Short- and long-term predictive power of the preoperative Geriatric Assessment components in older cancer patients undergoing high-risk abdominal surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The pathological stage of the cancer and presence of postoperative complications are the most important predictors of survival in older oncologic patients. Therefore, determining biological age, and risks connected with it, should be the key factor in the preoperative assessment. It may be accomplished by using a Geriatric Assessment (GA). However, it is not established which components are most useful for predicting short- and long-term postoperative outcomes in cancer patients undergoing high-risk abdominal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 334 consecutive cancer patients aged ≥70 years underwent elective abdominal surgery and were followed-up prospectively for 12 months. The preoperative GA consisted of eight domains: functional, physical activity, comorbidity, polypharmacotherapy, nutritional, cognition, mood, and social support. Logistic regression analyses were used to analyse the predictive ability. RESULTS: All components of GA were independent risk factors of 30-day major morbidity apart from ADL, BOMC, Polypharmacy (OR 0.6-1.3; p < 0.001). However, ADL, TUG, the polypharmacy and the MOS-SSS turned out to be significant predictors of 30-day mortality (OR 0.72-1.46; p < 0.001). In turn, only ADL, CDT and MOS-SSS were valid predictors of 12-months mortality (OR 0.46-0.85; p < 0.001). Frailty (surrogate of the biological age), not the chronological age, were also independent predictors of all outcomes (OR 4.71-8.56 p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Not the chronological age but components of GA and frailty are significant predictors of both 30-day postoperative outcome and 12-months mortality in older cancer patients undergoing high-risk abdominal surgery.

Fetuin-A Deficiency but Not Pentraxin 3, FGF-21, or Irisin, Predisposes to More Serious COVID-19 Course.

Analysis of liver biopsy specimens showed that SARS-CoV-2 might have led to liver damage. This study aimed to evaluate the role of selected hepatokines and myokines in the development and progression of COVID-19. Seventy patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 and 20 healthy volunteers were enrolled in the study. Irisin, pentraxin 3, fetuin-A, and FGF-21 serum concentrations and biochemical parameters were assessed using an immunoenzymatic method with commercially available enzyme immunoassay (EIA) or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) kits. Serum fetuin-A concentrations were significantly decreased in COVID-19 patients compared to healthy volunteers. The serum concentration of FGF-21 was significantly increased in obese COVID-19 patients compared to overweight ones. Moreover, the FGF-21 level was higher in COVID-19 patients diagnosed with metabolic syndrome than in patients without metabolic syndrome. PTX3 concentration was higher in COVID-19 patients with higher HOMA-IR values than those with lower HOMA-IR values. COVID-19 patients with HOMA-IR ≤ 3 and >3 had significantly lower fetuin-A levels than the control group. Irisin concentration was significantly decreased in the HOMA-IR ≤ 3 COVID-19 subgroup when comparing with the control group. Lower levels of fetuin-A observed in COVID-19 patients despite higher HOMA-IR, CRP, and ferritin levels, pneumonia, patients requiring ICU care suggests that fetuin-A deficiency predisposes to more severe COVID-19 course. Upregulated pentraxin 3 may be used as a potential predictor of COVID-19 severity.

Medical student experience with robot-assisted surgery after limited laparoscopy exposure.

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the objective and subjective experience of medical students completing robotic surgery tasks after limited laparoscopy exposure. Twenty-three medical students without previous laparoscopy and robotic surgery experience self-enrolled into 0 min (n = 11), 20 min (n = 6), and 40 min (n = 6) laparoscopy training groups. Subjects completed rope passing and ball placement tasks on a laparoscopy trainer before repeating similar tasks on the Senhance Surgical System, a robot-assisted digital laparoscopy device. Videos were recorded to evaluate objective measures including time, completion rate, clutch use, out of view instruments, ball drops, and manual adjustments. The NASA-TLX survey was administered to assess subjective experience using workload and task demand measures. There were no statistically significant differences in objective performance between the groups (p > 0.05). Subjects who completed laparoscopy training reported higher workloads, but these differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). NASA-TLX workload was correlated with time performance on Pearson and Spearman tests (r = 0.623, rho = 0.681, p < 0.01). Initial experience of medical students with robot-assisted surgery did not differ significantly after limited laparoscopy exposure.

