Comparison of BMI on operative time and complications of robotic inguinal hernia repair at a VA medical center.

BACKGROUND: BMI is a risk factor for recurrence and post-operative complications in both open and laparoscopic totally extraperitoneal approach (TEP) repair. Robotic surgery using the transabdominal preperitoneal approach (TAPP) is a safe and viable option for inguinal hernia repair (IHR). The objective of this study is to determine how difference in BMI influences rate of operative time, complications, and rate of recurrence in a robotic TAPP IHR. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent robotic inguinal hernia repair between 2012 and 2019 at a Veterans Health Administration facility (N = 304). The operating time, outcomes, and overall morbidity and mortality for robotic IHR were compared between three different BMI Groups. These groups were divided into: "Underweight/Normal Weight" (BMI < 25) n = 102, "Pre-Obese" (BMI 25-29.9) n = 120, and "Obese" (BMI 30 +) n = 82. RESULTS: The average operating time of a bilateral IHR by BMI group was 83.5, 98.4, and 97.8 min for BMIs < 25, 25-29.9, and 30 +, respectively. Operating time was lower in the Underweight/Normal BMI group compared to the Pre-Obese group (p = 0.006) as well as the Obese group (p = 0.001). For unilateral repair, the average operation length by group was 65.2, 70.9, and 85.6 min for BMIs < 25, 25-29.9, and 30 +, respectively, demonstrating an increased time for Obese compared to Underweight/Normal BMI (p = 0.001) and for Obese compared to Pre-Obese (p = 0.01). Demographic/comorbidity variables were not significantly different, except for a higher percentage of white patients in the Underweight/Normal BMI group compared to the Pre-Obese and Obese groups (p = 0.02 and p = 0.0003). There was no significant difference in complications or recurrence. CONCLUSION: BMI has a significant impact on the operating time of both unilateral and bilateral robotic hernia repair. Despite this increased operative time, BMI group did not differ significantly in postoperative outcomes or in recurrence rates.

A phase Ib feasibility trial of response adapted neoadjuvant therapy in gastric cancer (RANT-GC).

Current guidelines recommend neoadjuvant (NAC) and/or adjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced gastric cancers (LAGCs). However, the choice and duration of NAC regimen is standardized, rather than personalized to biologic response, despite the availability of several different classes of agents for the treatment of gastric cancer (GC). The current trial will use a tumor-informed ctDNA assay (Signatera™) and monitor response to NAC. Based on ctDNA kinetics, the treatment regimen is modified. This is a prospective single center, single-arm, open-label study in clinical stage IB-III GC. ctDNA is measured at baseline and repeated every 8 weeks. Imaging is performed at the same intervals. The primary end point is the feasibility of this approach, defined as percentage of patients completing gastrectomy.

Outcomes of Complex Gastrointestinal Cancer Resection at US News & World Report Top-Ranked vs Non-Ranked Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: The US News & World Report (USNWR) annual ranking of the best hospitals for gastroenterology and gastrointestinal surgery offers direction to patients and healthcare providers, especially for recommendations on complex medical and surgical gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. The objective of this study was to examine the outcomes of complex GI cancer resections performed at USNWR top-ranked, compared to non-ranked, hospitals. STUDY DESIGN: Using the Vizient database, data for patients who underwent esophagectomy, gastrectomy, and pancreatectomy for malignancy between January and December 2018 were reviewed. Perioperative outcomes were analyzed according to USNWR rank status. Primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes include length of stay, mortality index (observed-to-expected mortality ratio), rate of serious complication, and cost. Secondary analysis was performed for outcomes of patients who developed serious complications. RESULTS: There were 3,054 complex GI cancer resections performed at 42 top-ranked hospitals vs 3,608 resections performed at 198 non-ranked hospitals. The mean annual case volume was 73 cases at top-ranked hospitals compared to 18 cases at non-ranked hospitals. Compared with non-ranked hospitals, top-ranked hospitals had lower in-hospital mortality (0.96% vs 2.26%, respectively, p < 0.001) and lower mortality index (0.71 vs 1.53, respectively). There were no significant differences in length of stay, rate of serious complications, or direct cost between groups. In patients who developed serious morbidity, top-ranked hospitals had a lower mortality compared with non-ranked hospitals (8.2% vs 16.8%, respectively, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of complex GI cancer resection, USNWR top-ranked hospitals performed a 4-fold higher case volume and were associated with improved outcomes. Patients with complex GI-related malignancies may benefit from seeking surgical care at high-volume regional USNWR top-ranked hospitals.

