Weight loss after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and single anastomosis duodenoileostomy following failed sleeve gastrectomy.

OBJECTIVE: While sleeve gastrectomy (SG) results in sustained weight loss for the majority of patients, some will experience inadequate weight loss or weight regain requiring revision. The objective of this study was to evaluate differences in weight loss over time between patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or single anastomosis duodenoileostomy (SADI) after SG. METHODS: We queried a single institution's bariatrics registry to identify patients who underwent RYGB or SADI after previous SG over a three-year period. Demographics, operative characteristics, and post-operative complications were evaluated. Interval total body weight loss (TBWL) and excess body weight loss (EBWL) were calculated from available follow-ups within 2 years. RESULTS: We identified 124 patients who underwent conversion to RYGB (n = 61) or SADI (n = 63) following previous SG. There were no differences in sex, age, or medical comorbidities between groups. The median initial BMI was higher in the SADI group (44.9 vs. 41.9 for RYGB, p = 0.03) with greater excess body weight (56.7 vs. 64.3 kg, p = 0.04). The SADI group had a shorter median operative duration (157 vs. 182 min for RYGB, p < 0.01) and lower readmission rates (0 vs. 14.75%, p < 0.01). There was no difference in post-operative complications or need for rehydration therapy between the groups. Among 122 patients (98.4%) that had follow-up weights available, there were no differences in TBWL between groups. RYGB patients had a higher EBWL at 2, 3, and 6 months (p < 0.05 for all comparisons), but there were no differences between RYGB and SADI at 1 or 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Both RYGB and SADI conversions proved effective for further weight loss following failed SG at our academic center. While neither demonstrated clear superiority in long-term (> 1 year) weight loss, RYGB's restrictive gastric pouch may explain its early weight loss advantage.

30-day morbidity and mortality of revisional bariatric surgery - An international multi-centre collaborative (BROAD) study.

INTRODUCTION: Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) for insufficient weight loss/weight regain or metabolic relapse is increasing worldwide. There is currently no large multinational, prospective data on 30-day morbidity and mortality of RBS. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the 30-day morbidity and mortality of RBS at participating centres. METHODS: An international steering group was formed to oversee the study. The steering group members invited bariatric surgeons worldwide to participate in this study. Ethical approval was obtained at the lead centre. Data were collected prospectively on all consecutive RBS patients operated between 15th May 2021 to 31st December 2021. Revisions for complications were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 65 global centres submitted data on 750 patients. Sleeve gastrectomy (n = 369, 49.2 %) was the most common primary surgery for which revision was performed. Revisional procedures performed included Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in 41.1 % (n = 308) patients, One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) in 19.3 % (n = 145), Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG) in 16.7 % (n = 125) and other procedures in 22.9 % (n = 172) patients. Indications for revision included weight regain in 615(81.8 %) patients, inadequate weight loss in 127(16.9 %), inadequate diabetes control in 47(6.3 %) and diabetes relapse in 27(3.6 %). 30-day complications were seen in 80(10.7 %) patients. Forty-nine (6.5 %) complications were Clavien Dindo grade 3 or higher. Two patients (0.3 %) died within 30 days of RBS. CONCLUSION: RBS for insufficient weight loss/weight regain or metabolic relapse is associated with 10.7 % morbidity and 0.3 % mortality. Sleeve gastrectomy is the most common primary procedure to undergo revisional bariatric surgery, while Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is the most commonly performed revision.

Revisional Bariatric Surgery After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass for Bile Reflux: a Single-Center Long-Term Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) after primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is indicated for the efficient management of specific complications such as bile reflux. Published literature on this topic remains scarce as we aim to evaluate the long-term outcomes (10 years) of RBS for bile reflux after RYGB. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a single-center retrospective study of patients who underwent primary RYGB complicated by bile reflux and had RBS between 2008 and 2023. Our cohort was divided into two groups based on the etiology of bile reflux. Long-term surgical outcomes and nutritional status were reported and compared between the groups. RESULTS: A total of 41 patients (100% primary RYGB; 90.2% female, 97.6% white) were included. 56.1% (n = 23) of patients underwent Roux limb lengthening and the remaining 43.9% (n = 18) had a gastrogastric fistula takedown, with no significant differences in terms of intraoperative complications, estimated blood loss (p = 0.616), length of hospital stay (p = 0.099), and postoperative complications between the two groups. Long-term resolution of obesity-related medical conditions was demonstrated for all the evaluated comorbidities. Lastly, there was no reported mortality, bile reflux recurrence, or micro- and macro-nutrient deficiencies over the total follow-up period of 10 years. CONCLUSION: In our cohort, RBS after a primary RYGB for bile reflux management demonstrated safe and efficient short- and long-term surgical outcomes without any reported bile reflux recurrence or mortality. Adequate supplementation and close patient follow-up remain essential to decrease the morbidity and mortality associated with RBS as further studies are required to support our findings.

