Effect of gender discordance on surgical outcomes in predominantly female patient surgeries in NYS.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary evidence demonstrates female surgeons have improved post-operative outcomes compared to male colleagues despite underrepresentation in surgery. This study explores the effect of patient-surgeon gender discordance on outcomes in three specialties with high female patient populations: bariatric, foregut, colorectal. METHODS: This is a retrospective study using the New York State (NYS) SPARCS database and first study evaluating outcomes based on surgeon/patient concordance in NYS. Bariatric, foregut, and colorectal surgery cases from 2013 to 2017 were identified. RESULTS: Bariatric: female patients (FP) with CC had lower 30-day readmissions but higher complications compared with DC. Male patients (MP) with CC trended towards higher 30-day readmissions but lower complications compared with DC. FP received significantly better influence from CC in 30-day readmission, but disadvantages in complications. There was no significant difference in LOS or ED visits between CC and DC groups for either FP or MP. Foregut: FP with CC had lower LOS, 30-day readmissions, and 30-day ED visits compared with DC. MP showed opposite trends between CC and DC, although non-significant. The benefit from concordance was pronounced in FP compared to MP in LOS, 30-day readmissions, and 30-day ED visit. Concordance vs discordance did not significantly affect complications within either FP or MP group. Colorectal: the difference between CC and DC was not significant within FP or MP groups in any outcomes. When comparing the difference of 30-day readmissions in CC vs DC between FP and MP, there is a significant difference. CONCLUSION(S): Overall, our results show DC between patient and surgeon has significant effect on patient outcomes. A negative effect is seen for female patients in certain specialties, most pronounced in foregut surgery. This emphasizes need for surgeons to be conscious of care provided to opposite gender patients and underscores increasing female surgeons in high FP fields.

Multisociety research collaboration: timing of cholecystectomy following cholecystostomy drainage for acute cholecystitis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute cholecystitis (AC) presenting with unfavorable systemic or local conditions are often managed with percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) as a temporary measure. The clinical outcomes of interval cholecystectomy following PC remain unclear. The aim of the study was to identify the association between the timing of cholecystectomy following PC for AC and perioperative complication rates at interval cholecystectomy. We hypothesized that there would be a specific time interval to cholecystectomy associated with lower risk for adverse events. METHODS: This was a retrospective (2018-2020) multicenter study at 8 participating hospital systems of adult patients with AC, managed with PC and interval cholecystectomy. Demographics, comorbidities, treatment details, and outcomes were examined. Patients were grouped based on quartiles for timing of surgery after PC (< 7, 7-9, 10-13, > 13 weeks). The primary outcome was a composite endpoint of bile duct injury, reoperation, readmission, image-guided intervention, endoscopic intervention, conversion to open surgery, or death. RESULTS: There were 188 patients with a median age of 66 years with AC classified as mild (41%), moderate (47%), and severe (12%). Median days from PC to surgery were 65 (Q1 = 48, Q3 = 91). Laparoscopic cholecystectomy (89.9%) was the most commonly planned approach (robotic 6.4%, 3.7% open) and 28 (14.9%) were converted to open. The composite endpoint was reported in 51 patients (27.1%). A biliary injury occurred in 7 (3.7%) patients. Time to surgery and intraoperative drain placement were independently associated with the composite outcome. Cholecystectomy within 7 weeks of PC was associated with decreased risk (OR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.13-0.97) of the composite endpoint, compared to patients undergoing surgery > 13 weeks after PC. CONCLUSION: Timing of surgery following PC was associated with procedural outcomes. Patients undergoing surgery before 7 weeks experienced significantly less morbidity than patients having delayed cholecystectomy. These results should be considered in patient selection and management after PC.

