approach with laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) are lacking. We performed an exploratory analysis to compare these two approaches' adverse events (AEs) and clinical outcomes. Patients and methods This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study of HH repair followed by LNF versus HH repair followed by TIF in patients with GERD and moderate HH (2-5 cm). AEs were assessed using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Symptoms (heartburn/regurgitation, bloating, and dysphagia) were compared at 6 and 12 months. Results A total of 125 patients with HH repair with TIF and 70 with HH repair with LNF were compared. There was no difference in rates of discontinuing or decreasing proton pump inhibitor use, dysphagia, esophagitis, disrupted wrap, and HH recurrence between the two groups ( P  > 0.05). The length of hospital stay (1 day vs. 2 days), 30-day readmission rate (0 vs. 4.3 %), early AE rate (0 vs. 18.6 %), and early serious AE rate (0 vs. 4.3 %) favored TIF (all P  < 0.05). The rate of new or worse than baseline bloating was lower in the TIF group at 6 months (13.8 % vs. 30.0 %, P  = 0.009). Conclusions Concomitant HH repair with TIF is feasible and associated with lower early and serious AEs compared to LNF. Further comparative efficacy studies are warranted.

Effect of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty on gastric emptying, motility and hormones: a comparative prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) has gained global adoption but our understanding of its mechanism(s) of action and durability of efficacy is limited. We sought to determine changes in gastric emptying (GE), gastric motility (GM), hormones and eating behaviours after ESG. DESIGN: A priori-designed single-centre substudy of a large US randomised clinical trial, adults with obesity were randomised to ESG or lifestyle interventions (LS) alone. We measured GE, hormones and weight loss and assessed eating behaviours. In a subset of ESG patients, we assessed GM. The primary outcome was the change in T1/2 (min) at 3 months, and secondary outcomes were changes in weight, GE, GM, hormones and eating behaviours. We used t-test analyses and regression to determine the association between GE and weight loss. RESULTS: 36 (ESG=18; LS=18) participated in this substudy. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. At 3 months, T1/2 was delayed in the ESG group (n=17) compared with the LS group (n=17) (152.3±47.3 vs 89.1±27.9; p<0.001). At 12 months, T1/2 remained delayed in the ESG group (n=16) vs control group (n=14) (137±37.4 vs 90.1±23.4; p<0.001). Greater delays in GE at 3 months were associated with greater weight loss. GM was preserved and fasting ghrelin, glucagon-like peptide 1 and polypeptide YY significantly increased 18 months after ESG. CONCLUSION: ESG promotes weight loss through several key mechanistic pathways involving GE and hormones while preserving GM. These findings further support clinical adoption of this technique for the management of obesity. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03406975.

Lumen-apposing metal stents for the treatment of benign gastrointestinal tract strictures: a single-center experience and proposed treatment algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) are an alternative therapeutic option for benign gastrointestinal (GI) tract strictures. Our study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LAMS for the management of benign GI strictures. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent a LAMS placement for benign luminal GI strictures at a tertiary care center between January 2014 and July 2021 were reviewed. Primary outcomes included technical success, early clinical success, and adverse events (AEs). Other outcomes included rates of stent migration and re-intervention after LAMS removal. RESULTS: One hundred and nine patients who underwent 128 LAMS placements (67.9% female, mean age of 54.3 ± 14.2 years) were included, and 70.6% of the patients had failed prior endoscopic treatments. The majority of strictures (83.5%) were anastomotic, and the most common stricture site was the gastrojejunal anastomosis (65.9%). Technical success was achieved in 100% of procedures, while early clinical success was achieved in 98.4%. The overall stent-related AE rate was 25%. The migration rate was 27.3% (35/128). Of these, five stents were successfully repositioned endoscopically. The median stent dwell time was 119 days [interquartile range (IQR) 68-189 days], and the median follow-up duration was 668.5 days [IQR: 285.5-1441.5 days]. The re-intervention rate after LAMS removal was 58.3%. CONCLUSIONS: LAMS is an effective therapeutic option for benign GI strictures, offering high technical and early clinical success. However, the re-intervention rate after LAMS removal was high. In select cases, using LAMS placement as destination therapy with close surveillance is a reasonable option.