Novel Interdisciplinary Approach to GERD: Concomitant Laparoscopic Hiatal Hernia Repair with Transoral Incisionless Fundoplication.

BACKGROUND: Transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) is an endoscopic alternative for the treatment of GERD. However, TIF does not address the hiatal hernia (HH). We present a novel approach with a laparoscopic HH repair followed by same-session TIF, coined concomitant transoral incisionless fundoplication (cTIF). The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy, safety, and feasibility of cTIF in a collaborative approach between Gastroenterology and surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Patients with confirmed GERD and >2 cm HH who underwent cTIF between 2018 and 2020 were included. Symptoms were assessed using the Reflux Disease Questionnaire, GERD Health-Related Quality of Life Index, and the Reflux Symptom Index pre and post cTIF. One-way ANOVA and paired samples t-test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Sixty patients underwent cTIF (53% were men, mean age was 59.3 years) with 100% technical success. Mean ± SD HH measurement on endoscopy was 2.9 ± 1.5 cm. Scores on Reflux Disease Questionnaire for symptom frequency and symptom severity improved significantly from before to 6 months after cTIF (17.4 to 4.72; p < 0.01 and 16.7 to 4.56; p < 0.05, respectively). According to the GERD Health-Related Quality of Life Index, significant decreases were seen post cTIF in heartburn (23.26 to 7.37; p < 0.01) and regurgitation (14.26 to 0; p = 0.05). Reflux Symptom Index similarly decreased after cTIF (17.7 to 8.1 post cTIF; p < 0.01). Mean DeMeester score decreased from 43.7 to 4.9 and acid exposure time decreased from 12.7% to 1.28% post cTIF (p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: We present a novel multidisciplinary approach to GERD using a combined endoscopic and surgical approach with close collaboration between Gastroenterology and surgery. Our results suggest that cTIF is safe and effective in reducing reflux symptoms in a large spectrum of GERD patients.

The Role of Endoscopic Stent in Management of Postesophagectomy Leaks.

INTRODUCTION: Anastomotic leak is a dreaded complication following esophagectomy. Conventional management for leaks includes invasive reoperation and even gastrointestinal diversion. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine our contemporary outcome of using endoscopic esophageal stenting as primary therapy for management of anastomotic leak following minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). METHODS: We reviewed data on 11 patients who developed an esophageal leak following 111 MIE between January 2011 and December 2019. Of the 11 anastomotic leaks, 10 patients had an anastomotic disruption and underwent endoscopic esophageal stenting as primary therapy for management of leaks, while 1 patient had an anastomotic disruption complicated by an associated tracheoesophageal fistula that required surgical reoperation and subsequent colonic interposition. Main outcome measures focused on the 10 patients who were managed with endoscopic stenting, including length of hospital stay following leak management, need for thoracotomy or gastrointestinal diversion for leak, stent complications, and leak-associated mortality. RESULTS: Of the 10 patients who underwent endoscopic esophageal stenting as primary therapy for management of leaks, there were 8 males with a median age of 66 years. The median time to diagnosis of anastomotic leak was 10 days postoperatively. One of the ten patients also underwent percutaneous drain placement, while none of the patients required thoracotomy. Median duration of stent placement was 39 (range, 29-105) days. Median length of stay after stent placement was 10 (range, 4-43) days. The median number of stent exchange was 1 (range, 1-3) stent. Gastrointestinal continuity was maintained in all patients. The 90-day leak-associated mortality was 9.1% (1 of 11 patients). CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic stenting is an effective primary therapy in the management of postesophagectomy leak and avoids the need for an invasive, reoperative thoracotomy or gastrointestinal diversion procedure.

