Bariatric Surgeon Ergonomics: A Comparison of Laparoscopy and Robotics.

INTRODUCTION: Bariatric surgery is routinely performed using laparoscopic and robotic approaches. Musculoskeletal injuries are prevalent among both robotic and laparoscopic bariatric surgeons. Studies evaluating ergonomic differences between laparoscopic and robotic bariatric surgery are limited. This study aims to analyze the ergonomic, physical, and mental workload differences among surgeons performing robotic and laparoscopic bariatric surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All primary laparoscopic and robotic bariatric surgeries, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, and sleeve gastrectomy between May and August 2022 were included in this study. Objective ergonomic analysis was performed by an observer evaluating each surgeon intraoperatively according to the validated Rapid Entire Body Assessment tool, with a higher score indicating more ergonomic strain. After each operation, surgeons subjectively evaluated their physical workload using the body part discomfort scale, and their mental workload using the surgery task load index. RESULTS: Five bariatric surgeons participated in this study. In total, 50 operative cases were observed, 37 laparoscopic and 13 robotic. The median total Rapid Entire Body Assessmentscore as a primary surgeon was significantly higher in laparoscopic (6.0) compared to robotic (3.0) cases (P < 0.01). The laparoscopic and robotic approaches had no significant differences in the surgeons' physical (body part discomfort scale) or mental workload (surgery task load index). CONCLUSIONS: This study identified low-risk ergonomic stress in surgeons performing bariatric surgery robotically compared to medium-risk stress laparoscopically. Since ergonomic stress can exist even without the perception of physical or mental stress, this highlights the importance of external observations to optimize ergonomics for surgeons in the operating room.

The Association of Preoperative Food Insecurity With Early Postoperative Outcomes After Bariatric Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the rate of food insecurity in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. To compare the rates of 30-d postoperative complications based on food security status. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy between 7/2020 - 3/2022 were screened for food insecurity via telephone using questions from the Accountable Health Communities Health-Related Social Needs Screening Tool. Screens were matched to patient data and 30-d outcomes from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database. RESULTS: In total, 213 (59%) of the 359 bariatric surgery patients were screened with 81 (38%) screening positive for food insecurity. Evaluation of preoperative variables based on food security status showed comparable age, body mass index, and comorbidity status. Food insecure patients were found to have an increased length of stay following surgery compared to food secure patients (P = 0.003). Food insecurity was not associated with higher rates of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program reported 30-d postoperative complications including emergency department/urgent care visits (P = 0.34) and hospital readmissions (P = 0.94). CONCLUSIONS: Food insecurity was prevalent at 38% of the bariatric surgical population. Food insecure patients had a statistically longer length of stay after primary bariatric surgery but were not associated with an increased risk of 30-d complications. Future studies are needed to determine the mid-term and long-term effects of food insecurity status on bariatric surgical outcomes and the potential impact of food insecurity on length of stay.

From Alpha to Omicron and Beyond: Associations Between SARS-CoV-2 Variants and Surgical Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly influenced surgical practices, with SARS-CoV-2 variants presenting unique pathologic profiles and potential impacts on perioperative outcomes. This study explores associations between Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2 and surgical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis using the National COVID Cohort Collaborative database, which included patients who underwent selected major inpatient surgeries within eight weeks post-SARS-CoV-2 infection from January 2020 to April 2023. The viral variant was determined by the predominant strain at the time of the patient's infection. Multivariable logistic regression models explored the association between viral variants, COVID-19 severity, and 30-d major morbidity or mortality. RESULTS: The study included 10,617 surgical patients with preoperative COVID-19, infected by the Alpha (4456), Delta (1539), and Omicron (4622) variants. Patients infected with Omicron had the highest vaccination rates, most mild disease, and lowest 30-d morbidity and mortality rates. Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated that Omicron was linked to a reduced likelihood of adverse outcomes compared to Alpha, while Delta showed odds comparable to Alpha. Inclusion of COVID-19 severity in the model rendered the odds of major morbidity or mortality equal across all three variants. CONCLUSIONS: Our study examines the associations between the clinical and pathological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 variants and surgical outcomes. As novel SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge, this research supports COVID-19-related surgical policy that assesses the severity of disease to estimate surgical outcomes.