Setting realistic expectations for weight loss after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the clinical benefits of bariatric surgery, some patients have experienced disappointment with their weight loss. Setting realistic expectations is the key to success. AIM: To develop a specific prediction calculator to estimate the expected body mass index (BMI) at 1 year after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed to study 211 patients after primary LSG. Nine baseline variables were analyzed. Least angle regression (LARS) was employed for variable selection and to build the predictive model. External validation was performed on a dataset of 184 patients. To test the accuracy of the model, a Wilcoxon signed-rank test was performed between BMI estimates and the observed BMI. A linear logistic equation was used to construct the online predictive calculator. RESULTS: The model included three variables - preoperative BMI (ß = 0.023, p < 0.001), age (ß = 0.005, p < 0.001), and female gender (ß = 0.116, p = 0.001) - and demonstrated good discrimination (R2 = 0.672; adjusted R2 = 0.664) and good accuracy (root mean squared error of estimate, RMSE = 0.124). The difference between the observed BMI and the estimated BMI was not statistically significant (median = 0.737 (-2.676, 3.254); p = 0.223). External validation confirmed good performance of the model. CONCLUSIONS: The study revealed a useful predictive model for estimating BMI at 1 year after LSG. The model was used for development of the PREDICT BMI calculator. This tool allows one to set realistic expectations of weight loss at one year after LSG.

Current Practice of Global Bariatric Tourism-Survey-Based Study.

PURPOSE: Our goal was to present the experience of bariatric surgeons with medical tourism on a global scale. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online-based survey was sent to bariatric surgeons worldwide regarding surgeon's country of practice, number and types of bariatric procedures performed, number of tourists treated, their countries of origin, reasons for travel, follow-up, and complications. RESULTS: Ninety-three responders performed 18,001 procedures in 2017. Sixty-four of those 93 responders operated on foreign patients performing a total of 3740 operations for them. The majority of the responders practice in India (n = 11, 17%), Mexico (n = 10, 16%), and Turkey (n = 6, 9%). Mexico dominated the number of bariatric surgeries for tourists with 2557 procedures performed in 2017. The most frequent procedures provided were laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) provided by 89.1% of the respondents, laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (40.6% of respondents), and one anastomosis gastric bypass (37.5% of respondents). CONCLUSION: At least 2% of worldwide bariatric procedures are provided for medical tourists. Countries such as Mexico, Lebanon, and Romania dominate as providers for patients mainly from the USA, UK, and Germany. The lack of affordable bariatric healthcare and long waiting lists are some of the reasons for patients choosing bariatric tourism.

Safety of Revision Sleeve Gastrectomy Compared to Roux-Y Gastric Bypass After Failed Gastric Banding: Analysis of the MBSAQIP.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the safety of revisional surgery to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) compared to laparoscopic Roux-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) after failed laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). BACKGROUND: The number of reoperations after failed gastric banding rapidly increased in the United States during the last several years. A common approach is band removal with conversion to another weight loss procedure such as gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy in a single procedure. The safety profile of those procedures remains controversial. METHODS: Preoperative characteristics and 30-day outcomes from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program Participant Use Files 2015 were selected for all patients who underwent a 1-stage conversion of LAGB to LSG (conv-LSG) or LRYGB (conv-LRYGB). Conv-LSG cases were matched (1:1) with conv-LRYGB patients by age (±1 year), body mass index (±1 kg/m(2)), sex, and comorbidities including diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, venous stasis, and sleep apnea. RESULTS: A total of 2708 patients (1354 matched pairs) were included in the study. The groups were closely matched as intended. The mean operative time in conv-LRYGB was significantly longer in comparison to conv-LSG patients (151 ±â€Š58 vs 113 ±â€Š45 minutes, P < 0.001). No mortality was observed in either group. Patients after conv-LRYGB had a clinically increased anastomotic leakage rate (2.07% vs 1.18%, P = 0.070) and significantly increased bleed rate (2.66% vs 0.44%, P < 0.001). Thirty-day readmission rate was significantly higher in conv-LRYGB patients (7.46% vs 3.69%, P < 0.001), as was 30-day reoperation rate (3.25% vs 1.26%, P < 0.001). The length of hospital stay was longer in conv-LRYGB. CONCLUSIONS: A single-stage conversion of failed LAGB leads to greater morbidity and higher complication rates when converted to LRYGB versus LSG in the first 30 days postoperatively. These differences are particularly notable with regards to bleed events, 30-day reoperation, 30-day readmission, operative time, and hospital stay.