Venous thromboembolism risk for the contemporary bariatric surgeon.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE), including deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE), are the leading causes of morbidity and mortality after bariatric surgery. Although several studies have examined VTE, few have examined risk factors separately for DVT and PE after contemporary bariatric surgery, including laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). Our objective was to define risk factors for DVT and PE independently for both LSG and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) patients using the largest validated bariatric surgery database. METHODS: The metabolic and bariatric surgery accreditation and quality improvement program (MBSAQIP) database was queried to identify patients who underwent LSG or LRYGB between January 2015 and December 2017. Perioperative data were compared using bivariate analysis. Risk of DVT and PE after LSG or LRYGB was determined using multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: During the study period, 369,032 bariatric cases (72% LSG, 28% LRYGB) were performed. The incidence of DVT was similar between LSG and LRYGB (0.2% vs. 0.2%, p = 0.96), while the incidence of PE was decreased for LSG compared to LRYGB (0.1% vs. 0.2%, p < 0.001). Operative length was associated with increased risk of postoperative DVT (OR 1.1, CI 1.01-1.30, p = 0.04) and postoperative PE (OR 1.4, CI 1.16-1.64, p < 0.001) after surgery. The largest independent risk factors for DVT were history of DVT (OR 6.2, CI 4.44-8.45, p < 0.001) and transfusion (OR 4.2, CI 2.48-6.63, p < 0.001). The largest independent risk factors for PE were transfusion (OR 5.0, CI 2.69-8.36, p < 0.001) and history of DVT (OR 2.8, CI 1.67-4.58, p < 0.001). LSG was associated with a decreased risk of PE compared to LRYGB (OR 0.7 CI 0.55-0.91, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Prolonged operative length is associated with a higher risk of DVT and PE after either LSG or LRYGB. Transfusion and history of DVT are the largest risk factors for developing DVT and PE. There is a decreased risk of PE after LSG compared to LRYGB.

Outcomes of laparoscopic hiatal hernia repair based on surgical specialty: thoracic versus general surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Hiatal Hernia Repairs (HHR) are performed by both general surgeons (GS) and thoracic surgeons (TS). However, there are limited literature with respect to outcomes of HHR based on specialty training. The objective of this study was to compare the utilization, perioperative outcomes, and cost for HHR performed by GS versus TS. METHODS: The Vizient database was used to identify patients who underwent elective laparoscopic HHR between October 2014 and June 2018. Patients were grouped according to surgeon's specialty (GS vs. TS). Patient demographics and outcomes including in-hospital mortality were compared between groups. RESULTS: During the study period 13,764 patients underwent HHR by either GS or TS. GS performed 9930 (72%) cases while TS performed 3834 (28%) cases. There was no significant difference between GS versus TS with regard to serious morbidity (1.28% vs. 1.30%, p = 0.97) or mortality (0.10% vs. 0.21%, p = 0.19). The mortality index was 0.24 for GS versus 0.45 for TS. Compared to TS, laparoscopic HHR performed by GS was associated with a shorter LOS (2.57 days vs. 2.72 days, p < 0.001) and lower mean hospital costs ($7139 vs. $8032, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Within the context of academic centers, laparoscopic HHRs are mostly performed by GS with comparable outcome between general versus thoracic surgeons.

Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy or Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass for Patients with Metabolic Syndrome: An MBSAQIP Analysis.

In patients undergoing bariatric surgery, the presence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) contributes to perioperative morbidity. We aimed to evaluate the utilization and outcome of severely obese patients with MetS who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). Using the 2015 and 2016 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database, data were obtained for patients with MetS undergoing LSG or LRYGB. There were 29,588 MetS patients (LSG: 58.7% vs LRYGB: 41.3%). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (0.1% for LSG vs 0.2% for LRYGB, adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.58, confidence interval (CI) 0.32-1.05, P = 0.07) or length of stay between groups (2 ± 2 for LSG vs 2.2 ± 2 days for LRYGB, P = 0.40). Compared with LRYGB, LSG was associated with significantly shorter operative time (78 ± 39 vs 122 ± 54 minutes, P < 0.01), lower overall morbidity (2.3% vs 4.4%, AOR 0.53, CI 0.46-0.60, P < 0.01), lower serious morbidity (1.5% vs 2.3%, AOR 0.64, CI 0.53-0.76, P < 0.01), lower 30-day reoperation (1.2% vs 2.3%, AOR 0.52, CI 0.43-0.63, P < 0.01), and lower 30-day readmission (4.2% vs 6.6%, AOR 0.62, CI 0.55-0.69, P < 0.01). In conclusion, LSG is the predominant operation being performed for severely obese patients with MetS, and its popularity may in part be related to its improved perioperative safety profile.