[S073]-The impact of interval appendectomy timing on follow-up adverse outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the timing of interval appendectomy (IA) and its impact on post-operative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed for adult patients diagnosed with appendicitis between 2006 and 2017. IA was defined as a follow-up appendectomy > 1 week and < 2 years after the initial presentation. Time intervals were divided into 4 groups based on patient quartiles: 1-6 weeks, 7-9 weeks, 10-15 weeks, and > 15 weeks. The primary outcome measure was length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included 30-day readmission and IA post-operative complications. Tertiary outcomes included 30-day mortality and colonoscopy suggesting neoplasm or Inflammatory Bowel Disease. RESULTS: A total of 5069 patients' records whose interval appendectomy fell > 1 week and < 2 years after initial presentation were analyzed. Among them, 1006 (19.85%) underwent an initial percutaneous abscess drainage at diagnosis. The median timing for IA was 9.2 weeks. Patients with IA at 1-6 weeks were more likely to have longer LOS when compared to 7-9 weeks (ratio 1.33, 95% CI 1.2-1.48) and 10-15 weeks (ratio 1.38, 95% CI 1.25-1.52). IA between 7 and 9 weeks (ratio 0.81, 95% CI 0.73-0.89) and 10-15 weeks (ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.71-0.86) was associated with significantly shorter LOS compared to those receiving the operation after 15 weeks. Further, patients requiring abscess drainage (ratio 1.2, 95% CI 1.13-1.34) or those with comorbidities (ratio 1.51, 95% CI 1.39-1.63) were more likely to have longer LOS at IA. Socioeconomic and demographic differences including Black, Hispanic, and those with Medicare and Medicaid insurance had a greater LOS after their IA. CONCLUSION: LOS remains lowest among patients undergoing IA between 7-9 weeks and 10-15 weeks after initial appendicitis presentation. Patients with lower socioeconomic status or from racial minorities had a longer LOS after IA.

Socioeconomic disparities in the utilization of primary robotic hernia repair.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to examine socioeconomic disparities in the utilization of primary robotic hernia repair (RHR), utilizing statewide population-level data. It was funded by the SAGES Robotic Surgery Research Grant. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) administrative database was used to identify adult patients who underwent primary open, laparoscopic, and robotic hernia repair (inguinal, femoral, umbilical, ventral) from 2010 through 2016. Utilization trends were compared between the surgical approaches, assessing for difference in age, sex, race, insurance status, and socioeconomic status (as defined by median income for zip code). Multivariable regression models were used with statistical significance set at 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 280,064 patients underwent primary hernia repair: n = 216,892 (77.4%) open, n = 61,037 (21.8%) laparoscopic, and n = 2,135 (0.8%) robotic. After adjusting for confounding variables, senior age (OR 1.01, p = 0.002), male sex (OR 1.35, p < 0.001), and non-Hispanic race (OR 1.3-1.54, p < 0.001) were significantly associated with the use of robotic compared to open or laparoscopic surgery. Additionally, patients with commercial insurance were more likely to undergo RHR compared to those with Medicare (OR 1.32) or Medicaid (OR 1.54) (p < 0.0001). Income was significantly correlated with RHR such that every $10,000 increase in income would increase the odds of having RHR by 6% (OR 1.06, p < 0.0001). Academic facilities were also associated with a significantly higher likelihood of utilizing RHR (OR 1.88, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: There are significant socioeconomic disparities in the utilization of robotic compared to laparoscopic or open hernia repair. While the robotic approach is overall increasing in popularity, adoption of new technology should not be limited to specific socioeconomic cohorts of the population. Recognizing these disparities is a necessary first step in providing equal and consistent care.

Postoperative outcomes for sleeve gastrectomy patients with positive pH-defined GERD.

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a possible side effect of sleeve gastrectomy (SG). However, procedure selection for patients with GERD and risk factors for morbidity after bypass surgeries is complex. For patients with a preoperative GERD diagnosis, literature related to worsening postoperative symptoms is discordant. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effects of SG on patients with pre-operative GERD confirmed through pH testing. SETTING: University Hospital, United States. METHODS: This was a single-center case-series. SG patients with preoperative pH testing were compared based on DeMeester scoring. Preoperative demographics, endoscopy results, need for conversion surgery, and changes in gastrointestinal quality of life (GIQLI) scores were compared. Two-sample independent t-tests assuming unequal variances were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Twenty SG patients had preoperative pH testing. Nine patients were GERD positive; median DeMeester score 26.7 (22.1-31.15). Eleven patients were GERD negative, with a median DeMeester score of 9.0 (4.5-13.1). The two groups had similar median BMI, preoperative endoscopic findings and use of GERD medications. Concurrent hiatal hernia repair was performed in 22% of GERD positive vs. 36% of GERD negative patients, (p = 0.512). Two patients in the GERD positive cohort required conversion to gastric bypass (22%), while none in the GERD negative cohort did. No significant postoperative differences were noted in GIQLI, heartburn, or regurgitation symptoms. CONCLUSION: Objective pH testing may allow the differentiation of patients who would be higher risk for need for conversion to gastric bypass. For patients with mild symptoms, but negative pH testing, SG may represent a durable option.