Stapler-Less Robotic Partial Gastrectomy: a Safety and Feasibility Experimental Study.

BACKGROUND: No true preliminary work has been performed and published on the use of the bipolar cautery devices for transection of the stomach when performed as a part of the sleeve gastrectomy or gastric wedge resection. The objective of this study was to investigate the feasibility and safety of substitution of linear surgical stapling devices for use of a bipolar electrosurgical sealing instrument in the performance of a totally robotic partial gastrectomy (TRPG). METHODS: Ten female pigs were assigned to an intervention or control group. Intervention included TRPG with a robotic bipolar tissue coagulation device. In the control group, TRPG was performed using the staplers. Assessed outcomes included presence of the intraoperative and postoperative bleeding or leak and features of the sections from the stapled line or sutured line. RESULTS: Mean operating time was (130 ± 31 min) and (87 ± 23 min) in the study and control groups (p = 0.03). Intraoperative gastroscopy revealed slow bleeding associated with the staple line in 3/5 control pigs; oozing was not appreciated in any of the study pigs (0/5). No leak was detected during intraoperative gastroscopy. No major complications were suspected postoperatively or identified at postmortem exam in either group. Mean injury width was (1.12 ± 0.93 mm) in the control group with greater mean injury width (7.88 ± 3.73 mm) in the study group (p = 0.001). Mean depth of ulceration was (0.99 ± 0.94 mm) in the control group, with greater mean ulceration depth (2.25 ± 0.84 mm) in the study group (p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: The study showed the technical feasibility of performing stapler-less gastric wedge resection. The electrocautery alone failed to demonstrate the technical feasibility which was obtained with the concomitant use of a tissue clamp and a suture.

Safety of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in elderly patients - analysis of the MBSAQIP.

BACKGROUND: An increase in the prevalence of obesity and longer life expectancy has resulted in an increased number of candidates over the age of 60 who are pursuing a bariatric procedure. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the safety of laparoscopic Roux-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) compared to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients aged 60 years or older. SETTING: University Hospital, United States METHODS: Preoperative characteristics and 30-day outcomes from the MBSAQIP 2015 were selected for all patients aged 60 years or older who underwent a LSG or LRYGB. LRYGB cases were closely matched (1:1) with LSG patients by age (±1 year), BMI (±1 kg/m2), gender, preoperative steroid or immunosuppressant use, preoperative functional health status and comorbidities including: diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux disease, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, venous stasis, sleep apnea and history of severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. RESULTS: A 3371 matched pairs were included in the study. The mean operative time in LRYGB was significantly longer in comparison to LSG patients (122 vs 84 min., P<0.001). Patients after LRYGB had a significantly increased anastomotic leakage rate (1.01% vs 0.47 %, p = 0.011), 30-day readmission rate (6.08% vs 3.74%, p < 0.001) and 30-day reoperation rate (2.49% vs 0.89%, p < 0.001) The length of hospital stay was longer in LRYGB. Mortality and bleed rate was comparable. CONCLUSIONS: LRYGB and LSG in patients aged 60 years or older are relatively safe in the short term with an acceptable complication rate and low mortality. However, LRYGB is more challenging and is associated with significantly increased rates of leakage events, 30-day reoperation, 30-day readmission, longer operative time and longer hospital stay.

Does Robotic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Provide Outcome Advantages over Standard Laparoscopic Approaches?