Revision/Conversion Surgeries After One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass-An Experts' Modified Delphi Consensus.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of evidence for treatment of some conditions including complication management, suboptimal initial weight loss, recurrent weight gain, or worsening of a significant obesity complication after one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). This study was designed to respond to the existing lack of agreement and to provide a valuable resource for clinicians by employing an expert-modified Delphi consensus method. METHODS: Forty-eight recognized bariatric surgeons from 28 countries participated in the modified Delphi consensus to vote on 64 statements in two rounds. An agreement/disagreement among ≥ 70.0% of the experts was regarded to indicate a consensus. RESULTS: A consensus was achieved for 46 statements. For recurrent weight gain or worsening of a significant obesity complication after OAGB, more than 85% of experts reached a consensus that elongation of the biliopancreatic limb (BPL) is an acceptable option and the total bowel length measurement is mandatory during BPL elongation to preserve at least 300-400 cm of common channel limb length to avoid nutritional deficiencies. Also, more than 85% of experts reached a consensus on conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) with or without pouch downsizing as an acceptable option for the treatment of persistent bile reflux after OAGB and recommend detecting and repairing any size of hiatal hernia during conversion to RYGB. CONCLUSION: While the experts reached a consensus on several aspects regarding revision/conversion surgeries after OAGB, there are still lingering areas of disagreement. This highlights the importance of conducting further studies in the future to address these unresolved issues.

Safety of redo sleeve gastrectomy as a primary revisional procedure.

BACKGROUND: Insufficient weight loss after primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) occasionally requires revisional surgery. A few single-institution studies have examined the safety of redo LSG (RSG) and have shown mixed results. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of RSG compared with LSG over a period of 30 days. SETTING: University of Southern California, United States; Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. METHODS: The 2020-2021 MBSAQIP registry was used to evaluate patients who underwent RSG. Thirty-day outcomes were evaluated using univariable analysis and multivariable logistic and linear regression. RESULTS: A total of 226,029 patients were reviewed, of whom 1454 (.7%) underwent RSG and 224,575 (99.3%) underwent initial LSG. Patients who underwent RSG were older (45 versus 42 yr), predominantly female (86.2% versus 81.3%), had a lower body mass index (40.0 versus 43.4), fewer co-morbidities, and greater rates of gastroesophageal reflux (38.7% versus 25.1%). They demonstrated increased overall complications (3.6% versus 2.1%, P < .001) and a longer operative time (81 versus 62 min, P < .001), but there was no difference in mortality. On multivariable analysis, patients who underwent RSG were independently associated with an increased risk of overall postoperative complications (odds ratio [OR]: 1.493, P = .018), organ space infection (OR: 6.231, P < .001), staple line leak (OR: 12.838, P < .001), pneumonia (OR: 3.85, P = .013), ventilator requirement over 48 hours (OR: 6.404, P = .035), sepsis (OR: 4.397, P = .010), septic shock (OR: 8.669, P < .001), reoperation (OR: 1.808, P = .013), readmission (OR: 2.104, P < .001), reintervention (OR: 4.435, P < .001), and longer operative times (ß = 12.790, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this national database study, RSG was associated with increased rates of postoperative complications and a longer operative time. Although these results are concerning, further studies are required to examine long-term outcomes.

Revisional bariatric surgery using robotic-assisted surgery in a national medical center in Mexico.