Increased incidence of marginal ulceration following conversion of sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a multi-institutional experience.

BACKGROUND: Marginal ulcer (MU) formation is a serious complication following Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB). Incidental data suggested a higher incidence of MU following conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to RYGB (S-RYGB). Herein, we evaluate the incidence of MU after primary versus secondary RYGB. METHODS: After IRB approval, each institution's electronic medical record and MBSAQIP database were queried to retrospectively identify adult patients who underwent primary RYGB (P-RYGB), Gastric Banding to RYGB (B-RYGB), or S-RYGB between 2014 and 2019, with minimum 1 year follow-up. Patient demographics, operative data, and post-operative outcomes were compared. Numeric variables were compared via two-sample t test, Wilcoxon test or Kruskal Wallis rank sum test. Two-sample proportion test or Fisher's exact test was employed for categorical and binary variables. p < 0.05 marked statistical significance. RESULTS: 748 patients underwent RYGB: P-RYGB n = 584 [78.1%]; B-RYGB n = 98 [13.1%]; S-RYGB n = 66 [8.8%]. Most patients were female (83.2%). Mean age was 45.7 years. Forty-six (n = 6.1%) patients developed MU, a median of 14 ± 32.2 months (range 0.5-82) post-operatively. Incidence of MU was significantly higher for patients undergoing S-RYGB (n = 9 [13.6%]), compared to P-RYGB (n = 34 [5.8%]) and B-RYGB (n = 3 [3.1%]) (p = 0.023). Median time (months) to MU was significantly shorter for patients who underwent S-RYGB (5 ± 6) compared to P-RYGB or B-RYGB (19 ± 37.5) (p = 0.035). Among those who developed MU, there was no significant difference in H. pylori status, NSAID, steroid, or tobacco use, irrespective of operation performed. CONCLUSION: In this multi-institutional cohort, patients who underwent S-RYGB had a significantly higher incidence of MU than those with P-RYGB or B-RYGB. Further research is needed to elucidate its pathophysiology and prevention strategies.

The durability of revisional sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass after previous adjustable gastric band.

BACKGROUND: Patients with adjustable gastric banding (AGB) often require revision to one-stage or two-stage sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). OBJECTIVE: To compare the long-term durability of revisional SG and RYGB, in terms of subsequent revision or conversion (RC). METHODS: The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative Systems dataset was queried from 2006 to 2013 for patients who underwent primary SG and RYGB, one-stage, and two-stage conversion from AGB to SG and RYGB. Patients who required RC were identified. A multivariable Cox proportional hazard model was used to compare the RC risk among these groups. RESULTS: 13,749 had primary SG, 621 one-stage, and 321 two-stage AGB to SG. 31,814 had primary RYGB, 555 one-stage, and 248 two-stage AGB to RYGB. The estimated 5-year cumulative RC incidence rate was significantly lower after primary surgery than after prior AGB (one-stage AGB to SG 14.4%, two-stage AGB to SG 11.6%, primary SG 5.2%, one-stage AGB to RYBG 3.4%, two-stage AGB to RYGB 2.9%, and primary RYGB 1.1%, p-value < 0.0001). RYGB and SG did not differ significantly in terms of the elevation effect of one- and two-stage AGB conversion over primary surgeries (RYGB vs SG: one stage vs primary ratio of HR = 0.97, 95% CI = [0.58, 1.63], p-value = 0.9153; two stage vs primary ratio of HR = 1. 02, 95% CI = [0.50, 2.07], p-value = 0.9596). CONCLUSION: RC after AGB to SG or RYGB is more frequent compared to primary surgeries with procedures following AGB to SG being more common than AGB to RYGB. However, that difference was proportionally similar to the RC rate ratio differences noted for primary SG and RYGB.