Association of US News & World Report Top Ranking for Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Operation With Patient Outcomes in Abdominal Procedures.

Importance: The US News & World Report (USNWR) annual ranking of the best hospitals for gastroenterology and gastrointestinal operations provides guidance and referral of care for medical and surgical gastrointestinal conditions. Objective: To investigate whether USNWR top-ranked hospitals for gastroenterology and gastrointestinal surgical procedures are associated with improvements in patient outcomes, compared with nonranked hospitals, in common advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations. Design, Setting, and Participants: This study used the Vizient database, which contains administrative, clinical, and financial inpatient information of index hospitalizations for US academic centers and their affiliated hospitals that are members of Vizient. Data were obtained on advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations performed from January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017, at USNWR top-ranked hospitals (n = 16 296 operations) and nonranked hospitals (n = 35 573 operations). Abdominal operations included bariatric, colorectal, and hiatal hernia procedures. Operations on patients younger than 18 years, emergent cases, conversion cases, and patients with extreme severity of illness were excluded. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcome measures included in-hospital mortality, mortality index (observed to expected mortality ratio), serious morbidity, length of stay, and cost. Results: A total of 51 869 advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations were performed at 351 academic health centers and their community affiliates. Of these procedures, 16 296 (31.4%) were performed at 41 top-ranked hospitals and 35 573 (68.6%) at 310 nonranked hospitals. The annual case volume at top-ranked hospitals was 397 compared with 114 at nonranked hospitals. Between top-ranked and nonranked hospitals, no significant differences were found in in-hospital mortality (0.04% vs 0.07%; P = .33) or serious morbidity (1.06% vs 1.02%; P = .75). Compared with nonranked hospitals, advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations performed at top-ranked hospitals had higher mean costs ($7128 [$4917] vs $7742 [$6787]; P < .01) and longer mean lengths of stay (2.38 [2.60] days vs 2.73 [3.31] days; P < .01). Conclusions and Relevance: Although, among academic centers, the annual volume of advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations was 3-fold higher for USNWR top-ranked hospitals compared with nonranked hospitals, the volume did not appear to be associated with improved patient outcomes.

A longitudinal examination of suicide-related thoughts and behaviors among bariatric surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: Past research suggests self-harm/suicidality are more common among adults who have undergone bariatric surgery than the general population. OBJECTIVES: To compare prevalence of self-harm/suicidal ideation over time and identify presurgery risk factors for postsurgery self-harm/suicidal ideation. SETTING: The Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery-2 is a cohort study with presurgery and annual postsurgery assessments conducted at 10 U.S. hospitals. METHODS: Adults with severe obesity undergoing bariatric surgery between March 2006 and April 2009 (n = 2458). Five-year follow-up is reported. Self-reported history of suicidality assessed retrospectively via the Suicide Behavior Questionnaire-Revised (SBQ-R) and self-reported self-harm/suicidal ideation assessed prospectively via the Beck Depression Inventory-Version 1 (BDI-1). RESULTS: The SBQ-R was completed by 1540 participants; 2217 completed the BDI-1 pre- and postsurgery. Over 75% of participants were female, with a median age of 46 years and body mass index of 45.9 kg/m2. Approximately one fourth of participants (395/1534) reported a presurgery history of suicidal thoughts or behavior (SBQ-R). The prevalence of self-harm/suicidal ideation (BDI-1) was 5.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.7-6.8) presurgery and 3.8% (95% CI, 2.5-5.1) at year 1 postsurgery (P = .06). Prevalence increased over time postsurgery to 6.6% (95% CI, 4.6-8.6) at year 5 (P = .001) but was not significantly different than presurgery (P = .12). CONCLUSIONS: A large cohort of adults with severe obesity who underwent bariatric surgery had a prevalence of self-harm/suicidal ideation that may have decreased in the first postoperative year but increased over time to presurgery levels, suggesting screening for self-harm/suicidality is warranted throughout long-term postoperative care. Several risk factors were identified that may help with enhanced monitoring.