OBJECTIVE: The aim was to compare clinical outcomes of patients treated with totally robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (TRRYGB) with those treated with the different laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) techniques. The clinical benefit of the robotic approach to bariatric surgery compared to the standard laparoscopic approach is unclear. There are no studies directly comparing outcomes of TRRYGB with different LRYGB techniques. METHODS: Outcomes of 578 obese patients who underwent RYGB between 2011 and 2014 at an academic center were assessed. Multivariable analysis and propensity matching were used for comparing TRRYGB to different LRYGB techniques, including 21-mm EEA circular-stapled gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA, LRYGB-21CS), linear-stapled GJA (LRYGB-LS), and hand-sewn GJA (LRYGB-HS). RESULTS: The TRRYGB technique required a longer mean operative time compared to the other groups, respectively 204 ± 46 vs. 139 ± 30 min (LRYGB-21CS), 206 ± 37 vs. 158 ± 30 min (LRYGB-LS), and 210 ± 36 vs. 167 ± 30 min (LRYGB-HS). TRRYGB experienced a lower stricture rate (2 vs. 17%, P = 0.003), shorter hospital stay (2.6 ± 1.2 vs. 4.3 ± 5.5 days, P = 0.008), and lower readmission rate (12 vs. 28%, P = 0.009). No significant differences in outcomes were observed when comparing RRYGB to LRYGB-LS or LRYGB-HS. CONCLUSIONS: TRRYGB increases operative time compared to all LRYGB techniques. TRRYGB was superior to LRYGB-21CS in terms of significantly shorter hospital stay, lower readmission rate, and less frequent GJA stricture formation. TRRYGB provides no clinical advantages over the LRYGB-LS and LRYGB-HS techniques.

Application of HARM Score to Measure Surgical Quality and Outcomes in Bariatric Patients.

BACKGROUND: The HospitAl stay, Readmission, and Mortality rates (HARM) score is a quality indicator that is easily determined from routine administrative data. However, the HARM score has not yet been applied to patients undergoing bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVE: The aims of the present study were to adjust the HARM score to the bariatric population and to validate the ability of the modified HARM score to serve as an inexpensive tool to measure the quality of bariatric surgery. METHODS: A MBSAQIP 2015 PUF database was reviewed. For each discharge, a 1 to 10 score was calculated on the basis of length of stay (LOS), discharge status, and 30-day readmissions. We adjusted the LOS categories to the distribution of LOS in the MBSQIP database. The new LOS categories were used to calculate the modified HARM score, referred to as the BARiatric HARM (BAR-HARM) score. The association between HARM and BAR-HARM scores and complication rate was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 197,141 cases were evaluated: 98.8% were elective and 1.2% were emergent admissions. The mean individual patient BAR-HARM score was 1.75 ± 1.04 for elective cases, and 2.02 ± 1.45 for emergency cases. The complication rates for the respective BAR-HARM categories ≤ 2, > 2 to 3, > 3 to 4, and > 4 were 3.95, 27.53, 40.14, and 79.97% (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The quality of bariatric surgery can be reliably and validly assessed using the BAR-HARM score, which is a modification of the HARM score.

Does Sleeve Shape Make a Difference in Outcomes?

INTRODUCTION: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is one of the most common procedures performed for weight loss. Many seek the "perfect sleeve" with the notion that the type of calibrating device affects sleeve shape, and this in turn will affect outcomes and complications. Two major concerns after SG are amount of weight loss and acid reflux. Our aim was to determine if the various calibration methods could impact sleeve shape and thereby allow for better outcomes of weight loss and reflux. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of 210 patients who underwent SG and had postoperative upper gastrointestinal (UGI) study from 2011 to 2015 in a single center by a single (fellowship-trained) bariatric surgeon. Data regarding demographics, calibrating devices and clinical outcomes at 1 year (weight loss and de novo acid reflux) were collected. UGIs were reviewed by two radiologists blinded to the clinical outcomes. Sleeve shape was classified according to a previously described classification as tubular, dumbbell, upper pouch, or lower pouch. The types of calibrating devices used to guide the sleeve size intraoperatively were endoscopy, large-bore orogastric tube, and fenestrated suction tube. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-nine patients met inclusion criteria (11 had no esophagram). Demographics revealed age 45.76 ± 10.6 years, BMI 47 ± 8.6 kg/m2, and 82% female. Calibration devices used were endoscopic guidance (7.6%), large bore orogastric tube (41.4%), and fenestrated suction tube (50.5%). Sleeve shape was reported as 32.6% tubular, 20.6% dumbbell, 39.2% lower pouch, and 7.5% upper pouch (100% interrater reliability). No correlation was seen with type of calibration used. Of patients, 62.0% had > 50% excess weight loss at 1 year. Twenty-three percent of patients remained on PPI at 1 year (of which 43.3% did not have reflux preoperatively). The lower pouch shape showed a trend toward less reflux and more weight loss. CONCLUSION: This study showed no clear association between uniformity of sleeve shape and the type of calibration device used. The study showed a trend toward decreased reflux and improved weight loss with the lower pouch shape, regardless of calibration device.