The impact of interval cholecystectomy timing after percutaneous transhepatic cholecystostomy on post-operative adverse outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore how timing of interval of cholecystectomy (IC) after percutaneous transhepatic cholecystostomy tube (PTC) placement impacts post-operative outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective database analysis of New York State SPARCs database of IC between 2005 and 2015. The timing for IC ranged between > 1 week and < 2 years. Patients undergoing this procedure were further divided into quartiles using 4-time intervals; 1-5 weeks (Q1), 5-8 weeks (Q2), 8-12 weeks(Q3), and > 12 weeks(Q4). The study's primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes included discharge status, 30-day readmission, 30-day ED visit, and 90-day reoperation, surgery type, complication, and bile duct injury. Multivariable regression models were used to compare patients across the four-time intervals after adjusting for confounding factors. RESULTS: A total of 1038 patients with a history of PTC followed by IC between > 1 week and < 2 years were included in the final analysis. The median time to IC was 7.7 weeks. Q2 and Q3 both had a significantly higher median LOS of 3 days versus Q1 and Q4 at median of 5 days (p < 0.0001). Patients from racial and ethnic minorities (e.g., African Americans and Hispanics) were more likely to get their IC after 12 weeks (p < 0.05). Further, Black patients had a significantly higher median LOS than White, non-Hispanic patients (8 days vs 4 days, p < 0.0001) and were more likely to have open procedure. Multivariable regression analysis identified shorter LOS during Q2 (Ratio, 0.76, 95%, 0.67-0.87, p < 0.0001), and Q3 (Ratio 0.75, 95% CI, 065-0.86, p < 0.0001) compared to those who got their IC in Q4. Similar findings exist when comparing Q2 and Q3 to those receiving treatment during Q1. CONCLUSION: A time interval of 5-12 weeks between PTC and IC was associated with a decreased LOS. This study also suggests the persistence of racial disparities among these patients.

Timing and management of bleeding after bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: The timing of bleeding after bariatric surgery and subsequent management (characterized as surgical versus non-surgical (i.e., interventions including endoscopic or interventional radiology approaches)) has not been thoroughly studied. As such, we sought to describe the rates of reoperation or non-operative intervention after bleeding following sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). METHODS: The Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database was queried between 2015 and 2018 for any bleeding after SG or RYGB and subsequent reoperation or non-operative intervention. Multivariable Fine-Gray models were used to compare the hazard of reoperation/non-operative intervention. Multivariable generalized linear regression models were used to test the number of subsequent reoperations/non-operative interventions depending on initial management. RESULTS: 6251 patients with bleeding after SG or RYGB were identified, of which 2653 patients underwent subsequent procedures (n = 1375 [51.83%] RYGB index procedure, n = 1278 [48.17%] SG index procedure). 1892 (71.32%) and 761 (28.68%) patients had reoperation and non-operative intervention, respectively. For patients who developed bleeding, SG was associated with significantly higher reoperation risk, while RYGB was associated with significantly higher risk of non-operative intervention. Early bleeding was associated with significantly increased risk of reoperation and decreased risk of non-operative intervention, regardless of initial procedure. The total number of subsequent reoperations/non-operative interventions did not differ significantly depending on whether the patients had non-operative intervention or reoperation first [ratio 1.01, 95% CI (0.75, 1.36), p value 0.9418]. CONCLUSION: Patients after SG who experience bleeding are more likely to undergo reoperation than RYGB patients. On the other hand, patients with bleeding after RYGB are more likely to undergo non-operative intervention compared to SG patients. Early bleeding is associated with higher risk of reoperation and lower risk of non-operative intervention both after SG and RYGB. The initial approach did not play a role in the total number of subsequent reoperations/non-operative interventions.

Weight loss and clinical outcomes following primary versus secondary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a multi-institutional experience.

BACKGROUND: Revisional bariatric surgeries are increasing for weight recurrence and return of co-morbidities. Herein, we compare weight loss and clinical outcomes following primary Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (P-RYGB), adjustable gastric banding to RYGB (B-RYGB), and sleeve gastrectomy to RYGB (S-RYGB) to determine if primary versus secondary RYGB offer comparable benefits. METHODS: Participating institutions' EMRs and MBSAQIP databases were used to identify adult patients who underwent P-/B-/S-RYGB from 2013 to 2019 with a minimum one-year follow-up. Weight loss and clinical outcomes were assessed at 30 days, 1 year, and 5 years. Our multivariable model controlled for year, institution, patient and procedure characteristics, and excess body weight (EBW). RESULTS: 768 patients underwent RYGB: P-RYGB n = 581 [75.7%]; B-RYGB n = 106 [13.7%]; S-RYGB n = 81 [10.5%]. The number of secondary RYGB procedures increased in recent years. The most common indications for B-RYGB and S-RYGB were weight recurrence/nonresponse (59.8%) and GERD (65.4%), respectively. Mean time from index operation to B-RYGB or S-RYGB was 8.9 and 3.9 years, respectively. After adjusting for EBW, 1 year %TWL (total weight loss) and %EWL (excess weight loss) were greater after P-RYGB (30.4%, 56.7%) versus B-RYGB (26.2%, 49.4%) or S-RYGB (15.6%, 37%). Overall comorbidity resolution was comparable. Secondary RYGB patients had a longer adjusted mean length of stay (OR 1.17, p = 0.071) and a higher risk of pre-discharge complications or 30-day reoperation. CONCLUSION: Primary RYGB offers superior short-term weight loss outcomes compared to secondary RYGB, with decreased risk of 30-day reoperation.

