Duodenal Switch vs. Single-Anastomosis Duodenal Switch (SADI-S) for the Treatment of Grade IV Obesity: 5-Year Outcomes of a Multicenter Prospective Cohort Comparative Study.

PURPOSE: The aims were to compare the 5-year outcomes of duodenal switch (DS) and single-anastomosis duodenal switch (SADI-S) in terms of weight loss; remission of comorbidities; nutritional status short- and long-term complications; postoperative mortality; and need for revisional surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multicenter prospective observational study of all consecutive patients undergoing DS or SADI-S in three high-volume hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 87 patients were included in the study, 43 submitted to DS and 44 to SADI-S, with similar basal characteristics, nutritional parameters, and BMI (52.9 kg/m2 DS vs. 52.5 kg/m2 SADI-S). Operative time was 152 min (± 32.6) in DS vs. 116 min (± 21.9) in SADI-S (p = 0.043). Short-term complications were similar for DS and SADI-S, both overall (11.8% vs. 11.6%), and ranged as Clavien-Dindo > II (4.5% vs. 4.7%), with no mortality. At 5 years, DS and SADI-S results were as follows: BMI 30.6 vs. 33.3 kg/m2 (p = 0.023); %EWL 80.5% vs. 68.6% (p = 0.006); and %TWL 42.1 vs. 36.0 (p = 0.006). Comorbidity remission rates for DS and SADI-S were as follows: for diabetes, 92.8% vs. 85.7% (n.s.); for hypertension, 95.2% vs. 85.1% (n.s.); for sleep apnea, 75% vs. 73.3% (n.s.); and for dyslipidemia, 76.4% vs. 73.3% (n.s.). DS showed lower levels of vitamin B12, iron, vitamin E, and zinc than SADI-S (p = < 0.005). In the long term, there were 4 surgical reinterventions (due to 1 internal hernia in the DS group and 1 internal hernia and 2 biliary refluxes in the SADI-S group) with no cases of persistent diarrhea or malnutrition. CONCLUSION: Both DS and SADI-S allowed good weight control and resolution of comorbidities. DS achieved a greater weight loss compared to SADI-S, at the expense of longer operative time and lower vitamin and mineral levels.

Single- Versus Double-Anastomosis Duodenal Switch: Outcomes Stratified by Preoperative BMI.

PURPOSE: Describe and analyze the safety and weight loss performance of biliopancreatic diversion and duodenal switch (BPD-DS) and single-anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S), verifying any possible superiority according to preoperative BMI. METHODS: Retrospective review of patients who underwent primary SADI-S or BPD-DS in three bariatric centers. Study groups were further stratified according to preoperative BMI (subgroup 1: BMI < 50; subgroup 2: 50 ≤ BMI < 55; subgroup 3: BMI ≥ 55). RESULTS: Four hundred and sixty patients underwent BPD-DS (n = 220) or SADI-S (n = 240). The mean LOS was 3.48 ± 3.7 and 3.13 ± 2.3 days for BPD-DS and SADI-S respectively (p = 0.235). The mean operative time was shorter in the SADI-S group (167.25 ± 33.6 vs 140.85 ± 56.7 min) (p < 0.00). The mean %EWL was 44.2, 62.4, and 69.4 for the BPD-DS group and 48.4, 64.5, and 67.1 for the SADI-S group at 6, 12, and 24 months respectively. The mean %TBWL was 25, 35.9, and 40.3 for the BPD-DS group, and 26.2, 35, and 36.9 for the SADI-S group at 6, 12, and 24 months respectively. Overall complication rates were comparable between BPD-DS and SADI-S groups (14% vs 18%) (p = 0.219). SADI-S showed greater emergency department visits (17% vs 7%) (p = 0.005); similar readmission rates (6% vs 7%) (p = 0.80); similar reoperation rates (3% vs 7%) (p = 0.102); and similar mortality rate (0.9% vs 0.4%), after BPD-DS and SADI-S respectively. CONCLUSION: BPD-DS achieved greater %TBWL at 2 years, but no superiority was perceived among study subgroups. SADI-S and BPD-DS showed similar overall complication rates.

Robotic and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass after learning curve: 30-day and 12-month outcomes.

This study compares laparoscopic RYGB (L-RYGB) and robotic RYGB (R-RYGB) performed by the same team after the learning curve in both approaches. A retrospective cohort study was done, and the surgical outcome was analyzed in 30 days and 12 months for patients with similar characteristics and an equal number of cases in each group (233 cases). Four hundred and sixty-six patients were included in this study. Mean age was 46.8 ± 8.3 years and 2/3 were women. R-RYGB presented a longer operative time (150.7 versus 135.4 min; p < 0.001) with no differences in the length of hospital stay. The main 30-day complications were G-J stricture, leakage, and intraluminal bleeding. The reoperation rate was 1.6% by leakage (G-J anastomosis) and was higher in R-RYGB (2.1 versus 0.4; p = 0.108). The multivariate analysis identified that L-RYGB was the factor independently associated with a LOS longer than 2 days (odds ratio: 4.7, 95% CI: 2.6-8.2, p value < 0.001). At the FU time (12 months), no differences between the groups were found. The outcomes between the groups after the learning curve did not present differences in terms of 30 days and 12 months of FU when same preoperative characteristics and an equal number of cases in each group are considered. L-RYGB was the unique independent factor associated with long LOS.

Patient Selection in One Anastomosis/Mini Gastric Bypass-an Expert Modified Delphi Consensus.