Long-term postoperative complications of metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) are more frequent than those of primary surgery. Robotic-assisted procedures offer several advantages over traditional laparoscopy, but there are limited data. A retrospective study of 29 patients who underwent a revisional robotic-assisted Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RRYGB) in a Tertiary Level Hospital. Variables included were demographics, causes for revision, operative details, complications, and weight loss outcomes up to 54 month post-RRYGB. Causes for conversion were weight loss failure (WLF), weight regain (WR), Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD), or Joint Pain (JP). We assessed 29 patients. Causes for conversion included WLF (34%), WR (15%), WR with GERD (20%), GERD (24%), and JP (3%). Initial BMI was 53.43 kg/m2 ± 8.75. Mean length of hospital stay (LOS) was 2 days. Total operative time was 126 min. ± 43.45. Excess weight loss at 1 year post-surgery was 82.66% (p < 0.0001), with mean BMI of 30.93 kg/m2 (p < 0.001). At 3 years, mean %EWL was 71.26% and a mean BMI 33.81 kg/m2 (p < 0.0001). At 4.5 years, mean %EWL was 59.29% and mean BMI 37.27 kg/m2 (p < 0.0001). One complication (8%) was found (jejunojejunal stenosis). There was no mortality. The initial experience with RRYGB shows acceptable outcomes, including low morbidity, no mortality, excellent weight loss after the revisional surgery, and promising reduction in operative times, with important implications on reduction of the total cost of the procedure.

Endoluminal Vacuum Therapy as a Salvage Procedure for Difficult Anastomotic Leak Post Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.

We present a case of a woman in her 60s, with a history of a gastric sleeve resection, over 50% excess body weight loss, and subsequent severe gastroesophageal reflux disease refractory to maximal medical therapy, who underwent a conversion of a sleeve gastrectomy to a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with hiatal hernia repair. On postoperative day five, she was evaluated at our emergency department for vomiting and inability to tolerate oral intake. Imaging revealed a large retrocardiac hiatal hernia and extraluminal contrast extravasation. She was taken to the operating room after resuscitation, where the gastric pouch and roux limb were found to have significant edema with recurrence of the hernia. This was able to be reduced and a frank perforation was found at the posterior aspect of the anastomosis. A covered metal stent was placed by the gastroenterologist and drains were left in place.  In the ICU, nasojejunal feeds were stopped given suspicion of backflow with persistent leak. A decision was made to remove the stent and place an endoluminal vacuum (endoscopic vacuum-assisted wound closure [EVAC]). After three subsequent vacuum-sponge changes, the perforation was found to have healed. Patient was tolerating a diet on discharge. This case is an example of a complication where a multidisciplinary approach to a difficult leak resulted in recovery with the use of EVAC. We believe this is a valuable tool to have in our armamentarium for difficult-to-manage leaks.

Revision of restrictive bariatric procedures in elderly patients: results at a 5-year follow-up.

Revisional Bariatric Surgery (RBS) is increasing in popularity. Elderly patients (> 65 years old) are sometimes referred for RBS evaluation. The aim of this study is to evaluate outcomes of elderly patients undergoing RBS. A retrospective analysis of a cohort from a single-tertiary bariatric center. All elderly patients undergoing RBS after restrictive procedures between 2012 and 2022 were included. Thirty Nine patients undergoing RBS were included in the comparative analysis - 23 patients (57.5%) after adjustable gastric banding (s/p LAGB) and 16 patients (40%) after Sleeve Gastrectomy (s/p SG). The mean age and body mass index (BMI) of patients were comparable (67.2 ± 2.8 years and 38.3 ± 7.4, respectively). There was no difference in associated medical problems except reflux which was higher in s/p SG (68% vs. 13%; p < 0.001). The mean time interval between surgeries was 8.7 ± 5.1 years. The surgeries included One anastomosis gastric bypass (n = 22), SG (n = 8) and Roux-en-y gastric bypass (n = 9). Early major complication rates were comparable (4.3% and 12.5%; p = 0.36), and readmission rate was higher in patients s/p SG (p = 0.03). Ninety percent of patients were available to a follow-up of 59.8 months. The mean BMI and total weight loss was 29.2 and 20.3%, respectively with no difference between groups. The rate of patients with associated medical problems at last follow-up was significantly reduced. Five patients (12.5%) underwent revisional surgery due to complications during follow-up. In conclusion, RBS in the elderly is associated with a reasonable complication rate and is effective in terms of weight loss and improvement of associated medical problems in a 5-year follow-up.

Elevated Hb A1C level and revisional bariatric surgery complications.