Prospective Multicenter Study of the Primary Obesity Surgery Endoluminal (POSE 2.0) Procedure for Treatment of Obesity.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: The Primary Obesity Surgery Endoluminal (POSE) 2.0 procedure involves a novel pattern of full-thickness gastric body plications to shorten and narrow the stomach using durable suture anchor pairs. Our prospective, multicenter trial examined the safety, efficacy, durability, and physiologic effects of POSE 2.0 in adults with obesity. METHODS: Adults with obesity underwent POSE 2.0 at 3 centers. Primary outcomes were percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) and proportion of patients achieving >5% TBWL at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included change in obesity comorbidities, satiety, quality of life at 6 months, and durability of plications at 12 and 24 months. Subjects were followed for adverse events throughout the study duration. RESULTS: 44 patients (61% female; mean age, 45 ± 9.7 years; mean body mass index, 37 ± 2.1 kg/m2) were enrolled. This procedure used an average of 19 suture anchor pairs, with a mean duration of 37 ± 11 minutes, and was technically successful in all subjects. Mean %TBWL at 12 months was 15.7% ± 6.8%. At 12 months, %TBWL >5%, >10%, and >15% was achieved in 98%, 86%, and 58% of patients, respectively. Improvements in lipid profile, liver biochemistries, and hepatic steatosis were seen at 6 months. Improvements in hepatic steatosis persisted for 24 months in a subgroup of patients (P < .01). POSE 2.0 reduced maximum tolerated meal volume (P = .03) and was associated with increased fullness (P < .01) and improved eating behavior (P < .01) at 6 months. Impact of weight on quality-of-life questionnaire improved at 6 months (2.23 vs 1.23; P < .01). Repeat assessment at 24 months (n = 26) showed fully intact plications. No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: POSE 2.0 is an effective and durable endoscopic bariatric therapy which may influence physiologic pathways impacting satiety. Larger comparative studies are needed to further elucidate these initial findings. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT03721731.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety Between Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty and Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Meta-analysis of 6775 Individuals with Obesity.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a novel endoscopic bariatric therapy that complements current medical and surgical therapeutic offerings for weight management and fills an unmet need. Few meta-analyses compared ESG to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). However, these studies relied on indirect evidence derived from non-comparative studies. Comparative effectiveness data derived from direct comparative studies is needed. We performed a meta-analysis of studies that directly compared ESG with LSG. METHODS: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted. Single-arm studies were excluded. Pooled mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained within a random-effect model. RESULTS: Seven studies with 6,775 patients (3,413 with ESG vs. 3,362 with LSG) were included. There were significant differences in 6-month (MD - 7.48; 95% CI - 10.44, - 4.52; P < 0.00001), 12-month (MD - 9.90; 95% CI - 10.59, - 9.22; P < 0.00001), and 24-month (MD - 7.63; 95% CI - 11.31, - 3.94; P < 0.0001) TBWL% favoring LSG over ESG. There was a trend toward lower incidence of adverse events with ESG compared to LSG but did not reach statistical significance (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.23-1.11, P = 0.09). The incidence of new-onset gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) was significantly lower after ESG compared to LSG, 1.3% vs. 17.9%, respectively (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.02-0.53, P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: ESG achieved clinically adequate but lower short- and mid-term weight loss when compared to LSG, with fewer adverse events, including GERD. Given the stomach-sparing nature of ESG and acceptable safety profile, it provides an acceptable alternative to LSG for patients with mild-to-moderate obesity.