Case-Control Study of Postoperative Blood Pressure in Patients with Hemorrhagic Complications after Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy and Matched Controls.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is associated with a moderate risk of hemorrhagic complications (HC). There is a debate regarding the relationship between HC and high blood pressure in postoperative period. AIM: The aim is to clarify whether the postoperative blood pressure is an independent risk factor for hemorrhagic complications after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. METHODS: Medical records of 522 patients were reviewed. A case-control study of postoperative blood pressure was undertaken in patients with bleeding after LSG and matched controls. Patients who required surgical revision, due to the hemorrhagic complications within 72 hours, were identified as the cases. Controls were matched (1:1) with cases by age (±1 year), gender (female versus male), staple line reinforcement (running suture versus haemostatic clips) and surgeon's experience (>50 or <50 LSG procedures per year). 12-hour postoperative blood pressure was recorded. RESULTS: 17 patients after LSG with HC in postoperative period were matched with 17 controls. Patients who experienced hemorrhagic complications after LSG had non statistically significant decreased mean systolic blood pressure (mmHg) in 12 hours observation (130.7 ± 12.9 versus 139.1 ± 10.8); p = 0.15; mean difference - 11.6 (95% CI -29.5 - 6.1). Mean 12 hour diastolic pressure was also comparable. The detailed analysis of controls revealed a significantly higher systolic blood pressure measurements in 5th and 11th hour postoperatively, as well as higher diastolic blood pressure in 12th hour postoperatively. However, the differences were not clinically significant. CONCLUSION: Compared with closely matched control subjects, patients with HC after LSG have decreased systolic blood pressure without clinical significance.

Can Sleeve Gastrectomy "Cure" Diabetes? Long-term Metabolic Effects of Sleeve Gastrectomy in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to assess long-term metabolic effects of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and to identify predictive factors for long-term diabetes remission and relapse. BACKGROUND: LSG has become the most common bariatric operation worldwide. Its long-term metabolic effects in patients with T2DM are, however, unknown. METHODS: Outcomes of 134 patients with obesity with T2DM who underwent LSG at an academic center during 2005 to 2010 and had at least 5 years of follow-up were assessed. RESULTS: At a median postsurgical follow-up of 6 years (range: 5-9), a mean body mass index loss of -7.8 ±â€Š5.1 kg/m (total weight loss: 16.8% ±â€Š9.7%) was associated with a reduction in mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c, -1.3 ±â€Š1.8%, P < 0.001), fasting blood glucose (-37.8 ±â€Š70.4 mg/dL, P < 0.001) and median number of diabetes medications (-1, P < 0.001). Long-term glycemic control (HbA1c <7%) was seen in 63% of patients (vs 31% at baseline, P < 0.001), diabetes remission (HbA1c <6.5% off medications) in 26%, complete remission (HbA1c <6% off medications) in 11%, and "cure" (continuous complete remission for ≥5 years) was achieved in 3%. Long-term relapse of T2DM after initial remission occurred in 44%. Among patients with relapse, 67% maintained glycemic control (HbA1c <7%). On adjusted analysis, taking 2 or more diabetes medications at baseline predicted less long-term remission (odds ratio 0.19, 95% confidence interval 0.07-0.55, P = 0.002) and more relapse of T2DM (odds ratio 8.50, 95% confidence interval: 1.40-49.20, P = 0.02). Significant improvement in triglycerides (-53.7 ±â€Š116.4 mg/dL, P < 0.001), high-density lipoprotein (8.2 ±â€Š12.9 mg/dL, P < 0.001), systolic (-8.9 ±â€Š18.7 mmHg, P < 0.001) and diastolic blood pressure (-2.6 ±â€Š14.5 mmHg, P = 0.04), and cardiovascular risk (13% relative reduction, P < 0.001) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: LSG can significantly improve cardiometabolic risk factors including glycemic status in T2DM. Long-term complete remission and "cure" of T2DM, however, occur infrequently.

Quality of Life and Bariatric Surgery: Cross-Sectional Study and Analysis of Factors Influencing Outcome.