Severity of Prior Coronavirus Disease 2019 is Associated With Postoperative Outcomes After Major Inpatient Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how the severity of prior history (Hx) of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection influences postoperative outcomes after major elective inpatient surgery. BACKGROUND: Surgical guidelines instituted early in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic recommended a delay in surgery of up to 8 weeks after an acute SARS-CoV-2 infection. This was based on the observation of elevated surgical risk after recovery from COVID-19 early in the pandemic. As the pandemic shifts to an endemic phase, it is unclear whether this association remains, especially for those recovering from asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic COVID-19. METHODS: Utilizing the National COVID Cohort Collaborative, we assessed postoperative outcomes for adults with and without a Hx of COVID-19 who underwent major elective inpatient surgery between January 2020 and February 2023. COVID-19 severity and time from infection to surgery were each used as independent variables in multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: This study included 387,030 patients, of whom 37,354 (9.7%) were diagnosed with preoperative COVID-19. Hx of COVID-19 was found to be an independent risk factor for adverse postoperative outcomes even after a 12-week delay for patients with moderate and severe SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with mild COVID-19 did not have an increased risk of adverse postoperative outcomes at any time point. Vaccination decreased the odds of respiratory failure. CONCLUSIONS: Impact of COVID-19 on postoperative outcomes is dependent on the severity of illness, with only moderate and severe disease leading to a higher risk of adverse outcomes. Existing perioperative policies should be updated to include consideration of COVID-19 disease severity and vaccination status.

Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection increases risk of early postoperative cardiovascular complications following noncardiac surgery.

As the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic progresses to an endemic phase, a greater number of patients with a history of COVID-19 will undergo surgery. Major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACE) are the primary contributors to postoperative morbidity and mortality; however, studies assessing the relationship between a previous severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and postoperative MACE outcomes are limited. Here, we analyzed retrospective data from 457,804 patients within the N3C Data Enclave, the largest national, multi-institutional data set on COVID-19 in the United States. However, 7.4% of patients had a history of COVID-19 before surgery. When comorbidities, age, race, and risk of surgery were controlled, patients with preoperative COVID-19 had an increased risk for 30-day postoperative MACE. MACE risk was influenced by an interplay between COVID-19 disease severity and time between surgery and infection; in those with mild disease, MACE risk was not increased even among those undergoing surgery within 4 wk following infection. In those with moderate disease, risk for postoperative MACE was mitigated 8 wk after infection, whereas patients with severe disease continued to have elevated postoperative MACE risk even after waiting for 8 wk. Being fully vaccinated decreased the risk for postoperative MACE in both patients with no history of COVID-19 and in those with breakthrough COVID-19 infection. Together, our results suggest that a thorough assessment of the severity, vaccination status, and timing of SARS-CoV-2 infection must be a mandatory part of perioperative stratification.NEW & NOTEWORTHY With an increasing proportion of patients undergoing surgery with a prior history of COVID-19, it is crucial to understand the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection on postoperative cardiovascular/cerebrovascular risk. Our work assesses a large, national, multi-institutional cohort of patients to highlight that COVID-19 infection increases risk for postoperative major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACE). MACE risk is influenced by an interplay between disease severity and time between infection and surgery, and full vaccination reduces the risk for 30-day postoperative MACE. These results highlight the importance of stratifying time-to-surgery guidelines based on disease severity.

The impact of frailty on outcomes following laparoscopic repair of 'giant' paraesophageal hernias.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a measure of physiologic reserve and correlates with surgical outcomes in the elderly. Patients who present with giant paraesophageal hernias (PEH) are typically older than 65. We defined 'giant' as a PEH with 50% or more of the stomach in the chest. We hypothesized that frailty correlates with 30-day complications, length of stay, and discharge destination following laparoscopic giant PEH repair. METHODS: Patients older than 65 to undergo primary laparoscopic repair of a giant PEH at a single academic medical center between 2015 and 2022 were included. Hernia size was determined by preoperative imaging. Frailty was assessed clinically prior to surgery using the modified Frailty Index (mFI), an 11-item instrument that counts clinical deficits associated with frailty. A score ≥ 3 was considered frail. A major complication was a Clavien grade IIIB or higher. RESULTS: Of the 162 patients included in the study, mean age was 74.4 ± 7.2, and 66% of patients were female (n = 128). The mFI was ≥ 3 in 37 patients (22.8%). Frail patients were older (78 ± 7.9 vs. 73 ± 6.6 years, p = 0.02). There was no difference in overall complication rate (40.5% vs. 29.6%, p = 0.22) or major complication rate (8.1% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.20) between frail and non-frail patients. Functionally impaired patients (METS < 4) were more likely to develop a major complication (17.9% vs. 3.0%, p < 0.01). Average length of stay was 2.4 days, and frail patients experienced a longer mean hospital stay (2.5 ± 0.2 vs. 2.3 ± 1.8, p = 0.03). Frail patients were more likely to be discharged to a destination other than home. CONCLUSION: Increased frailty as assessed by the mFI is correlated with length of stay and discharge destination following laparoscopic repair of giant PEH in patients > 65. Complication rates were comparable for both frail and non-frail cohorts.