Bariatric Surgery Lowers the Risk of Major Cardiovascular Events.

OBJECTIVE: This study examines the impact of bariatric surgery on the risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, and a composite of cardiovascular outcomes in a large population cohort. Additionally, the impact of different bariatric surgery procedures on cardiovascular outcomes is assessed and compared. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Bariatric surgery has been shown to improve comorbid conditions that are associated with cardiovascular disease and death. Few large studies have examined the impact of bariatric surgery on cardiovascular outcomes, and specifically compared the different bariatric procedures. METHODS: A retrospective, observational, matched-cohort study was conducted in adult patients with obesity in New York state from 2006 to 2012. Patients were stratified into 2 groups, based on utilization of bariatric surgery. Patients were further subgrouped based on the types of primary bariatric surgery. The primary endpoint was the development of specific cardiovascular events - myocardial infarction (MI), and stroke; as well as a composite of both events. RESULTS: A total of 328,807 patients, including 60,445 who had undergone bariatric surgery, and 268,362 matched nonsurgical controls were the study cohort for comparing surgical and nonsurgical patients. The risk of composite cardiovascular events decreased in the surgical group [hazards ratio (HR) = 0.48, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.45-0.51], as did the risk of MI (HR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.35-0.42), and stroke (HR = 0.55, 95% CI: 0.51-0.59). Among the surgical cohort, sleeve gastrectomy patients had a higher risk of developing MI, stroke, and any type of cardiovascular event than gastric bypass patients. CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery is associated with decreased risk of significant cardiovascular events compared to nonsurgical controls. In this exploratory analysis, gastric bypass was associated with a lower risk of all cardiovascular events than sleeve gastrectomy.

Timing of cholecystectomy following cholecystostomy tube placement for acute cholecystitis: a retrospective study aiming to identify the optimal timing between a percutaneous cholecystostomy and cholecystectomy to reduce the number of poor surgical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Our study aims to identify the optimal timing between a percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) and cholecystectomy to reduce the number of poor surgical outcomes. BACKGROUND: Biliary disease is a common surgical disease and laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the preferred strategy for the management of acute cholecystitis. However, in high-risk surgical patients, a PC tube may be placed instead. In the 2018 Tokyo Guidelines, the optimal timing of cholecystectomy following a PC has been identified as an important future research question. METHODS: This is a retrospective study that focuses on identifying the ideal timing of cholecystectomy after PC tube placement to minimize complications. Poor surgical outcomes were measured as 90-day reoperations, 30-day readmissions, 30-day emergency department (ED) visits, length of stay (LOS), and discharge destination. Patients were selected from the New York SPARCS database from 2005 to September 30, 2015. RESULTS: 1213 records that consisted of both PC and cholecystectomy were collected. No significant differences in 30-day readmissions, 90-day reoperations, and 30-day ED visits in relation to timing between PC and cholecystectomy were found. Additionally, the decision to replace or not replace dislodged PC tubes was not associated with 90-day reoperation, 30-day readmission, 30-day ED visit, LOS, or discharge destination. However, discharge destination and LOS were significantly different between early intervention of 3 days or less between PC and cholecystectomy and late intervention of more than 14 days with late intervention being associated with shorter LOS and more home discharges. CONCLUSION: Performing a cholecystectomy more than 14 days after a PC is associated with better surgical outcomes.

One anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a 30-day follow-up review.