PURPOSE: The aims of our study were to compare quality of life (QOL) in obese patients after bariatric surgery with that in controls seeking surgery and to investigate which factors are associated with QOL in the Moorehead-Ardelt Quality of Life Questionnaire II (MA II). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study. The operated group consisted of patients after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The MA II was administered by e-mail to 305 patients 12-18 months after surgery. The control groups consisted of 101 obese patients. We compared the QOL scores and considered good and very good outcomes to be satisfactory. Multiple logistic regression and correlation analysis was performed to identify factors associated with QOL. RESULTS: In the operated group, the total MA II score was 1.70 ± 0.76, which was higher than 0.59 ± 1.17 in the control group. The score adjusted for the type of surgery was comparable. The prevalence of satisfactory QOL outcomes was similar in both post-operative subgroups and was still higher than in the control group. We identified four factors associated with higher QOL in obese patients. Weight loss was not correlated with total score in MAII. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that patients after bariatric surgery have a higher score in MA II, which reflects better QOL. The scoring adjusted by type of operation is comparable. QOL among obese patients is dependent on age, gender, history of bariatric surgery, and partnered status. Body mass reduction was not associated with outcome in MAII.

Reoperations in bariatric surgery - indications and initial evaluation of postoperative complications.

UNLABELLED: Obesity, at present, seems to be a very serious health problem all over the world. The surgery is said to be the most successful treatment of obesity. With the increase in the quantity of conducted bariatric procedures, the number of revision treatments increases as well. The aim of the study was to analyze the indications, results and complications after repeated bariatric surgeries. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The repeated bariatric procedures performed in 2009-2015 have been retrospectively analyzed. The endpoint of the study was the evaluation of early surgical treatment results-up to 30th day after repeated surgery. RESULTS: Overall, amongs 103 obese patients with a BMI over 35 kg / m2, qualified for bariatric treatment 7 revision surgeries were conducted (6.8%). Two operations were carried out by laporotomy, other by laparoscopy. In the study group, neither any deaths were noted in perioperative period nor life-threatening complications. The frequency of complications-Surgical site infection and bleeding from the staple lines of stapler in the study group appeared to be 28.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Qualification for repeated bariatric surgeries should be based on a thorough analysis of the condition of the patient, previous outcome of the bariatric treatment: evaluation of weight loss as well as possible complications of the original surgery.

Laparoscopic Three-Port Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Single Institution Case Series.

BACKGROUND: Further minimization of abdominal wall trauma during laparoscopic bariatric surgery is a topic of great interest. Reducing the number of trocars may provide superior cosmetic results with less pain and shorter length of stay (LOS). However, it remains unclear if this approach compromises safety or effectiveness of weight loss. The aim of this study is to report initial safety and feasibility results using a three-port minimally invasive sleeve gastrectomy technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent laparoscopic three-port sleeve gastrectomy (3PSG) at our institution was conducted. Patient demographics, intraoperative parameters, and perioperative outcomes were extracted and analyzed. Postoperative data were obtained from routine follow-up history and physical examination. RESULTS: From May 2013 to April 2014, 45 morbidly obese patients underwent 3PSG. The cohort had a male-to-female ratio of 20:25, mean age of 47.4 ± 11.6 years, and a mean preoperative body mass index (BMI) of 47.6 ± 9.7 kg/m(2). The mean number of comorbidities was 4 (range 0-8), and the mean American Society of Anesthesiologists score was 2.82 (range 1-4). Mean procedural duration and blood loss were 165 ± 31.9 minutes and 27.0 ± 31.8 mL, respectively. Eight patients (17%) required one additional trocar. Two cases (4.4%) had an intraoperative complication (staple line bleeding and splenic capsule laceration). Two (4.4%) postoperative complications were encountered (wound infection and axillary vein thrombosis). The mean LOS was 2.7 (range 2-7) days. At a mean follow-up of 5 (range 0.4-11.7) months, the cohort had a mean BMI of 40.0 ± 9.26 kg/m(2), which corresponded to a mean excess weight loss of 36.0% ± 18.1%. There were no trocar site hernias. All patients were highly satisfied with the final cosmetic result. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic 3PSG appears to be a safe and feasible technique for performing sleeve gastrectomy. While further long-term research is needed, it appears to have significant benefits, mainly patient satisfaction and potentially less pain.

Reoperative Surgery for Management of Early Complications After Gastric Bypass.