Robotic simulation: validation and qualitative assessment of a general surgery resident training curriculum.

BACKGROUND: The da Vinci skills simulation curriculum has been validated in the literature. The updated simulator, SimNow, features restructured exercises that have not been formally validated. The purpose of this study is to validate the SimNow resident robotic basic simulation curriculum. This study also consists of a qualitative assessment that gives greater insight into the learner's experience completing the robotic curriculum. METHODS: There were 18 participants in this study: 6 novices, 6 competent surgeons, and 6 expert surgeons. The curriculum comprised 5 exercises; participants completed three consecutive scored trials. Computer-derived performance metrics were recorded. The NASA Task Load Index survey was used to assess subjective mental workload. Subjects were asked a series of open-ended questions regarding their experience that were recorded and transcribed. Codes were identified using an inductive method, and themes were generated. RESULTS: Performance metrics were significantly different between novice versus competent and expert surgeons. There was no significant difference in any score metric between competent and expert surgeons. On average, overall score percentages for competent and expert surgeons were between 90.4 and 92.8% versus 70.5% for novices (p = 0.02 and p = 0.01). Expert surgeons perceived a higher level of performance completing the exercises than novice surgeons (15.8 vs. 45.8, p = 0.02). Participants noted a similar robotic experience, utilizing efficiency of motion and visual field skills. Participants agreed on exercise strengths, exercise weaknesses, and software limitations. Competent and expert surgeons were better able to assess the exercises' clinical application. CONCLUSIONS: The SimNow curriculum is a valid simulation training as part of a general surgery resident robotic curriculum. The curriculum distinguishes between novices compared to competent and expert surgeons, but not between competent and expert surgeons. Clinical training level does not affect the experience and mental workload using the robotic simulator, except for competent and expert surgeons' ability to better assess clinical application.

Implementation of a standardized multimodal pain regimen significantly reduces postoperative inpatient opioid utilization in patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Routine opioid use in surgical patients has received attention given the opioid epidemic and a renewed focus on the dangers and drawbacks of opioids in the postoperative setting. Little is known about opioid use in bariatric surgery, especially in the inpatient setting. We hypothesize that a standardized opioid-sparing protocol reduces postoperative inpatient opioid use in bariatric surgery patients. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of bariatric surgery patients at a single institution. From March to September 2019, a standardized intraoperative and postoperative opioid-sparing protocol was designed and implemented along with an educational program for patients regarding safe pain management. Inpatient opioid utilization in patients undergoing surgery in the preintervention phase between April and March 2019 was compared to patients from a postintervention phase of October 2019 to December 2020. Opioid utilization was measured in morphine milliequivalents (MME). RESULTS: A total of 359 patients were included; 192 preintervention and 167 postintervention. Patients were similar demographically. For all patients, mean age was 44.1 years, mean BMI 49.2 kg/m2, and 80% were female. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy was performed in 48%, laparoscopic gastric bypass in 34%, robotic sleeve gastrectomy in 17%, and robotic gastric bypass in 1%. In the postintervention phase inpatient opioid utilization was significantly lower [median 134.8 [79.0-240.8] MME preintervention vs. 61.5 [35.5-150.0] MME postintervention (p < 0.001)]. MME prescribed at discharge decreased from a median of 300 MME preintervention to 75 MME postintervention (p < 0.001). In the postintervention phase, 16% of patients did not receive an opioid prescription at discharge compared to 0% preintervention (p < 0.001). When examining by procedure, statistically significant reductions in opioid utilization were seen for each operation. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a standardized intraoperative and postoperative multimodal pain regimen and educational program significantly reduces inpatient opioid utilization in patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

Surgeon experience with insurance barriers to offering gastric bypass as an evidence-based operation for pathologic GERD.