BACKGROUND: One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) type procedures have been widely adopted outside the United States. International experience of OAGB commonly suggests improved early postoperative safety with OAGB over Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). This study aims to report on the early experience with OAGB in Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) accredited centers, and compare with RYGB in terms of complication rates. METHODS: The MBSAQIP public use files from 2015 to 2018 were used to identify adult patients who underwent primary OAGB and RYGB. Propensity score analysis was used to estimate the marginal population-average differences between OAGB and RYGB patients. Based on the matched samples, McNemar's tests and Wilcoxon signed rank test were carried out for binary and continuous outcomes. P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Propensity score matching analysis resulted in 279 matched pairs for OAGB and RYGB. Twelve OAGB patients (4.3%) experienced a complication; 3 of them (1.1%) were diagnosed with anastomotic leaks. Compared to 14 (5%) of RYGB patients experiencing a complication; 5 (1.8%) were diagnosed with anastomotic leaks. Reintervention, reoperation and readmission rates for OAGB were 2.5%, 3.2% and 5%, compared to 1.8%, 1.8%, and 3.2% for RYGB. DISCUSSION: Our study supports previous data that suggests OAGB has a similar early safety profile compared to RYGB and perioperative risks of OAGB should not be of a concern regarding its adoption. Conversely, OAGB does not seem to be associated with an improved safety profile over RYGB.

The incidence of reintervention and reoperation following Heller myotomy across multiple indications.

INTRODUCTION: Achalasia is a debilitating primary esophageal motility disorder. Heller myotomy (HM) is a first-line therapy for the treatment of achalasia patients who have failed other modalities. Other indications for HM include diverticulum, diffuse esophageal spasm, and esophageal strictures. However, long-term outcomes of HM are unclear. This study aims to assess incidence of reintervention, either endoscopically or through minimally invasive or resectional procedures, in patients who underwent HM in New York State. METHODS: The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) administrative longitudinal database identified 1817 adult patients who underwent HM between 2000 and 2008 for achalasia, esophageal diverticulum, diffuse esophageal spasm, and esophageal strictures, based on ICD-9 and CPT codes. Through the use of unique identifiers, patients requiring reintervention were tracked up to 2016 (for at least 8 years follow-up). Primary outcome was incidence of subsequent procedures following HM. Secondary outcomes were time to reintervention and risk factors for reintervention. RESULTS: Of the 1817 patients who underwent HM, 320 (17.6%) required subsequent intervention. Of the 320 patients, 234 (73.1%) underwent endoscopic reinterventions, 54 (16.9%) underwent minimally invasive procedures, and 32 (10%) underwent resectional procedures as their initial revisional intervention. Of the 234 patients who underwent endoscopic reintervention as their initial revisional procedure, only 40 (16.8%) required subsequent surgical procedures. Over a mean follow-up of 7.0 years, the mean time to a subsequent procedure was 4.3 ± 3.74 years. Reintervention rates after 10 years following HM for achalasia, diverticulum ,and other indication were 24.4%, 12.6%, and 37%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The majority of HM reinterventions were managed solely by endoscopic procedures (60.6%). Heller myotomy remains an excellent procedure to prevent surgical reintervention for achalasia and diverticulum.

S157-a structured early intervention program in patients with predicted poor long-term outcome following bariatric surgery: a prospective randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Early postoperative weight loss can be predictive of one-year outcomes. It is unclear if poor performers identified in the first post-operative month can have improvement in outcomes with additional support and education. PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact of a structured targeted support program for patients with lower-than-average early post-operative weight loss on 1-year outcomes. METHODS: This was a prospective randomized study of bariatric surgery patients who experienced less than 50th percentile excess body weight loss (%EWL) at 3 weeks. Subjects with EWL < 18% were randomized into two groups: an intervention (IV) arm or a control (NI, no intervention) arm. The IV arm was offered a program with 7-weekly behavioral support sessions, while the NI patients received routine post-operative care. RESULTS: A total of 128 patients were randomized: 65 NI and 63 IV. In the IV group, 20 attended all sessions, 7 attended < 4, and 36 did not participate. There was no difference in baseline demographics, procedure type, or BMI. At 1 year, there was no difference in %EWL (ratio 0.993, 95% CI 0.873, 1.131), %EBMIL (ratio 0.997, 95% CI 0.875, 1.137), and %TWL (ratio 1.016, 95% CI 0.901, 1.146) between groups. A subgroup analysis including only the subjects who participated in all seven sessions showed similar results. CONCLUSION: Patients who present with suboptimal weight loss early after bariatric surgery do not experience a significant weight loss improvement with a structured behavioral support program. Importantly, despite being alerted to their poor early weight loss, patients demonstrated poor adherence to the proposed interventions.