BACKGROUND: Elevated Hb A1C is a modifiable risk factor for postoperative complications. However, in bariatric surgery, as published by our group and others, elevated preoperative Hb A1C may not be associated with increased postoperative complications. Previous literature has focused on primary bariatric surgery and has excluded the higher-risk revisional surgery cohort. OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of Hb A1C on early postoperative outcomes in patients requiring revisional bariatric surgery. SETTING: Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database. METHODS: We undertook a retrospective review of patients undergoing revisional bariatric surgery between 2017 and 2018 from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database. Two groups were studied, defined by Hb A1C cutoff, ≤8% versus >8% and ≤10% versus >10%. Early postoperative complications were compared at each threshold, with the primary outcome defined as a composite of all complications. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used with one-to-one matching for covariates, and the complication rates before and after PSM were calculated and assessed by Fisher's exact test and conditional logistic regression, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 16,234 patients had undergone revisional bariatric surgery. After PSM, elevated Hb A1C was not associated with worse outcomes. No significant difference was seen in the composite outcomes for Hb A1C ≤8% versus Hb A1C >8% (P = .22) or for patients with Hb A1C ≤10% versus Hb A1C >10% (P < .46). There were no differences in individual outcomes such as surgical-site infections, cardiopulmonary complications, or readmissions/reinterventions. CONCLUSION: In this study of revisional bariatric patients, elevated Hb A1C >8% or >10% was not associated with increased postoperative complications. Prospective studies are needed to investigate this further.

One-Stage Vs. Two-Step One Anastomosis Duodenal Switch (OADS/SADI-S): A Safety and Efficacy Single-Center Propensity-Score Matched Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: One Anastomosis Duodenal Switch (OADS/SADI-S) is used both as a one stage and a second-step procedure, either planned or revisional after a failed sleeve gastrectomy. However, there is lack of adjusted comparative evidence validating its use. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Propensity-score matched comparison between patients submitted to one-stage vs. two-step OADS, adjusted by age, gender, and initial body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: One hundred ninety-five patients (130 one-stage and 65 two-step OADS) were included, with mean initial BMI 52.4 kg/m2. Overall complication rate was 6.6% in the short-term (3.3% Clavien-Dindo ≥ III), and 7.3% in the long-term, with no differences between groups. Follow-up at 1 and 3 years was 83.6% and 61.5%. After one-stage OADS, total weight loss was 36.6 ± 8.2% at 1 year and 30.4 ± 10.3% at 3 years, vs. 30.2 ± 9.4% and 25.6 ± 10.2% after two-steps OADS (p = 0.021). Resolution rates of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and obstructive sleep apnea were 86.4%, 80.4%, 78.0%, and 73.3%, with no differences between groups. CONCLUSION: One-stage OADS is a safe and effective bariatric technique for patients with grade III and IV obesity. The two-step strategy does not reduce postoperative risks and may compromise weight loss results at mid-term.

The Trajectory of Revisional Bariatric Surgery: Open to Laparoscopic to Robotic.

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is the most effective therapeutic intervention for patients with obesity, with sleeve gastrectomy (SG) being the most commonly performed primary MBS procedure. Long-term studies have demonstrated that 15-20% of patients require revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) due to weight-related issues or surgical complications. Despite the gold standard being laparoscopic revision, there are other available approaches such as open or robotic-assisted. An extensive literature review was performed for articles from their inception to February 2024. A descriptive review of MBS procedures (SG, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), single anastomosis duodeno-ileostomy (SADI) and biliopancreatic diversion-duodenal switch (BPD-DS)) was carried out to report and compare outcomes between primary and revisional bariatric surgery. A similar review was conducted to compare outcomes of revisional approaches (open, laparoscopic, robotic). RYGB remains the dominant RBS with a similar safety profile compared to revisional SADI and BPD-DS. In terms of the RBS surgical approach, all three options showed comparable short and long-term outcomes, with robotic RBS being associated with longer operative time and variable length of stay. Additional long-term studies are required to further validate our conclusions.

Patients' perspectives on weight recurrence after bariatric surgery: a single-center survey.