Serum biomarkers of inflammation and adiposity in the LABS cohort: associations with metabolic disease and surgical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The utility of serum biomarkers related to inflammation and adiposity as predictors of metabolic disease prevalence and outcomes after bariatric surgery are not well-defined. METHODS: Associations between pre- and post-operative serum levels of four biomarkers (C-reactive protein (CRP), cystatin C (CC), leptin, and ghrelin) with baseline measures of adiposity and metabolic disease prevalence (asthma, diabetes, sleep apnea), and weight loss and metabolic disease remission after bariatric surgery were studied in the Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery (LABS) cohort. RESULTS: Baseline CRP levels were positively associated with the odds of asthma but not diabetes or sleep apnea; baseline CC levels were positively associated with asthma, diabetes, and sleep apnea; baseline leptin levels were positively associated with asthma and negatively associated with diabetes and sleep apnea; baseline ghrelin levels were negatively associated with diabetes and sleep apnea. Increased weight loss was associated with increased baseline levels of leptin and CRP and decreased baseline levels of CC. Remission of diabetes and asthma was not associated with baseline levels of any biomarker. A higher likelihood of asthma remission was associated with a greater decrease in leptin levels, and a higher likelihood of diabetes remission was predicted by a lesser decrease in CC. Bariatric surgery was associated with decreased post-operative CC, CRP, and leptin levels, and increased post-operative ghrelin levels. CONCLUSION: This is the largest study to date of serum biomarkers of inflammation and adiposity in a bariatric surgery cohort. Biomarker levels correlate with metabolic disease prevalence prior to bariatric surgery, and with weight loss but not metabolic disease remission after surgery. Bariatric surgery regulates serum biomarker levels in a manner consistent with anti-inflammatory and compensatory orexigenic effects. These data contribute to our understanding of the mechanisms underlying the biologic effects of bariatric surgery.

Robotic versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a MBSAQIP analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy has become the procedure of choice for the treatment of morbid obesity. Robotic sleeve gastrectomy is an alternative surgical option, but its utilization has been low. The aim of this study was to evaluate the contemporary outcomes of robotic sleeve gastrectomy (RSG) versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) using a national database from accredited bariatric centers. STUDY DESIGN: Using the 2015 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database, clinical data for patients who underwent RSG or LSG were examined. Emergent and revisional cases were excluded. A multivariate logistic regression model was utilized to compare the outcomes between RSG and LSG. RESULTS: A total of 75,079 patients underwent sleeve gastrectomy with 70,298 (93.6%) LSG and 4781 (6.4%) RSG. Preoperative sleep apnea and hypoalbumenia were significantly higher in the RSG group (P < 0.01). Mean length of stay was similar between RSG and LSG (1.8 ± 2.0 vs. 1.7 ± 2.0 days, P = 0.17). Operative time was longer in the RSG group (102 ± 43 vs. 74 ± 36 min, P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between the RSG versus LSG group (0.02% vs. 0.01%, AOR 0.85; 95% CI 0.11-6.46, P = 0.88). However, RSG was associated with higher serious morbidity (1.1% vs. 0.8%, AOR 1.40; 95% CI 1.05-1.86, P < 0.01), higher leak rate (1.5% vs. 0.5%, AOR 3.14; 95% CI 2.65-4.42, P < 0.01), and higher surgical site infection rate (0.7% vs. 0.4%, AOR 1.55; 95% CI 1.08-2.23, P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic sleeve gastrectomy has longer operative time and is associated with higher postoperative morbidity including leak and surgical site infections. Laparoscopy should continue to be the surgical approach of choice for sleeve gastrectomy.

American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery and American Hernia Society consensus guideline on bariatric surgery and hernia surgery.

The American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery issues the following guidelines for the purpose of enhancing quality of care in hernia treatment through metabolic and bariatric surgery. In this statement, suggestions for management are presented that are derived from available knowledge, peer-reviewed scientific literature, and expert opinion. This was accomplished by performing a review of currently available literature regarding obesity, obesity treatments, and hernia surgery. The intent of issuing such a guideline is to provide objective information regarding the impact of obesity treatment on effective and durable hernia repair. The guideline may be revised in the future should additional evidence become available.