Conversion of Adjustable Gastric Banding to Stapling Bariatric Procedures: Single- or Two-stage Approach.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the safety of single- versus two-stage conversion of adjustable gastric band (AGB) to gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: AGB patients often present for conversion to RYGB or SG. The impact of single- or two-stage approach of such conversion remains unclear. METHODS: A statewide database was used to identify all patients who underwent AGB removal and concurrent (single-stage) or interval (two-stage) RYGB or SG. Propensity score matching schemes were constructed to account for differences in baseline comorbidities and demographics, allowing for matched pairs available for comparisons. RESULTS: A total of 4330 patients underwent AGB conversion. Complications, readmissions, and ED visits were noted in 394 (9.1%), 278 (6.42%), and 589 (13.6%) patients, respectively. Three hundred sixty-seven matched pairs underwent RYGB; single-stage patients experienced shorter length of stay (LOS) (median difference -1 d, P < 0.0001), less complications [risk difference (RD): -8.4%, 95% confidence interval (CI), -13.4% to -3.5%], readmissions (RD: -5.2%, 95% CI, -9.6% to -0.8%), and ED visits (RD: -5.7%, 95% CI, -11.3% to -0.2%). Eight hundred seventy-five matched pairs underwent SG; single-stage patients experienced improved outcomes in all measures examined. For single-stage procedures (809 pairs), RYGB was associated with longer LOS, and more complications (RD: 3.3%, 95% CI, 0.9%-5.8%), with similar readmissions, and ED visits. CONCLUSIONS: AGB conversion procedures have low morbidity. Single-stage conversion is associated with lower morbidity compared with the two-stage approach. Conversion to SG seems to be safer than RYGB.

Impact of bariatric surgery on the development of diabetic microvascular and macrovascular complications.

BACKGROUND: While bariatric surgery has been shown to improve type 2 diabetes (DM) control in the obese population, the effect on long-term DM complications has been less thoroughly investigated. The purpose of this study was to assess the development of microvascular and macrovascular complications in obese DM patients undergoing bariatric surgery. METHODS: New York patients' records from the SPARCS database in years 2006-2012 were used to identify obese patients with DM. Patients undergoing bariatric surgery were compared with patients managed medically, matched for age and gender. Patients were grouped based on baseline presence of controlled or uncontrolled DM and followed over time for the development of micro- and macrovascular complications. Cumulative incidence of complications was estimated with death treated as a competing risk event. Multivariable proportional sub-distribution hazards models were used to compare the risk of complications among different patient groups after adjusting for possible confounding factors. RESULTS: A total of 88,981 patients were reviewed, including 15,585 (18%) that were treated with bariatric surgery. Surgery patients had significantly lower risk of microvascular complications compared to non-surgery patients (controlled diabetes: HR = 0.40, 95% CI 0.37-0.42; uncontrolled diabetes: HR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.37-0.71). Similarly, the surgical patients were noted to have a significantly lower risk for macrovascular complications compared to non-surgery patients (controlled diabetes: HR = 0.43, 95% CI 0.40-0.46; uncontrolled diabetes: HR = 0.44, 95% CI 0.28-0.69). Cumulative incidence of microvascular complications was lower at 1, 5 and 9 years for the surgical groups for controlled and uncontrolled DM. Similar trends were observed for the macrovascular complications. CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery appears to prevent complications of DM. Bariatric surgery patients with DM experienced significantly lower rates of microvascular and macrovascular complications, compared to non-surgically treated comparison group. Bariatric surgery was noted to offer protective benefits for both complicated and non-complicated DM patients. This reduced rate of complications was sustained in the long term.

Trends in the utilization and perioperative outcomes of primary robotic bariatric surgery from 2015 to 2018: a study of 46,764 patients from the MBSAQIP data registry.