INTRODUCTION: Obesity is an increasingly prevalent public health problem often associated with poorly controlled gastroesophageal reflux disease. Fundoplication has been shown to have limited long-term efficacy in patients with morbid obesity and does not address additional weight-related co-morbidities. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the gold standard operation for durable resolution of GERD in patients with obesity, and is also used as a salvage operation for GERD after prior foregut surgery. Surgeons report access to RYGB as surgical treatment for GERD is often limited by RYGB-specific benefit exclusions embedded within insurance policies, but the magnitude and scope of this problem is unknown. METHODS: A 9-item survey evaluating surgeon practice and experience with insurance coverage for RYGB for GERD was developed and piloted by a SAGES Foregut Taskforce working group. This survey was then administered to surgeon members of the SAGES Foregut Taskforce and to surgeons participating in the SAGES Bariatrics and/or Foregut Facebook groups. RESULTS: 187 surgeons completed the survey. 89% reported using the RYGB as an anti-reflux procedure. 44% and 26% used a BMI of 35 kg/m2 and 30 kg/m2 respectively as cutoff for the RYGB. 89% viewed RYGB as the procedure of choice for GERD after bariatric surgery. 69% reported using RYGB to address recurrent reflux secondary to failed fundoplication. 74% of responders experienced trouble with insurance coverage at least half the time RYGB was offered for GERD, and 8% reported they were never able to get approval for RYGB for GERD indications in their patient populations. CONCLUSION: For many patients, GERD and obesity are related diseases that are best addressed with RYGB. However, insurance coverage for RYGB for GERD is often limited by policies which run contrary to evidence-based medicine. Advocacy is critical to improve access to appropriate surgical care for GERD in patients with obesity.

Multi-society consensus conference and guideline on the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common diseases in North America and globally. The aim of this guideline is to provide evidence-based recommendations regarding the most utilized and available endoscopic and surgical treatments for GERD. METHODS: Systematic literature reviews were conducted for 4 key questions regarding the surgical and endoscopic treatments for GERD in adults: preoperative evaluation, endoscopic vs surgical or medical treatment, complete vs partial fundoplication, and treatment for obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥ 35 kg/m2) and concomitant GERD. Evidence-based recommendations were formulated using the GRADE methodology by subject experts. Recommendations for future research were also proposed. RESULTS: The consensus provided 13 recommendations. Through the development of these evidence-based recommendations, an algorithm was proposed for aid in the treatment of GERD. Patients with typical symptoms should undergo upper endoscopy, manometry, and pH-testing; additional testing may be required for patients with atypical or extra-esophageal symptoms. Patients with normal or abnormal findings on manometry should consider undergoing partial fundoplication. Magnetic sphincter augmentation or fundoplication are appropriate surgical procedures for adults with GERD. For patients who wish to avoid surgery, the Stretta procedure and transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF 2.0) were found to have better outcomes than proton pump inhibitors alone. Patients with concomitant obesity were recommended to undergo either gastric bypass or fundoplication, although patients with severe comorbid disease or BMI > 50 should undergo Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for the additional benefits that follow weight loss. CONCLUSION: Using the recommendations an algorithm was developed by this panel, so that physicians may better counsel their patients with GERD. There are certain patient factors that have been excluded from included studies/trials, and so these recommendations should not replace surgeon-patient decision making. Engaging in the identified research areas may improve future care for GERD patients.

Anatomic location and mechanism of hiatal hernia recurrence: a video-based assessment.