PURPOSE: One anastomosis/mini gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB) is up to date the third most performed obesity and metabolic procedure worldwide, which recently has been endorsed by ASMBS. The main criticisms are the risk of bile reflux, esophageal cancer, and malnutrition. Although IFSO has recognized this procedure, guidance is needed regarding selection criteria. To give clinicians a daily support in performing the right patient selection in OAGB/MGB, the aim of this paper is to generate clinical guidelines based on an expert modified Delphi consensus. METHODS: A committee of 57 recognized bariatric surgeons from 24 countries created 69 statements. Modified Delphi consensus voting was performed in two rounds. An agreement/disagreement among ≥ 70.0% of the experts was considered to indicate a consensus. RESULTS: Consensus was achieved for 56 statements. Remarkably, ≥ 90.0% of the experts felt that OAGB/MGB is an acceptable and suitable option "in patients with Body mass index (BMI) > 70, BMI > 60, BMI > 50 kg/m2 as a one-stage procedure," "as the second stage of a two-stage bariatric surgery after Sleeve Gastrectomy for BMI > 50 kg/m2 (instead of BPD/DS)," and "in patients with weight regain after restrictive procedures. No consensus was reached on the statement that OAGB/MGB is a suitable option in case of resistant Helicobacter pylori. This is likely as there is a concern that this procedure is associated with reflux and its related long-term complications including risk of cancer in the esophagus or stomach. Also no consensus reached on OAGB/MGB as conversional surgery in patients with GERD after restrictive procedures. Consensus for disagreement was predominantly achieved "in case of intestinal metaplasia of the stomach" (74.55%), "in patients with severe Gastro Esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)(C,D)" (75.44%), "in patients with Barrett's metaplasia" (89.29%), and "in documented insulinoma" (89.47%). CONCLUSION: Patient selection in OAGB/MGB is still a point of discussion among experts. There was consensus that OAGB/MGB is a suitable option in elderly patients, patients with low BMI (30-35 kg/m2) with associated metabolic problems, and patients with BMIs more than 50 kg/m2 as one-stage procedure. OAGB/MGB can also be a safe procedure in vegetarian and vegan patients. Although OAGB/MGB can be a suitable procedure in patients with large hiatal hernia with concurrent hiatal hernia, it should not be offered to patients with grade C or D esophagitis or Barrett's metaplasia.

Endobarrier® in Grade I Obese Patients with Long-Standing Type 2 Diabetes: Role of Gastrointestinal Hormones in Glucose Metabolism.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Endobarrier® in grade 1 obese T2DM patients with poor metabolic control and the role of gastro-intestinal hormone changes on the metabolic outcomes. METHODS: Twenty-one patients aged 54.1 ± 9.5 years, diabetes duration 14.8 ± 8.5 years, BMI 33.4 ± 1.9 kg/m2, and HbA1c 9.1 ± 1.3 %, under insulin therapy, were implanted with Endobarrier®. Fasting concentrations of PYY, ghrelin and glucagon, and AUC for GLP-1 after a standard meal test were determined prior to and at months 1 and 12 after implantation. RESULTS: Patients lost 14.9 ± 5.7 % of their total body weight. HbA1c decreased 1.3 % in the first month, but at the end of the study, the reduction was 0.6 %. HbA1c ≤ 7 % was achieved in 26.3 % of patients. No differences in GLP-1 AUC values were found before and after implant. Fasting plasma ghrelin and PYY concentrations increased from month 1 to 12. Conversely, fasting plasma glucagon concentrations decreased at month 1 and increased thereafter. Weight (ß 0.152) and HbA1c decrease at month 1 (ß 0.176) were the only variables predictive of HbA1c values at 12 months (adjusted R 2 for the model 0.693, p = 0.001). Minor adverse events occurred in 14 % of patients and major events in 9.5 %. CONCLUSIONS: Endobarrier® in T2DM patients with grade I obesity and poor metabolic control is associated with significant weight decrease and moderate reduction in HbA1c at month 12. Our data do not support a role for GLP-1 in the metabolic improvement in this subset of patients.

Is sleeve gastrectomy as effective as gastric bypass for remission of type 2 diabetes in morbidly obese patients?

BACKGROUND: The benefits of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) for the control of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in morbidly obese patients are well known, although the implicated mechanisms have not yet been elucidated. However, little is known about the remission of T2DM after sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The aim of our study was to compare the outcomes of T2DM after both procedures. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of diabetic morbidly obese patients who had undergone RYGB or SG. The variables analyzed included weight, fasting glycemia, and glycosylated hemoglobin. RESULTS: A total of 90 patients were included (60 RYGB and 30 SG). The body mass index was 46.22 kg/m(2) for the RYGB group and 56.80 kg/m(2) for the SG group. The fasting glycemia was 10.63 mmol/L and 8.05 mmol/L and the glycated hemoglobin was 8.1% and 7.3% in the RYGB and SG groups, respectively. No significant differences were seen in the amount of weight loss after 2 years between the 2 techniques. Similarly, no significant differences were found in T2DM control after either 1 year (91.8% versus 82.3%) or 2 years (91.8% versus 88.9%). No significant differences were found in the duration of T2DM in either group nor in the percentage of patients treated with insulin and oral hypoglycemic drugs before and 2 years after surgery. CONCLUSION: We did not find any significant differences in weight loss or T2DM resolution between the 2 techniques. Our results highlight that 1 of the mechanisms implicated in T2DM remission after bariatric surgery is weight loss. The role of other factors, such as incretins, that we have not studied cannot be ruled out and should be analyzed further.