INTRODUCTION: Most papers discussing specifics of reoperative surgery after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) are over 10 years old. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing reoperative surgery within 30 days of LRYGB. RESULTS: Over a 5-year period, 52 out of 1769 (2.9%) patients underwent reoperation within 30 days of the index LRYGB. The 30-day reoperative surgery rate was 2.5% for primary and 7.1% for revisional LRYGB. The most common indications for reoperation included bleeding (n = 16), followed by bowel obstruction (n = 14), leak (n = 14), and diagnostic exploration for tachycardia and abdominal pain (n = 4). Forty-nine (94%) reoperations were started laparoscopically and six (12%) required conversion to laparotomy. The most common sources of bleeding were the mesenteric vessels (n = 6); the most common cause of obstruction was adhesion (n = 5), and the most common site of leak was the gastric pouch and gastrojejunal anastomosis (n = 9). Twenty (38%) patients developed further complications that led to a third surgery in nine (17%) patients. There were no significant differences as far cause for reoperation noted between patients undergoing primary surgery versus revisional surgery. The 90-day readmission and mortality rates were 29% and zero, respectively. CONCLUSION: Type of complications is comparable, and number of complications requiring early surgical reintervention following primary or revisional LRYGB is low. Increasing proportion of patients requiring early reoperation will have undergone a revisional surgery. The majority of these reoperations are accomplished laparoscopically. Bleeding continues to be the most common cause for early reoperation. Although associated with significant morbidity, mortality is rare in this patient population.

Most common robotic bariatric procedures: review and technical aspects.

Since its appear in the year 1997, when Drs. Cadiere and Himpens did the first robotic cholecystectomy in Brussels, not long after the first cholecystectomy, they performed the first robotic bariatric procedure. It is believed that robotically-assisted surgery's most notable contributions are reflected in its ability to extend the benefits of minimally invasive surgery to procedures not routinely performed using minimal access techniques. We describe the 3 most common bariatric procedures done by robot. The main advantages of the robotic system applied to the gastric bypass appear to be better control of stoma size, avoidance of stapler costs, elimination of the potential for oropharyngeal and esophageal trauma, and a potential decrease in wound infection. While in the sleeve gastrectomy and adjustable gastric banding its utility is more debatable, giving a bigger advantage during surgery on patients with a very large BMI or revisional cases.

Laparoscopic single-incision gastric bypass: initial experience, technique and short-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) research has been limited. The aim of this study is to describe our technique and to evaluate the short term outcomes and efficacy of SILS Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in a selected group of patients in a single center. METHODS: From March 2012 to January 2013, a total of fourteen patients underwent SILS RYGB using a single vertical 2.5-3 cm intra-umbilical incision, 3-ports placed trans-fascially, and a liver suspension technique in Cleveland Clinic's Bariatric & Metabolic Institute, in Cleveland, Ohio, USA. Patient selection, short-term outcomes and technical issues were retrospectively viewed in this study. RESULTS: A total of 14 morbid obese patients (12 women and 2 men; mean age, 46 years). Mean operative time was 196 (range 131-265) min. Mean weight at surgery was 113 (range 91-135) kg. One patient required placement of one additional port (7 %). No conversions to conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) or open surgery was needed. The estimated blood loss was 40 (range 20-100) ml. In terms of pain control, the frequency of patient controlled analgesia had a mean use of 21 times in postoperative day 0 (POD), 37 times in POD1 and 13 times in POD2. Pain score (assessed by visual analogue scale) had a median score of 6.9 in POD0, 5.2 In POD1 and 3.8 in POD2. Weight loss was approximately 7.25 lb. (±4.5) after first postoperative visit, 28.9 lb. (±11.86) after 1 month and 45.4 lb. (±15.4) after 4 months. No patients required re-operation or readmission during the 90 days after surgery. CONCLUSION: Single incision is feasible, safe and reproducible technique used as an access to complex surgeries like gastric bypass in carefully selected patients. Results in short-term outcomes are comparable to those observed in literature. Some potential benefits include less postoperative pain, improved cosmesis, and patient satisfaction. Randomized trials involving larger patient series with a longer follow-up and larger cohort studies and/or systematic reviews will be necessary to assess the extent of the benefits and limitations of SILS in bariatric surgery.