INTRODUCTION: Hiatal hernia recurrence following surgical repair is common. We sought to define the most common anatomic location and mechanism for hiatal failure to inform technical strategies to decrease recurrence rates. METHODS: Retrospective chart review and video analysis were performed for all recurrent hiatal hernia operations performed by a single surgeon between January 2013 and April 2020. Hiatal recurrences were defined by anatomic quadrants. Recurrences on both left and right on either the anterior or posterior portion of the hiatus were simply classified as 'anterior' or 'posterior', respectively. Three or more quadrants were defined as circumferential. Mechanism of recurrence was defined as disruption of the previous repair or dilation of the hiatus. RESULTS: There were 130 patients to meet criteria. Median time to reoperation from previous hiatal repair was 60 months (IQR19.5-132). First-time recurrent repairs accounted for 74%, second time 18%, and three or more previous repairs for 8% of analyzed procedures. Mesh had been placed at the hiatus in a previous operation in 16%. All reoperative cases were completed laparoscopically. Video analysis revealed anterior recurrences were most common (67%), followed by circumferential (29%). There were two with left-anterior recurrence (1.5%), two posterior recurrence (1.5%), and one right-sided recurrence. The mechanism of recurrence was dilation in 74% and disruption in 26%. Disruption as a mechanism was most common in circumferential hiatal failures. Neither the prior number of hiatal surgeries nor the presence of mesh at the time of reoperation correlated with anatomic recurrence location or mechanism. Reoperations in patients with hiatal disruption occurred after a shorter interval when compared to hiatal dilation. CONCLUSION: The most common location and mechanism for hiatal hernia recurrence is anterior dilation of the hiatus. Outcomes following techniques designed to reinforce the anterior hiatus and perhaps to prevent hiatal dilation should be explored.

The evolution of the general surgery resident operative case experience in the era of robotic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted general surgery procedures are becoming commonplace, requiring more residency programs to establish training curricula for residents. Concerns exist regarding the impact this will have on surgical residents' operative case distribution in laparoscopic and open surgery. This study aimed to analyze the impact of a growing robotic operative case volume and established robotic surgery training curriculum on the general surgery resident operative experience. METHODS: The robotic surgery training curriculum at the Medical College of Wisconsin was established in 2017. ACGME operative case logs of residents from 2014 to 2020 were analyzed to determine resident participation in open, laparoscopic, and robotic cases. Case categories included alimentary tract, abdomen, endocrine, thoracic, pediatric, and trauma. A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to analyze overall cases, as well as participation by case type, post-graduate year (PGY) level, resident role, and institution type. Statistical significance was defined as a p value < 0.05. RESULTS: Operative case logs from 77 residents were analyzed with a total of 34,757 cases: 59.3% open, 39.6% laparoscopic, and 1.1% robotic. There was no significant change in open or laparoscopic case volumes. However, there was a 3.4% increase in robotic cases, from 2014 to 2020 (p = 0.01), specifically in foregut (4.0%, p = 0.01), intestinal (1.6%, p = 0.03), and hernia (8.3%, p = 0.003) procedures. Academic (2.8%, p = 0.01) and veterans' hospital (2.0%, p = 0.01) institutions saw a significant increase in their residents' robotic cases. The only resident role with a significant increase in robotic cases was first assistant (8.0%, p = 0.004). There was no significant difference across PGY levels by surgical approach. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights that the growth of robotic cases has not had a detrimental effect on the resident experience with open and laparoscopic cases. As robotic cases continually increase, the impact on laparoscopic and open case volumes must be monitored to ensure a well-balanced training experience.

Examining current patterns of opioid prescribing and use after bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based guidelines on the appropriate amount of opioid medications to prescribe following bariatric surgery are lacking. We sought to determine our current opioid-prescribing practices, patient utilization, and satisfaction with pain control following elective bariatric surgery. METHODS: A retrospective chart review and phone survey were conducted on patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) from April 2018 to March 2019 at a single academic medical center. Opioid medications were converted to morphine milligram equivalents provided (MMEs). RESULTS: In total, 192 patients met inclusion criteria. The median amount of opioid medication prescribed on discharge was 300 oral MMEs, although there was a significant difference between the MMEs prescribed to patients with and without chronic opioid therapy (median 300 MMEs opioid naïve vs. 375 MMEs chronic opioid therapy, p = 0.01). Significantly fewer SG patients required a refill of their opioid medication compared to RYGB (8.3% vs. 23.9%, p = 0.003). Of the 192 patients, 87 (45.3%) completed the phone survey. Fifty-six patients (64%) reported that they took half or less of the initially prescribed opioids. Of the patients with leftover medication, 36% reported that they did not dispose of the medication. Overall understanding of pain control options after surgery was significantly lower in patients who felt they were prescribed "too little" opioids (p = 0.01), patients requiring refills (p = 0.02), and patients who were not satisfied with their pain control (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: There is a gap between the amount of opioid medication prescribed and taken by patients following bariatric surgery in our practice. Patients who were least satisfied with their pain control reported knowledge gaps about pain control options that were more significant than patients who were more satisfied. Future initiatives should focus on the reduction of opioids prescribed to bariatric surgery patients post-operatively and on opioid education for patients.

