RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The Single Anastomosis Sleeve Ileal (SASI) bypass is a novel bariatric procedure that simplifies Santoro's procedure, balancing functional restriction and neuroendocrine modulation while preserving anatomy. We aim to conduct a single-arm meta-analysis of the SASI bypass to explore its moderate-term efficacy, as this might expand the available choices for surgeons to choose the best bariatric surgery that suits the patient's condition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search on PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, and Cochrane to identify studies for the SASI bypass surgery focusing on outcomes such as %EWL, %TWL, remission rate of comorbidities, and complications. The statistical analysis was carried out using RStudio version 4.3.2. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochrane Q test and I2 statistics. RESULTS: Our findings illuminate SASI's potency by undertaking a single-arm meta-analysis involving 1873 patients across 26 studies. At 12 months, we report a noteworthy % Excess Weight Loss (%EWL) (Mean 84.13; 95% CI 78.41-89.85; I2 = 95%), and % Total Weight Loss (%TWL) (Mean 35.17; 95% CI 32.30-38.04; I2 = 97%), highlighting SASI's efficacy on weight loss. Cumulative meta-analyses supported these findings. More weight loss was observed with a 250 cm common limb and a greater than 3 cm anastomosis. An 88.28% remission rate in type 2 diabetes mellitus (95% CI 79.74-95.03; I2 = 84%) at 12 months was observed. Beyond weight outcomes, SASI impacts comorbidities with a good safety profile. CONCLUSION: Our study positions the SASI bypass as a good alternative option. However, long-term efficacy is yet to be explored in the future.
RESUMEN
Robot-assisted Heller myotomy (RAHM) is an increasingly popular alternative to the traditional laparoscopic Heller myotomy (LHM) in the surgical management of achalasia, with similar outcomes and potentially lower complication rates. We aimed to systematically review the literature by comparing the technical success, outcomes, and complications of RAHM and LHM. We searched PubMed, Medline, and Cochrane Central Register for articles published between 2001 and 2023. Data on technical success, clinical outcomes, length of hospital stay, esophageal perforation rate, and overall mortality were extracted. A total of 11 articles were included in the study, comparing a total of 3,543 RAHM and 15,434 LHM cases. The mean operative time was significantly higher in the RAHM procedure with a total mean difference of 23.95 (95% confidence interval (Cl) 17.09, 30.81; p < 0.00001; I2 = 99%). However, the RAHM was associated with a significantly shorter hospital stay, with a total mean difference of -0.24 (95% Cl = -0.40, -0.08; p < 0.00001; I2 = 81%). The volume of blood loss was significantly smaller in RAHM with a total mean difference of -61.11 (95% CI = -150.31, 28.09; p < 0.00001; I2 = 99%). Esophageal mucosal perforation was significantly lower in RAHM with an odds ratio of 0.36 (95% CI = 0.16, 0.82; p = 0.02; I2 = 22%). Both procedures were associated with similar rates of symptom relief. Although no mortality was recorded in patients who underwent RAHM as opposed to 16 cases in patients who underwent LHM, no statistically significant difference could be reached. Our results demonstrate that while both procedures yield comparable clinical outcomes, RAHM is associated with a lower overall complication rate, particularly a lower rate of esophageal mucosal perforation, shorter hospital stay, and possibly a lower mortality rate. This confirms that RAHM is a viable and justifiable alternative to the conventional LHM in the surgical management of achalasia.
RESUMEN
Purpose: In recent years, the need for revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) procedures has experienced a noteworthy surge to confront complexities and weight recidivism. Despite being a subject of controversy for many, the utilization of the Da Vinci robotic platform (Intuitive Surgical, Inc.) may present benefits in RBS. This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of robotic RBS in comparison to Laparoscopic RBS. Methods: A meticulous and thorough analysis was ensured through a comprehensive exploration of the literature, which included PubMed, Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane. This exploration was conducted in adherence to the directives outlined in the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for quality assessment. Results: A total of 11 studies were included in this meta-analysis, comprising 55,889 in the laparoscopic group and 5,809 in the robotic group. No significant differences were observed in the leak, bleeding, operative time, or length of stay across both groups. However, the robotic group showed higher rates of conversion to open surgery (odds ratio [OR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.79; p < 0.0001; I2 = 0%), reoperation (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.57-0.87; p = 0.0009; I2 = 6%), and readmission (higher rate of readmission in the robotic group; OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62-0.92; p = 0.005; I2 = 30%). Conclusion: Robotic-assisted bariatric surgery has no significant advantage over conventional laparoscopic surgery. Further research is warranted to explore and evaluate surgeons' methodology and proficiency differences.
RESUMEN
Purpose: This study aimed to assess the outcomes of revisional procedures, namely Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) following unsuccessful laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Materials and Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis included 817 patients (404 in OAGB group, 413 in RYGB group) from seven retrospective comparative studies. Data on sample size, demographics, perioperative complications, operative time, pre- and post-revisional body mass index, total weight loss, and global weight loss over follow-up were extracted. Results: The mean operative time was 98.2-201 minutes for RYGB versus 78.7-168 minutes for OAGB. Despite classical RYGB gastric bypass taking longer, mini gastric bypass resulted in greater weight loss than RYGB, with a mean difference of -5.84 (95% confidence interval [CI], -6.74 to -4.94; P<0.00001; I2=0%), greater total weight loss, and a higher diabetes remission rate (odds ratio [OR], 0.32; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.71). However, OAGB was associated with a significantly higher incidence of postoperative gastroesophageal reflux than RYGB (52 vs. 31: OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.67; P=0.0005; I2=0%). Conclusion: OAGB was performed more quickly and boasted greater total weight loss and higher diabetes remission rates compared to RYGB after failed sleeve gastrectomy. However, OAGB also demonstrated a higher incidence of postoperative gastroesophageal reflux disease. Thus, careful patient selection is essential when considering OAGB. Trial Registration: PROSPERO Identifier: CRD42023474966.
RESUMEN
Older adults are increasingly engaging in unhealthy substance use. Owing to aging and comorbid medical conditions, older adults are at increased risk of adverse effects from alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drug use. Preventative measures, regular screening, and appropriate intervention can protect older adults from the negative outcomes of substance use and potentially improve their quality of life. This article reviews the latest trends of substance use in older adults, impact on health, and the best practice approaches for the clinical assessment of substance use disorders in this age group.