BACKGROUND: Weight recurrence (WR) affects nearly 20% of patients after bariatric surgery and may decrease its benefits, affecting patients' quality of life negatively. Patient perspectives on WR are not well known. OBJECTIVES: Assess patient needs, goals, and preferences regarding WR treatment. SETTING: Single MBSAQIP-accredited academic center, and online recruitment. METHODS: An 18-item, web-based survey was distributed to adults seeking treatment for WR after a primary bariatric surgery (PBS), in addition to online recruitment, between 2021 and 2023. Survey items included somatometric data, questions about the importance of factors for successful weight loss, procedure decision-making, and treatment expectations. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients with > 10% increase from their nadir weight were included in the study. Patients had initially undergone Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (62.5%), sleeve gastrectomy (28.6%), adjustable gastric banding (3.6%), or other procedures (5.3%). When assessing their satisfaction with PBS, 57.1% were somewhat/extremely satisfied, 33.9% somewhat/extremely dissatisfied, while 8.9% were ambivalent. Patients considered the expected benefits (for example, weight loss) as the most important factor when choosing a treatment option for WR. Patient goals included "feeling good about myself" (96.4% very/extremely important), "being able to resume activities I could not do before" (91% very/extremely important), and "improved quality of life" and "-life expectancy" (> 90% very/extremely important). Finally, RBS, lifestyle modification with peer support, and anti-obesity medication were ranked as first treatment options for WR by 40%, 38.8%, and 29.8% of the respondents, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients considered weight loss as the most important factor when choosing treatment modality for WR, with RBS and lifestyle changes being preferred over weight-loss medications. Large prospective randomized trials are needed to counsel this patient population better.

Outcomes of One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Conversion to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass for Severe Obesity: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

One-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is an effective procedure to treat severe obesity. However, conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is increasing. We therefore conducted a systematic review to determine the safety and efficacy associated with OAGB-RYGB conversion. A systematic search was conducted by three independent reviewers using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane library following PRISMA guidelines. Six studies including 134 patients were selected who were undergoing OAGB-RYGB conversion. The most common indications were reflux (47.8%), malnutrition (31.3%), and inadequate weight loss (8.2%). Study outcomes demonstrated 100% resolution of bile reflux. Overall, there was medium-term weight gain of 0.61 BMI. OAGB to RYGB conversion leads to resolution of reflux symptoms. However, it is associated with weight regain, albeit this may be acceptable to patients to treat biliary reflux.

ReSleeve or revisional one anastomosis gastric bypass for failed primary sleeve gastrectomy with dilated gastric tube: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) has been increasingly performed due to weight loss failure (WLF). Many revisional procedures have been proposed after primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (pLSG) failure, including ReSleeve gastrectomy (ReLSG), and laparoscopic one anastomosis gastric bypass (LOAGB). Choosing the RBS post-pLSG failure represents a challenge. WLF without gastric tube (GT) dilation is undoubtedly converted to a malabsorptive procedure, but the presence of GT dilation makes it more difficult to select a RBS. This study aimed to compare two relatively simple revisional procedures after pLSG failure with dilated GT to help decision making on which procedure better done to which patient. METHODS: Data of 52 patients who completed one year follow-up (FU) after their RBS (ReLSG: 27 or LOAGB: 25) for their failed pLSG were collected, assessed, correlated to weight loss (WL) and compared. RESULTS: Mean operative time was 97 ± 18.4 min. with revisional LOAGB (RLOAGB) and 62 ± 11 min. with ReLSG. Six patients (11.5%) had seven postoperative procedure-specific complications. Significant hemorrhage occurred in three patients. Two cases of leakage were encountered with each procedure. LOAGB Patients had lower mean final weight (76.2 ± 10.5 vs 85.3 ± 13), lower mean Final BMI (26.4 ± 2.5 vs 29.7 ± 2.9) and higher mean percentage of excess weight loss (EWL%) (83.6 ± 13.5% vs 60.29 ± 14.6%). All RLOAGB patients and 77.8% of ReLSG patients had EWL% > 50%. RLOAGB patients had higher EWL% compared to ReLSG (p < 0.001). Insufficient WL (IWL) patients had higher EWL% compared to weight regain (WR) patients (p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: Both procedures (RLOAGB and ReLSG) were relatively safe and effective in terms of WL. RLOAGB led to higher WL compared to ReLSG in all types of patients despite higher Caloric intake. IWL patients had more WL compared to WR patients. WL was not related to GT dilation type. Large-scale longer-FU studies are still needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PACTR202310644487566 (retrospectively registered).

Effect of Primary Versus Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB) on Fatty Acid Profile.