Transversus abdominis plane blocks for complex abdominal wall reconstruction decrease hospital length of stay compared to epidurals.

BACKGROUND: Complex abdominal wall reconstruction for ventral and incisional hernias can be quite painful with prolonged length of stay (LOS). There are a variety of options to manage post-operative pain after a ventral hernia repair, including epidural catheters, transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks, and intravenous narcotic pain medications (IVPM). We hypothesized that TAP blocks with liposomal bupivacaine decrease the LOS compared to epidurals and IVPM. METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent an open ventral hernia repair with retromuscular mesh between 2016 and 2020 was conducted. LOS was used as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included post-operative pain and 90-day post-operative complications. RESULTS: An epidural was used in 66 patients, a TAP block with liposomal bupivacaine in 18 patients, and IVPM in 11 patients. The epidural group was noted to have a significantly longer duration of surgery (251.11 vs. 207.94 min; P < 0.05) and larger area of mesh (461.85 vs. 338.17 cm2; P < 0.05) when compared to the TAP block group. Hospital LOS was significantly shorter for the TAP block group compared to the epidural group (4.22 vs. 5.62 days; P < 0.05). There were no differences in post-operative complications between the groups. The epidural group reported significantly lower post-operative day one (POD1) pain scores measured on a 10-point scale, compared to the IVPM and TAP block groups (5.00 vs. 6.91 vs. 7.50; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Patients who received a TAP block for post-operative pain management had a significantly shorter length of stay compared to those patients who received an epidural. While the TAP block group reported higher POD1 pain scores, they did not have a significant difference in post-operative complications. TAP blocks with liposomal bupivacaine should be considered for post-operative pain control in complex ventral hernia repairs.

The Impact of Hemoglobin A1c on Post-operative Outcomes in Bariatric Surgery Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Pre-operative hemoglobin (Hb) A1c levels ≥ 8% can lead to increased post-operative complications. In bariatric surgery patients, attaining a pre-operative HbA1c < 8% can be a challenge. The purpose of this study was to identify the association of pre-operative HbA1c on post-operative outcomes in bariatric surgery patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on diabetic patients (HbA1c ≥ 6.5%) who underwent primary bariatric surgery at a single institution between the years 2013 and 2019. Patients were divided into two groups based on their pre-operative HbA1c levels of < 8% and ≥ 8%. Univariate analyses were performed to determine an association between pre-operative HbA1c levels and post-operative outcomes. RESULTS: There were 351 primary diabetic bariatric surgery patients, 270 HbA1c <8%, and 81 HbA1c ≥ 8%. Procedure selection was significantly different between the HbA1c < 8% and HbA1c ≥ 8% group (49.3% sleeve, 50.4% bypass and 0.4% band versus 43.2% sleeve, 53.1% bypass and 3.7% band respectively, P < 0.04). There was no statistically significant difference in any 30-day post-operative outcome between the two groups. Post-operative HbA1c was significantly less in the HbA1c < 8% group at 3-6 month (6.0% ± 0.9 versus 7.4% ± 1.4, P <0.001) and 6-12 month (6.0% ± 1.1 versus 7.2% ± 1.4, P <0.001) follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated no difference in post-operative outcomes of primary bariatric surgery patients based on a HbA1c cut-off of 8%. This highlights that bariatric surgery can be considered and safely performed in patients with a pre-operative HbA1c ≥ 8%.