Effects on physiologic measures of appetite from intragastric balloon and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty: results of a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic bariatric therapies can help address widening management gaps in obesity. Their ability to facilitate weight loss is largely tied to influences on appetite through perturbations of gastric emptying and accommodation. As these tools gain traction in obesity therapy, their physiologic underpinnings require exploration, which may enhance efficacy, tolerance, and patient-tailored care. METHODS: We prospectively assessed consecutive subjects with fluid-filled intragastric balloons (IGBs) ( n  = 18) placed between October 2016 and June 2017 or underwent endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) ( n  = 23) from March 2018 to June 2018. Patients underwent physiologic appraisal at 3 months with 13 C-spirulina-based gastric emptying breath test to determine time to half emptying (T50), as well as maximum tolerated volume (MTV) of a standard nutrient drink test. Changes in T50 and MTV at 3 months were compared with percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) at 3 and 6 months using best-fit linear regression. RESULTS: The change in T50 at 3 months correlated with %TBWL at 3 months for IGB ( P  = 0.01) and ESG ( P  = 0.01) but with greater impact on %TBWL in IGB compared to ESG ( R2  = 0.42 vs . 0.26). Change in T50 at 3 months was predictive of weight loss at 6 months for IGB ( P  = 0.01) but not ESG ( P  = 0.11). ESG was associated with greater decrease in MTV compared to IGB (340.25 ±â€Š297.97 mL vs. 183.00 ±â€Š217.13 mL, P  = 0.08), indicting an enhanced effect on satiation through decreased gastric accommodation. Changes in MTV at 3 months did not correlate with %TBWL for either IGB ( P  = 0.26) or ESG ( P  = 0.49) but trended toward significance for predicting %TBWL at 6 months for ESG ( P  = 0.06) but not IGB ( P  = 0.19). CONCLUSION: IGB and ESG both induce weight loss but likely through distinct gastric motor function phenotypes, and gastric emptying may predict future weight loss in patients with IGB.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided injectable therapy for pancreatic cancer: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Given the low survival rate in pancreatic cancer, new therapeutic techniques have been explored, especially for unresectable or borderline resectable disease. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) provides real-time imaging and minimally invasive access for local and targeted injection of anti-tumor agents directly into the pancreatic tumor. Limited studies have been reported using this technique for the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). AIM: To evaluate the progress made with EUS-guided injectable therapies in the treatment of PDAC. METHODS: All original articles published in English until July 15, 2021, were retrieved via a library-assisted literature search from Ovid Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews and Scopus databases. Reference lists were reviewed to identify additional relevant articles. Prospective clinical studies evaluating the use of EUS-guided injectable therapies in PDAC were included. Studies primarily directed at non-EUS injectable therapies and other malignancies were excluded. Retrieved manuscripts were reviewed descriptively with on critical appraisal of published studies based on their methods and outcome measures such as safety, feasibility, and effectiveness in terms of tumor response and survival. Heterogeneity in data outcomes and therapeutic techniques limited the ability to perform comparative statistical analysis. RESULTS: A total of thirteen articles (503 patients) were found eligible for inclusion. The EUS-injectable therapies used were heterogeneous among the studies consisting of immunotherapy (n = 5) in 59 patients, chemotherapy (n = 1) in 36 patients, and viral and other biological therapies (n = 7) in 408 patients. Eleven of the studies reviewed were single armed while two were double armed with one randomized trial and one non-randomized comparative study. Overall, the included studies demonstrated EUS-guided injectable therapies to be safe and feasible with different agents as monotherapy or in conjunction with other modalities. Promising results were also observed regarding their efficacy and survival parameters in patients with PDAC. CONCLUSION: EUS-guided injectable therapies, including immunotherapy, chemotherapy, and viral or other biological therapies have shown minimal adverse events and potential efficacy in the treatment of PDAC. Comparative studies, including controlled trials, are required to confirm these results in order to offer novel EUS-based treatment options for patients with PDAC.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy in patients with malignant gastric outlet obstruction and ascites.

Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ) is an endoscopic procedure for treating gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). Limited data exist regarding the safety and efficacy of EUS-GJ in patients with malignant GOO with ascites. Thus, we aimed to study the outcomes and safety of EUS-GJ in GOO patients with vs. without ascites. Patients and methods This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with malignant GOO who underwent successful EUS-GJ at a tertiary care academic center. Primary outcomes included the efficacy and safety of EUS-GJ. Secondary outcomes included 30-day readmission, reintervention, and survival utilizing Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results A total of 55 patients (mean age of 67.0 ±â€Š11.3 years, 40.0 % female) who underwent EUS-GJ, of whom 24 had ascites (small in 22, large in 2) were included. Clinical success was achieved in 91.7 % and 93.5 % ( P =  1.00) of patients with and without ascites, respectively. A higher rate of adverse events (AEs) was noted in patients with ascites but this was not statistically significant (37.5 % vs. 19.4 %, P =  0.13). Four patients in the ascites group (16.6 %) developed clinical evidence of peritonitis or sepsis post-EUS-GJ. Eight patients with ascites developed worsening ascites within a month of EUS-GJ. In contrast, only one patient without ascites developed evidence of new ascites. The median survival of patients was not significantly different between the two groups (patients with ascites: 129 days vs. patients without ascites: 180 days, ( P =  0.12). Conclusions The efficacy EUS-GJ in the presence of ascites is promising; however, the safety profile remains concerning given the high rate of AEs, specifically peritonitis and sepsis.

Endoscopic suturing and plication in the stomach for weight loss.

The prevalence of obesity has been increasing on a global scale. However, less than 1% of patients eligible for bariatric surgery actually undergo weight loss surgery. Endobariatric therapies (EBTs) have emerged to bridge the obesity treatment gap, as they are less invasive, highly effective, and more broadly applicable to patients with mild to moderate obesity. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty and primary obesity surgery endoluminal are the two most promising EBTs, altering stomach physiologies mimicking bariatric surgery. This review focuses on these two EBT approaches.