INTRODUCTION: One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is one option of a revisional procedure for failed sleeve gastrectomy. Moreover, it can be used as a primary bariatric procedure, and is an effective surgery resulting in significant weight loss and the resolution or improvement of obesity-associated medical problems, accompanied by low perioperative complications. However, as with any therapy, OAGB has its limitations, including micronutrient deficiency or malnutrition. In our study, we compared the fatty acid (FA) profile in serum of patients after both primary OAGB (pOAGB) and revisional OAGB (rOAGB) to identify potential postsurgical FA alterations. METHODS: This is a retrospective study on patients with obesity who underwent OAGB procedures (pOAGB n=68; rOAGB n=17), conducted from 2016 to 2018. In blood, we analyzed a series of biochemical parameters, and in the serum, the FA profile was determined using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. RESULTS: The percentage of excess BMI loss (% EBMIL) after pOAGB was 73.5 ± 2.47% in comparison to 45.9 ± 4.15% in the rOAGB group (p<0.001). In contrast to the lack of effect of rOAGB on most polyunsaturated FAs, in the pOAGB group, there was a decrease in eicosapentaenoic acid, and eicosatetraenoic and docosahexaenoic acid levels (p<0.001). We also found a decrease in very long-chain FAs (VLCFAs) and an increase in branched-chain FAs (BCFAs) after both types of OAGB procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Both OAGB procedures improved the profile of most FAs, leading to a decrease in VLCFAs, which are considered harmful, and an improvement in BCFAs, which are considered to be beneficial. There is a need to further investigate the possibility of n-3 polyunsaturated FA supplementation after pOAGB, due to the large decrease in these FAs after pOAGB.

Experience of Robotic Complex Revisional Bariatric Surgery in a High-Volume Center.

PURPOSE: A revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) is necessary in about 28% of the patients. The role of robotic surgery in RBS is still a subject of debate. We aim to report the outcomes of robotic-assisted RBS at our institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified patients who underwent robotic-assisted RBSs between January 1, 2016, and May 31, 2022. We analyzed patient demographics and indications for surgery. Measured outcomes included peri- and postoperative morbidity, comorbidity management, and weight loss outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 106 patients were included. Primary procedures were adjustable gastric band 44 (41.5%), sleeve gastrectomy 42 (39.6%), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) 18 (17%), duodenal switch (DS) 1 (0.9%), and vertical banded gastroplasty 1 (0.9%). RBSs performed included 85 (78.7%) RYGB, 16 (14.8%) redo-gastrojejunostomy, and 5 (4.6%) DS. The median time to revision was 8 (range 1-36) years, and the main indication was insufficient weight loss (49%). Median length of hospital stay was 2 (range 1-16) days, and 9 (8.5%) patients were readmitted during the first 30 days. Only 4 (3.7%) patients had early Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher adverse events. No anastomotic leaks were documented. Median excess weight loss was 35.1%, 42.23%, and 45.82% at the 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up. Of 57 patients with hypertension, 29 (50.9%) reduced their medication dosage, and 20/27 (74.1%) reduced their diabetes mellitus medication dosage. Finally, of the 75 patients with symptoms, 64 (85.3%) reported an improvement after the RBS. CONCLUSION: Robotic-assisted RBS is feasible, significantly improves patients' comorbidities and symptoms, and leads to considerable weight loss.

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy as revisional bariatric procedures after adjustable gastric banding: a retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: The frequency of revisional bariatric surgery is increasing, but its effectiveness and safety are not yet fully established. The aim of our study was to compare short-term outcomes of primary (pRYGB and pSG) and revisional bariatric surgeries (rRYGB and rSG). METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study assessing all patients submitted to primary and revisional (after a failed AGB) RYGB and SG in 2019. Each patient was followed-up at 6 months and 12 months after surgery. We compared pRYGB vs. rRYGB, pSG vs. rSG and rRYGB vs. rSG on weight loss, surgical complications, and resolution of comorbidities. RESULTS: We assessed 494 patients, of which 18.8% had undergone a revisional procedure. Higher weight loss at 6 and 12 months was observed in patients undergoing primary vs. revisional procedures. Patients submitted to rRYGB lost more weight than those with rSG (%EWL 12 months = 82.6% vs. 69.0%, p < 0.001). Regarding the resolution of obesity-related comorbidities, diabetes resolution was more frequent in pRYGB than rRYGB (54.2% vs. 25.0%; p = 0.038). Also, 41.7% of the patients who underwent rRYGB had dyslipidemia resolution vs. 0% from the rSG group (p = 0.035). Dyslipidemia resolution was also more common in pSG vs. rSG (68.6% vs. 0.0%; p = 0.001). No significant differences in surgical complications were found. CONCLUSION: Revisional bariatric surgery is effective and safe treating obesity and related comorbidities after AGB. Primary procedures appear to be associated with better weight loss outcomes. Further prospective studies are needed to better understand the role of revisional bariatric surgery.