Laparoscopic fundoplication for refractory GERD: a procedure worth repeating if needed.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic fundoplication is the current gold standard for medically refractory gastroesophageal reflux disease. Over a 10-year period following surgery, 5-10% of primary laparoscopic fundoplication patients undergo reoperative surgery. Our objective was to compare the symptomatic outcomes and morbidity of primary and reoperative fundoplication procedures. METHODS: This was a retrospective review of patients who underwent laparoscopic primary or reoperative fundoplication between 2011 and 2017. A single surgeon with a more than 10-year experience in reoperative foregut surgery performed all procedures. Patients in both groups completed the GERD health-related quality of life (GERD-HRQL) survey prior to surgery and postoperatively. Outcomes were reflected by the composite GERD-HRQL scores (0 to 50, with lower scores representing a better GERD-related quality of life), which were compared between groups postoperatively. Demographics, perioperative data, and complications were compared. Patient data were analyzed using Chi-Square tests and outcomes were analyzed using independent samples t tests and Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: There were 136 primary and 82 reoperative fundoplications. Prior to surgery, GERD-HRQL scores were similar for primary and reoperative patients. Both groups experienced significant improvement in GERD-related quality of life at 2 years, although this improvement was greater in primary patients (8.7 ± 7.8 primary vs. 14.3 ± 13.6 reoperative, p = 0.02). Operative time and length of stay were longer following reoperative cases. The rate of moderate to severe 30-day complications requiring radiologic, endoscopic, or surgical intervention was similar (2.9% primary vs. 1.2% reoperative, p = 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo reoperative fundoplication experience a significant improvement in their GERD-related symptoms, although not to the degree seen in primary antireflux surgery patients. Perioperative morbidity rates following reoperative and primary procedures can be similar in the hands of an experienced surgeon.

Ten-year trends in minimally invasive hernia repair: a NSQIP database review.

BACKGROUND: Utilization of minimally invasive techniques for ventral and inguinal hernia repairs continues to rise. The purpose of this study was to provide updates on national utilization trends and wound complications of minimally invasive versus open ventral and inguinal hernia repairs. METHODS: Data were accessed from the 2006 to 2017 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. All CPT codes that correlated to laparoscopic and open inguinal and ventral hernia repairs were queried. The total number of cases and wound complications, including superficial surgical site infection (SSI), deep SSI, organ space SSI, and wound dehiscence, was collected for each respective CPT code and compared for each year. IBM SPSS Statistics Software and Microsoft Excel were used to collect and analyze the data. RESULTS: Between 2009 and 2017, the percentage of minimally invasive inguinal hernia repairs increased from 23.1 to 37.8%, whereas the percentage of minimally invasive ventral hernias only increased from 31.5 to 36.6%. Open inguinal hernia repairs had a wound complication rate ranging from 0.60 to 0.74%, which was double the rate of minimally invasive repairs (0.24 to 0.49%) for nearly each respective year. Minimally invasive ventral hernia repairs had total wound complication rates ranging from 0.91 to 1.37%, whereas open ventral hernias had the highest total wound complication rates ranging from 5.07 to 6.26%. CONCLUSIONS: Over the last ten years, the utilization of minimally invasive inguinal and ventral hernia repair has increased by nearly two-fold. A larger proportion of this increase has been secondary to minimally invasive inguinal compared to ventral hernia repairs. Wound complications across all techniques remained stable or improved, and remained significantly less in the minimally invasive compared to open approaches. This study highlights the continued growth of minimally invasive techniques in hernia repair over the last decade.

Experience-based expert consensus on the intra-operative usage of the Endoflip impedance planimetry system.

INTRODUCTION: The Endoluminal Functional Lumen Imaging Probe (Endoflip™) is a balloon-based catheter that provides real-time, objective feedback regarding the distensibility of any sphincter in the gastrointestinal tract. Usage of the Functional Lumen Imaging Probe (FLIP) has not been standardized, which has limited the interpretation and generalizability of published data. The purpose of this consensus statement is to provide a standardized protocol for obtaining FLIP measurements in order to create a more uniform approach to data collection. METHODS: Five expert foregut surgeons, all of whom utilize the FLIP system in their daily practice, convened on March 19, 2019, to create a standardized protocol for obtaining FLIP measurements during hiatal hernia repair and fundoplication, magnetic sphincter augmentation, laparoscopic Heller myotomy, and peroral endoscopic myotomy. Existing literature was presented and reviewed. Each step of the protocol was discussed in detail until a unanimous consensus was reached. RESULTS: A standardized protocol was developed for obtaining FLIP measurements during hiatal hernia repair and fundoplication, magnetic sphincter augmentation, laparoscopic Heller myotomy, and peroral endoscopic myotomy. CONCLUSION: The FLIP impedance planimetry system is the only technology available that provides surgeons an objective way to assess the tightness of a fundoplication or adequacy of a myotomy during an operation. While considerable research remains to correlate FLIP measurements to patient outcomes, this consensus statement will provide standardization of data collection among FLIP users that will enhance the understanding of future study results.