BACKGROUND: Utilization of robotic surgery has increased over time. Outcomes in bariatric surgery have been variable. This study used the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality and Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) dataset to compare nationwide trends in utilization and outcomes improvement for robotic and laparoscopic bariatric surgery over a four-year period. METHODS: We identified all adult patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic primary sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) from 2015 to 2018. Those with previous bariatric/foregut surgery or open conversion were excluded. Trends in clinical outcomes of different surgery types over years were compared through multivariable regression models. Subgroup analysis was performed for patients in 2018, comparing outcomes among different surgery types. RESULTS: A total of 571,417 patients underwent bariatric surgery, of which 46,764 (8.2%) were performed robotically. Utilization of the robotic platform increased annually, from 6.7% in 2015 to 10.3% in 2018 (p < 0.0001). The majority of patients underwent SG (n = 33,891, 72.5%). Perioperative outcomes improved over time for both robotic and laparoscopic procedures. Improvement was more pronounced in the robotic cohort for extended length of stay (OR 0.76 vs 0.8, p < 0.0001) and operative time (OR 0.98 vs 0.99, p < 0.0001). In the 2018 subgroup, multivariable analysis found laparoscopic RYGB was associated with increased bleeding (OR 2.220, p = 0.0004), overall complications (OR 1.356, p = 0.0013), and extended LOS (OR 1.178, p < 0.0001) compared to robotic surgery. Laparoscopic SG was associated with decreased anastomotic/staple line leak (OR 0.718, p = 0.0321), 30-d readmission (OR 0.826, p = 0.0005), 30-d reintervention (OR 0.723, p = 0.0014), overall event (OR 0.862, p = 0.0009), and extended LOS (OR 0.950, p = 0.0113). Across the board, laparoscopic surgery was associated with decreased operative time (Adjusted Ratio = 0.704, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Robotic utilization for bariatric surgery is increasing and outcomes continue to improve with time. There is a differential impact of the robotic approach on SG and RYGB, which requires further assessment.

The risk of female-specific cancer after bariatric surgery in the state of New York.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a known risk factor for many cancers. Although bariatric surgery has been associated with a decrease in the risk of developing cancer, data on the effect of bariatric surgery on female-specific cancers are limited. This study aimed to assess the impact of bariatric interventions on the development of endometrial, ovarian and breast cancer. METHODS: The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database was used to identify all female patients without a pre-existing cancer diagnosis who had a diagnosis of obesity between 2006 and 2012. The risk of having female-specific cancer diagnosis in patients who underwent bariatric surgery were compared with those who had no bariatric interventions using multivariable proportional sub-distribution hazard regression analysis. Subsequent cancer diagnoses were followed up to 2016. RESULTS: We identified 55,781 and 247,102 obese female patients who had and did not have bariatric surgery, respectively. The overall incidence of female-specific cancer was 2.69% and 2.09% for the non-surgery and surgery groups, respectively (p < 0.0001). Surgery patients were less likely to develop female-specific cancers [hazard ratio (HR) 0.78; 95% CI 0.73-0.83; p < 0.0001]. Patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass had a lower risk of developing female-specific cancer than laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.51-0.87; p = 0.0056) and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.69-0.99; p = 0.0056) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing bariatric surgery have a lower incidence of endometrial, female breast and ovarian cancer than non-surgery obese patients. These data suggest that bariatric interventions may reduce the risk of female-specific cancers.

Bone mineral density changes after bariatric surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Although bariatric surgery is associated with multiple health benefits, decreased bone mass is a known complication of the procedure. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is associated with significant bone loss and increased fracture risk. However, data on the effect of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) on bone mineral changes are sparse. The impact of vitamin D and calcium levels on bone mineral density (BMD) after SG is also unknown. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed to include patients who underwent RYGB or SG from 2014 to 2016 at a single institution. Patients were included if bone densitometry was performed preoperatively and within 2 years postoperatively. Serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D and calcium levels were collected preoperatively and at time of bone densitometry scan. BMD and T-score changes at the femoral neck, femoral trochanter, total hip, and lumbar spine were compared between RYGB and SG patients. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were included. 24 (60%) of patients underwent RYGB and 16 (40%) patients underwent SG. No statistically significant difference in baseline characteristics was noted between RYGB and SG patients. All measurements, except for serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D, were significantly decreased in RYGB patients, postoperatively. All measurements, except for BMD and T-score at the lumbar spine and serum 25-hydroxy vitamin D, were significantly decreased in SG patients, postoperatively. The extent of decrease in serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D was significantly associated with decreased BMD (p = 0.049) and T-score (p = 0.032) at the lumbar spine. The extent of decrease in serum calcium was significantly associated with decreased BMD (p = 0.046) at the femoral neck. CONCLUSION: All patients were found to have decreased BMD after RYGB and SG. Surgery type was not a significant risk factor in BMD change. Despite vitamin D and calcium supplementation in all patients, a decrease in vitamin D and calcium levels were associated with a decrease in BMD. Close follow-up and treatment of vitamin D and calcium levels are warranted in all bariatric patients.