[The obstructive sleep apnea in bariatric surgery]. / Sindrome delle apnee ostruttive del sonno in chirurgia bariatrica.

INTRODUCTION: Obesity is a well known risk factor for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Medical therapy is not effective for morbid obesity. Bariatric surgery is therefore a reasonable option for weight reduction for patients with clinically severe obesity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 283 obese patients were operated on from 1999 until 2005 in our Institution and they were examined with a history, physical examination and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS). Obese patients with a ESS score > or = than 10 were evaluated with a Polysomnography (PSG). RESULT: 61 patients (21.5%) resulted with a ESS > or = than 10. An obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome was identified in 52 patients (85.2%). These patients were treated by continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for 3 months before the surgical treatment. After 1 year follow-up (100% of patients) we observed a reduction in OSAS patients: ESS < 10 in 77.5% and PSG negative in 80.3%. CONCLUSION: This study considered the value of ESS to select obese patients with a high risk of OSA. We did not observe any association between grade of obesity and risk of OSA. Bariatric surgery reduced the prevalence of OSA already after 1 year of follow-up and the preoperative treatment of OSA (3 months CPAP) reduced the post-operative morbidity.

[Our experience in selecting patients for bariatric surgery]. / La nostra esperienza nella selezione dei pazienti candidati alla chirurgia bariatrica.

AIM OF THE STUDY: To evaluate the parameters applied in Authors' experience for the selection of candidates undergoing bariatric surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis has been performed of 447 patients who underwent bariatric surgery from December 1998 to December 2006 at the 1st Service of General Surgery of Spedali Civili of Brescia - Abdominal Surgical Department of University of Study of Brescia; 317 patients underwent a mal-absorptive procedure, 35 a gastro-restrictive procedure and 10 had a conversion from a gastro-restrictive procedure to a mal-absorptive one. RESULTS: At 7 years of follow-up the Authors observed that the excess weight loss was 74.1% +/- 6.2 for mal-absorptive procedures and 42.3% +/- 2.6 for gastro-restrictive procedures. At 2 years of follow-up a progressive weight resumption was observed in the 20% of patients who had a gastro-restrictive procedures. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Optimal clinical outcome were achieved confirming the belief that a strict and rigorous selection of the patients and the applied therapeutic algorithm have to be followed; though even more selective criteria can be suggested such as the preventive BIB. The clinical results supported our preference of mal-absorptive procedures (317 of 352 surgical performances, excepting the 10 conversions with an obliged surgical choice).