Magnetic Sphincter Augmentation Superior to Proton Pump Inhibitors for Regurgitation in a 1-Year Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Regurgitative gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) refractive to medical treatment is common and caused by mechanical failure of the anti-reflux barrier. We compared the effects of magnetic sphincter augmentation (MSA) with those of proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) in a randomized trial. METHODS: Patients with moderate to severe regurgitation (assessed by the foregut symptom questionnaire) despite once-daily PPI therapy (n = 152) were randomly assigned to groups given twice-daily PPIs (n = 102) or laparoscopic MSA (n = 50) at 20 sites, from July 2015 through February 2017. Patients answered questions from the foregut-specific reflux disease questionnaire and GERD health-related quality of life survey about regurgitation, heartburn, dysphagia, bloating, diarrhea, flatulence, and medication use, at baseline and 6 and 12 months after treatment. Six months after PPI therapy, MSA was offered to patients with persistent moderate to severe regurgitation and excess reflux episodes during impedance or pH testing on medication. Regurgitation, foregut scores, esophageal acid exposure, and adverse events were evaluated at 1 year. RESULTS: Patients in the MSA group and those who crossed over to the MSA group after PPI therapy (n = 75) had similar outcomes. MSA resulted in control of regurgitation in 72/75 patients (96%); regurgitation control was independent of preoperative response to PPIs. Only 8/43 patients receiving PPIs (19%) reported control of regurgitation. Among the 75 patients who received MSA, 61 (81%) had improvements in GERD health-related quality of life improvement scores (greater than 50%) and 68 patients (91%) discontinued daily PPI use. Proportions of patients with dysphagia decreased from 15% to 7% (P < .005), bloating decreased from 55% to 25%, and esophageal acid exposure time decreased from 10.7% to 1.3% (P < .001) from study entry to 1-year after MSA (Combined P < .001). Seventy percent (48/69) of patients had pH normalization at study completion. MSA was not associated with any peri-operative events, device explants, erosions, or migrations. CONCLUSIONS: In a prospective study, we found MSA to reduce regurgitation in 95% of patients with moderate to severe regurgitation despite once-daily PPI therapy. MSA is superior to twice-daily PPIs therapy in reducing regurgitation. Relief of regurgitation is sustained over 12 months. ClinicalTrials.gov no: NCT02505945.

Morbidity and Mortality after Bariatric Surgery in Adolescents Versus Adults.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing prevalence and severity of childhood obesity, the national utilization of adolescent bariatric surgery has plateaued. Concern about the perioperative safety of adolescent bariatric surgery has limited referrals and insurance coverage. The purpose of this study was to compare the 30-d complication rate of minimally invasive bariatric surgery in adolescents and adults. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program 2015 data set was queried for primary minimally invasive bariatric procedures in adolescents and adults. Adolescents were defined as age 19 y or younger. Univariate analyses were performed to determine if there was an increased incidence of the adolescent 30-d complication rate as compared with adults. RESULTS: Of the cases who met inclusion criteria, 1076 (0.8%) were adolescents and 142,704 (99.2%) were adults. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy was the most commonly performed procedure for both patient populations, although at a higher rate in adolescents (73.9% versus 68.8% in adults, P = 0 < 0.0001). The overall 30-d complication rate was comparable in adolescents and adults (6.3% versus 7.3%; P = 0.21) with similar rates of intervention, reoperation, readmission, and mortality. There was no significant difference in any specific perioperative complication class reported between adolescents and adults, except wound disruption (0.2% versus 0.0%, P < 0.0001) and postlaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy coma >24 h (0.1% versus 0.0%, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery in adolescents shares a similar perioperative safety profile as found in adults. This data support the utilization and extension of adult criteria for bariatric surgery to adolescents with morbid obesity.