Complete endoscopic removal of an eroded magnetic sphincter augmentation device.

Video 1Technique for complete endoscopic removal of the eroded and migrated LINX device using the Ovesco DC current retrieval system.

Indications and Outcomes of Conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: a Systematic Review and a Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most performed bariatric procedure. Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for SG-related complications such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), insufficient weight loss (ISWL), and weight regain (WR) is increasing. Our aim was to investigate the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of conversion from SG to RYGB. METHODS: A literature search was performed from database inception to May 2020. Eligible studies must report indications for conversion, %total body weight loss (%TWL), and/or complications. The pooled mean or proportion were analyzed using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Seventeen unique studies (n = 556, 68.7% female, average age at time of conversion 42.6 ± 10.29 years) were included. The pooled conversion rate due to GERD was 30.4% (95% CI 23.5, 38.3%; I2 = 63.9%), compared to 52.0% (95% CI 37.0, 66.6%; I2 = 85.89%) due to ISWL/WR. The pooled baseline BMI at conversion was 38.5 kg/m2 (95% CI 36.49, 40.6 kg/m2; I2 = 92.1%) and after 1 year was 32.1 kg/m2 (95% CI 25.50, 38.7 kg/m2; I2 = 94.53%). The pooled %TWL after 1 year was 22.8% (95% CI 13.5, 32.1%; I2 = 98.05%). Complication rate within 30 days was 16.4% (95% CI 11.1, 23.6%; I2 = 57.17%), and after 30 days was 11.4% (95% CI 7.7, 16.7%; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis showed that conversion from SG to RYGB is an option for conversion at a bariatric care center that produces sufficient weight loss outcomes, and potential resolution of symptoms of GERD. Further indication-based studies are required to obtain a clearer consensus on the surgical management of patients seeking RYGB following SG.

Impact of bariatric surgery on surveillance and treatment outcomes of Barrett's esophagus: A stage-matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Obesity could increase the risk of Barrett's esophagus (BE). Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) could alter the natural course of BE. Data on BE progression after RYGB are scarce. OBJECTIVES: To study endoscopic surveillance and endoscopic eradication therapy (EET) outcomes of BE in post-RYGB patients versus controls with obesity. SETTING: Academic referral centers, a retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Patients who underwent RYGB with biopsy-proven BE or intramucosal esophageal adenocarcinoma (IM-EAC) with an endoscopic follow-up of at least 12 months were identified from a prospectively maintained database between January 1992 and February 2019 at 3 tertiary care centers. RYGB patients were matched 1-to-2 to patients with obesity (body mass index > 30 kg/m2) by the initial BE stage at diagnosis. Surveillance and EET outcomes were compared. RESULTS: A total of 147 patients were included (49 RYGB and 98 BE stage-matched controls with obesity). For endoscopic surveillance, the rate of disease progression to high-grade dysplasia /IM-EAC was significantly lower in the RYGB patients than controls (2.6% versus 40.2%, respectively; P < .0001), with a comparable median follow-up time (85 months versus 80 months, respectively). This effect persisted in a multivariate analysis, with a hazard ratio of .09 (95% confidence interval, .01-.69). For EET, no difference in the rate of achieving complete remission of intestinal metaplasia was observed between the RYGB and control groups (71.2% versus 81.3%, respectively; P = .44). CONCLUSION: RYGB appears to be a protective factor for disease progression to neoplastic BE during endoscopic surveillance. However, disease progression was still observed after RYGB, warranting continuing endoscopic surveillance. EET appeared to be equally effective between RYGB patients and controls with obesity.