Risk Factors for Gastrointestinal Leak after Bariatric Surgery: MBASQIP Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal leak remains one of the most dreaded complications in bariatric surgery. We aimed to evaluate risk factors and the impact of common perioperative interventions on the development of leak in patients who underwent laparoscopic bariatric surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Using the 2015 database of accredited centers, data were analyzed for patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). Emergent, revisional, and converted cases were excluded. Multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze risk factors for leak, including provocative testing of anastomosis, surgical drain placement, and use of postoperative swallow study. RESULTS: Data from 133,478 patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (n = 92,495 [69.3%]) and LRYGB (n = 40,983 [30.7%]) were analyzed. Overall leak rate was 0.7% (938 of 133,478). Factors associated with increased risk for leak were oxygen dependency (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.97), hypoalbuminemia (AOR 1.66), sleep apnea (AOR 1.52), hypertension (AOR 1.36), and diabetes (AOR 1.18). Compared with LRYGB, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a lower risk of leak (AOR 0.52; 95% CI 0.44 to 0.61; p < 0.01). Intraoperative provocative test was performed in 81.9% of cases and the leak rate was higher in patients with vs without a provocative test (0.8% vs 0.4%, respectively; p < 0.01). A surgical drain was placed in 24.5% of cases and the leak rate was higher in patients with vs without a surgical drain placed (1.6% vs 0.4%, respectively; p < 0.01). A swallow study was performed in 41% of cases and the leak rate was similar between patients with vs without swallow study (0.7% vs 0.7%; p = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: The overall rate of gastrointestinal leak in bariatric surgery is low. Certain preoperative factors, procedural type (LRYGB), and interventions (intraoperative provocative test and surgical drain placement) were associated with a higher risk for leaks.

Effect of Bariatric Surgery on CKD Risk.

Obesity is linked to the development and progression of CKD, but whether bariatric surgery protects against CKD is poorly understood. We, therefore, examined whether bariatric surgery influences CKD risk. The study included 2144 adults who underwent bariatric surgery from March of 2006 to April of 2009 and participated in the Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery-2 Study cohort. The primary outcome was CKD risk categories as assessed by the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) consortium criteria using a combination of eGFR and albuminuria. Patients were 79% women and 87% white, with a median age of 46 years old. Improvements were observed in CKD risk at 1 and 7 years after surgery in patients with moderate baseline CKD risk (63% and 53%, respectively), high baseline risk (78% and 56%, respectively), and very high baseline risk (59% and 23%, respectively). The proportion of patients whose CKD risk worsened was ≤10%; five patients developed ESRD. Sensitivity analyses using year 1 as baseline to minimize the effect of weight loss on serum creatinine and differing eGFR equations offered qualitatively similar results. Treatment with bariatric surgery associated with an improvement in CKD risk categories in a large proportion of patients for up to 7 years, especially in those with moderate and high baseline risk. These findings support consideration of CKD risk in evaluation for bariatric surgery and further study of bariatric surgery as a treatment for high-risk obese patients with CKD.

Use of prescribed opioids before and after bariatric surgery: prospective evidence from a U.S. multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence suggests bariatric surgery may not reduce opioid analgesic use, despite improvements in pain. OBJECTIVE: To determine if use of prescribed opioid analgesics changes in the short and long term after bariatric surgery and to identify factors associated with continued and postsurgery initiated use. SETTING: Ten U.S. hospitals. METHODS: The Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery-2 is an observational cohort study. Assessments were conducted presurgery, 6 months postsurgery, and annually postsurgery for up to 7 years until January 2015. Opioid use was defined as self-reported daily, weekly, or "as needed" use of a prescribed medication classified as an opioid analgesic. RESULTS: Of 2258 participants with baseline data, 2218 completed follow-up assessment(s) (78.7% were female, median body mass index: 46; 70.6% underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass). Prevalence of opioid use decreased after surgery from 14.7% (95% CI: 13.3-16.2) at baseline to 12.9% (95% CI: 11.5-14.4) at month 6 but then increased to 20.3%, above baseline levels, as time progressed (95% CI: 18.2-22.5) at year 7. Among participants without baseline opioid use (n = 1892), opioid use prevalence increased from 5.8% (95% CI: 4.7-6.9) at month 6 to 14.2% (95% CI: 12.2-16.3) at year 7. Public versus private health insurance, more pain presurgery, undergoing subsequent surgeries, worsening or less improvement in pain, and starting or continuing nonopioid analgesics postsurgery were significantly associated with higher risk of postsurgery initiated opioid use. CONCLUSION: After bariatric surgery, prevalence of prescribed opioid analgesic use initially decreased but then increased to surpass baseline prevalence, suggesting the need for alternative methods of pain management in this population.