Single anastomosis sleeve ileal (SASI) bypass as a primary and revisional procedure: a single-centre experience.

Introduction: To achieve effective weight loss and remission of comorbidities, various surgical methods are used in the treatment of obesity. The most common procedures performed worldwide are followed by the newest ones. Aim: To present the results of the first group of patients from a high-volume bariatric centre in central Europe and to compare single anastomosis sleeve ileal (SASI) as a primary and revisional procedure. Material and methods: We retrospectively analysed patients who underwent SASI for obesity from December 2018 to June 2022 by the same team of surgeons. There were 2 groups of patients. The first group consisted of patients who underwent SASI as their first bariatric procedure (primary group - PG). The second group consisted of patients who underwent SASI after previous SG procedure due to weight regain and/or symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (revisional group - RG). Results: There were 15 patients (80% female) in the PG, and 14 patients (88% female) in the RG. In the PG, %TWL 12 and 36 months after surgery was 37.8% and 43.9% respectively. In the RG, %TWL 12 and 24 months after surgery was 13.8% and 20.9%, respectively. Most patients had complete remission of T2D and HT after surgery. In the RG, 9 (81.8%) patients had remission of GERD. The worsening of GERD was reported in 4 (40%) patients in the PG. Conclusions: SASI may be an effective and safe method of treatment of obesity. SASI may be an effective method of revisional bariatric surgery performed for GERD, but not for weight regain.

The analysis of factors increasing the odds for type 2 diabetes mellitus remission following re-do bariatric surgery after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy- cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Metabolic/bariatric surgery is the only proven treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) with curative intent. However, in a number of patients, the surgery is not effective or they may experience a relapse. Those patients can be offered re-do bariatric surgery (RBS). PURPOSE: The study aimed to determine factors increasing the odds for T2D remission one year after RBS following primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted between January 2010 and January 2020, which included 12 bariatric centers in Poland. The study population was divided into groups: Group 1- patients with T2D remission after RBS (n = 28) and Group 2- patients without T2D remission after RBS (n = 49). T2D remission was defined as HBA1c < 6.0% without glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy and glycemia within normal range at time of follow-up that was completed 12 months after RBS. RESULTS: Fifty seven females and 20 males were included in the study. Patients who achieved BMI < 33 kg/m2 after RBS and those with %EBMIL > 60.7% had an increased chance of T2D remission (OR = 3.39, 95%CI = 1.28-8.95, p = 0.014 and OR = 12.48, 95%CI 2.67-58.42, p = 0.001, respectively). Time interval between primary LSG and RBS was significantly shorter in Group 1 than in Group 2 [1 (1-4) vs. 3 (2-4) years, p = 0.023]. CONCLUSIONS: Shorter time interval between LSG and RBS may ease remission of T2D in case of lack of remission after primary procedure. Significant excess weight loss seems to be the most crucial factor for T2D remission.

Revisional Bariatric Surgery due to Complications: Indications and Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The increasing prevalence of bariatric procedures has led to a surge in revisional surgeries. Failure of bariatric surgery can be attributed to inadequate weight loss or complications necessitating revisional surgery. In this study, we investigated the indications and outcomes of revisional surgery due to complications following primary bariatric surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using data from the Tehran Obesity Treatment Study, which included patients who underwent revisional bariatric surgery between March 2013 and September 2021 due to complications following primary bariatric surgery. RESULTS: Of the 5382 patients who underwent primary bariatric surgery (sleeve gastrectomy, one-anastomosis gastric bypass, and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass), 203 (3.70%) required revisional surgery, with 37 cases performed due to surgical complications. The indications of revisional operations were gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (n=17, 45.9%), protein-calorie malnutrition (PCM) (n=14, 37.8%), unexplained abdominal pain (n=5, 13.5%), and phytobezoar (n=1, 0.03%). In the postoperative follow-up, most patients exhibited improvement in signs and symptoms related to underlying causes. However, eight patients experienced early or late complications of grade III or higher according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, with one death resulting from liver failure. CONCLUSION: Revisional bariatric surgery may effectively address complications from primary bariatric surgery, with the majority of patients experiencing improvements in symptoms. While the overall incidence of revisional surgery due to complications is relatively low, our findings suggest that GERD and PCM are the most common indications for revisional surgery.