Endoscopic management of refractory leaks and fistulas after bariatric surgery with long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND: In selected cases of post-bariatric leaks and fistulas, endoscopy is an initial treatment modality. Management can be complex and require multiple endoscopic sessions with varying degrees of success. Our aim was to describe our tertiary care experience on endoscopy management of refractory post-bariatric leaks and fistulas. METHODS: Patients with post-bariatric leaks and/or fistulas who failed an initial endoscopic intervention were included. Endoscopic treatments were classified into four strategies: (1) closure management, (2) active drainage, (3) passive drainage, and (4) plugging. Clinical success and adverse events were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients (mean age = 45.3 ± 11.8 years and 56% female) were included. Clinical success was achieved in 20 patients (80%) with a mean of 3.0 ± 1.5 procedures and a median time to healing of 114.5 (53-210.3) days. Closure and plugging were the main successful strategies used for early and acute leaks/fistulas, while drainage was for late and chronic leaks/fistulas. Adverse events were observed in 13 patients (52%) with one serious adverse event. Patients with fistulas had a lower success rate (72.2% vs. 100%, P = 0.052). Of those with clinical failure (n = 5), four underwent reconstructive surgery, eventually led to success in 3 patients. The other one died of septic shock related to a complicated fistula. CONCLUSIONS: Complex multi-modality endoscopic management ultimately achieved clinical success in most cases of refractory leaks/fistulas post-bariatric with an acceptable safety profile. However, a close follow-up to detect the development of long-term failure is warranted. These patients should be referred to a specialized bariatric center with expertise in bariatric endoscopy and surgery.

Revisional endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: an international, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) facilitates significant and durable weight loss; however, weight recidivism and need for revisional surgery occur in a subset of patients. Reduction of a dilated LSG using the revisional endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (R-ESG) approach is an appealing and minimally invasive alternative to surgical revision that is congruent with obesity as a chronic relapsing disease model. In this study, we examine the safety and efficacy of the technique in a large multicenter international cohort. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from 9 centers for 82 consecutive adults who underwent R-ESG for weight regain after LSG using the OverStitch device (Apollo Endosurgery, Austin, Tex, USA) from March 2014 to November 2019 were reviewed. Total body weight loss (TBWL) and adverse events were reported up to 12 months. Univariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of response at 12 months. RESULTS: Eighty-two adults (92.7% female) experienced 27.9 ± 20.7 kg weight regain from post-LSG nadir weight, prompting R-ESG (mean age, 42.8 ± 10.4 years) at a mean weight of 128.2 ± 57.5 kg. Mean R-ESG procedure duration was 48.3 ± 20.5 minutes, and the median number of sutures used was 4 (interquartile range, 3-4). After R-ESG, TBWL (follow-up %) was 6.6% ± 3.2% at 1 month (81.7%), 10.6% ± 4.4% at 3 months (74.4%), 13.2% ± 10.1% at 6 months (63.4%), and 15.7% ± 7.6% at 12 months (51.2%). In a per-protocol analysis, ≥10% TBWL was achieved by 37 of 51 patients (72.5%) at 6 months and 34 of 42 patients (81.0%) at 12 months; ≥15% TBWL was achieved by 20 of 46 patients (43.5%) at 6 months and 22 of 42 patients (52.4%) at 12 months. Only 1 moderate adverse event occurred in the form of a narrowed gastroesophageal junction, which resolved after a single endoscopic dilation. CONCLUSIONS: R-ESG is a safe and effective means of facilitating weight loss for weight recidivism after LSG, with sustained results at 1 year. R-ESG should be considered before pursuing more-invasive surgical revisional options.

Long-term outcomes of Roux-en-Y gastric diversion after failed surgical fundoplication in a large cohort and a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric diversion (RNYG) is an alternative approach for patients with persistent or recurrent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) after surgical fundoplication, especially in patients with esophageal dysmotility or morbid obesity, because redo fundoplication could offer unfavorable outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term outcomes of RNYG for failed fundoplication and its impact on esophageal function. SETTING: A retrospective cohort study and a systematic review. METHODS: Patients who underwent RNYG after failed fundoplication between 1995 and 2019 were identified. Surgical-related complications, GERD, dysphagia, and endoscopic and esophageal manometric findings were reviewed. A literature search for relevant studies was performed from several databases from database inception to September 2019. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients (mean age, 52.1 yr; 86.1% female; mean body mass index, 35.8 kg/m2) were included. Overall complication rates within and more than 30 days after surgery were 36.3% and 53.5%. GERD symptoms were resolved in 70.1% after RNYG. However, 39.7% had a recurrence during a median follow-up of 56.2 months. In patients with no baseline dysphagia (n = 36), 16 (44%) developed new-onset dysphagia after surgery. In patients with severe baseline dysphagia (n = 9), 5 patients (56%) had persistent dysphagia after surgery. Seven studies involving 381 patients were included in our systematic review. High rates of GERD improvement have been reported across studies; however, long-term GERD, dysphagia, and objective outcomes were infrequently reported. CONCLUSION: RNYG is an effective alternative surgery in a subset of patients with intractable symptoms who failed fundoplication. However, patients should be informed of the risks of postoperative GERD symptoms and dysphagia. Referral for a careful evaluation by a multidisciplinary foregut team is warranted.