Alcohol and other substance use after bariatric surgery: prospective evidence from a U.S. multicenter cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Empirical evidence suggests Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) increases risk of developing alcohol use disorder (AUD). However, prospective assessment of substance use disorders (SUD) after bariatric surgery is limited. OBJECTIVE: To report SUD-related outcomes after RYGB and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). To identify factors associated with incident SUD-related outcomes. SETTING: 10 U.S. hospitals METHODS: The Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery-2 is a prospective cohort study. Participants self-reported past-year AUD symptoms (determined by the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test), illicit drug use (cocaine, hallucinogens, inhalants, phencyclidine, amphetamines, or marijuana), and SUD treatment (counseling or hospitalization for alcohol or drugs) presurgery and annually postsurgery for up to 7 years through January 2015. RESULTS: Of 2348 participants who underwent RYGB or LAGB, 2003 completed baseline and follow-up assessments (79.2% women, baseline median age: 47 years, median body mass index 45.6). The year-5 cumulative incidence of postsurgery onset AUD symptoms, illicit drug use, and SUD treatment were 20.8% (95% confidence interval (CI): 18.5-23.3), 7.5% (95% CI: 6.1-9.1), and 3.5% (95% CI: 2.6-4.8), respectively, post-RYGB, and 11.3% (95% CI: 8.5-14.9), 4.9% (95% CI: 3.1-7.6), and .9% (95% CI: .4-2.5) post-LAGB. Undergoing RYGB versus LAGB was associated with higher risk of incident AUD symptoms (adjusted hazard ratio or AHR = 2.08 [95% CI: 1.51-2.85]), illicit drug use (AHR = 1.76 [95% CI: 1.07-2.90]) and SUD treatment (AHR = 3.56 [95% CI: 1.26-10.07]). CONCLUSIONS: Undergoing RYGB versus LAGB was associated with twice the risk of incident AUD symptoms. One-fifth of participants reported incident AUD symptoms within 5 years post-RYGB. AUD education, screening, evaluation, and treatment referral should be incorporated in pre- and postoperative care.

Wound Morbidity in Minimally Invasive Anterior Component Separation Compared to Transversus Abdominis Release.

BACKGROUND: Transversus abdominis release is a novel approach for myofascial advancement in ventral hernia repair and has been hypothesized to have lower rates of wound complication than anterior component separation. METHODS: Patients who had a ventral hernia repair with either transversus abdominis release or minimally invasive anterior component separation from January of 2010 to January of 2016 were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study. Patient characteristics were collected through chart review. Primary outcomes were operative time and wound complications. Multiple linear/Poisson regression and Fisher's exact test were used to determine statistical significance. RESULTS: Of 142 patients analyzed, 75 subjects underwent Butler minimally invasive anterior component separation and 67 underwent transversus abdominis release. There were no differences in baseline characteristics between groups, except that the anterior component separation group had more immunosuppressed patients (35 percent versus 19 percent). Median operative time for anterior component separation was 6.3 hours versus 6.1 hours for transversus abdominis release (p = 0.6). Overall wound complications did not differ between the groups (p = 0.5). Compared with anterior component separation, transversus abdominis release had a similar incidence of seroma/hematoma (relative risk, 0.9; 95 percent CI, 0.5 to 1.7), wound infection (relative risk, 1.1; 95 percent CI, 0.5 to 2.2), and mesh infection (relative risk, 0.7; 95 percent CI, 0.2 to 3.4). Hernia recurrence was 12 percent for anterior component separation and 6 percent for transversus abdominis release (relative risk, 0.6; 95 percent CI, 0.2 to 1.7). Reoperation was required in 19 percent of anterior component separation and 12 percent of transversus abdominis release subjects (relative risk, 0.5; 95 percent CI, 0.2 to 1.2). CONCLUSIONS: Transversus abdominis release patients had similar operative times, wound complications, reoperations, and hernia recurrences compared with Butler minimally invasive anterior component separation patients. This contemporary comparison helps inform operative decisions for reconstructive surgeons. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.