Sweetened Beverage Tax Implementation and Change in Body Mass Index Among Children in Seattle.

Importance: Sweetened beverage taxes have been associated with reduced purchasing of taxed beverages. However, few studies have assessed the association between sweetened beverage taxes and health outcomes. Objective: To evaluate the association between the Seattle sweetened beverage tax and change in body mass index (BMI) among children. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this longitudinal cohort study, anthropometric data were obtained from electronic medical records of 2 health care systems (Kaiser Permanente Washington [KP] and Seattle Children's Hospital Odessa Brown Children's Clinic [OBCC]). Children were included in the study if they were aged 2 to 18 years (between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2019); had at least 1 weight measurement every year between 2015 and 2019; lived in Seattle or in urban areas of 3 surrounding counties (King, Pierce, and Snohomish); had not moved between taxed (Seattle) and nontaxed areas; received primary health care from KP or OBCC; did not have a recent history of cancer, bariatric surgery, or pregnancy; and had biologically plausible height and BMI (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared). Data analysis was conducted between August 5, 2022, and March 4, 2024. Exposure: Seattle sweetened beverage tax (1.75 cents per ounce on sweetened beverages), implemented on January 1, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was BMIp95 (BMI expressed as a percentage of the 95th percentile; a newly recommended metric for assessing BMI change) of the reference population for age and sex, using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention growth charts. In the primary (synthetic difference-in-differences [SDID]) model used, a comparison sample was created by reweighting the comparison sample to optimize on matching to pretax trends in outcome among 6313 children in Seattle. Secondary models were within-person change models using 1 pretax measurement and 1 posttax measurement in 22 779 children and fine stratification weights to balance baseline individual and neighborhood-level confounders. Results: The primary SDID analysis included 6313 children (3041 female [48%] and 3272 male [52%]). More than a third of children (2383 [38%]) were aged 2 to 5 years); their mean (SE) age was 7.7 (0.6) years. With regard to race and ethnicity, 789 children (13%) were Asian, 631 (10%) were Black, 649 (10%) were Hispanic, and 3158 (50%) were White. The primary model results suggested that the Seattle tax was associated with a larger decrease in BMIp95 for children living in Seattle compared with those living in the comparison area (SDID: -0.90 percentage points [95% CI, -1.20 to -0.60]; P < .001). Results from secondary models were similar. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that the Seattle sweetened beverage tax was associated with a modest decrease in BMIp95 among children living in Seattle compared with children living in nearby nontaxed areas who were receiving care within the same health care systems. Taken together with existing studies in the US, these results suggest that sweetened beverage taxes may be an effective policy for improving children's BMI. Future research should test this association using longitudinal data in other US cities with sweetened beverage taxes.

Health Expenditures After Bariatric Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: Bariatric surgery leads to substantial improvements in weight and weight-related conditions, but prior literature on post-surgical health expenditures is equivocal. In a retrospective cohort study, we compared expenditures between surgical and matched non-surgical patients. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA AND METHODS: In a retrospective study, total, outpatient, inpatient and medication expenditures 3 years before and 5.5 years after surgery were compared between 22,698 bariatric surgery (n=7,127 RYGB, 15,571 sleeve gastrectomy) patients from 2012-2019 and 66,769 matched non-surgical patients, using generalized estimating equations. We also compared expenditures between patients receiving the two leading surgical procedures in weighted analyses. RESULTS: Surgical and non-surgical cohorts were well matched, 80-81% female, with mean body mass index (BMI) of 44, and mean age of 47 (RYGB) and 44 (SG) years. Estimated total expenditures were similar between surgical and non-surgical groups 3 years before surgery ($27 difference, 95% confidence interval (CI): -42, 102)), increased 6 months prior to surgery for surgical patients, and decreased below pre-period levels for both groups after 3-5.5 years to become similar (difference at 5.5 y=-$61, 95% CI: -166, 52). Long-term outpatient expenditures were similar between groups. Surgical patients' lower long-term medication expenditures ($314 lower at 5.5 y, 95% CI: -419, -208) were offset by a higher risk of hospitalization. Total expenditures were similar between RYGB and SG patients 3.5 to 5.5 years after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery translated into lower medication expenditures than matched controls, but not lower overall long-term expenditures. Expenditure trends appear similar for the two leading bariatric operations.

Comparison of health care costs following sleeve gastrectomy versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass among patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the impact of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) on overall and diabetes-specific health care costs among patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study examined patients with type 2 diabetes after SG and RYGB using data from Optum's deidentified Clinformatics® Data Mart database. The matched study group included 9608 patients who underwent SG or RYGB and were enrolled between 2007 and 2019. The primary outcomes assessed were overall and diabetes-specific health care costs. RESULTS: Health care costs associated with type 2 diabetes declined substantially in the first few years following both SG and RYGB. RYGB was associated with a larger decrease in pharmacy costs, as well as type 2 diabetes-specific office and laboratory costs. SG was associated with lower total health care costs in the first three follow-up periods and lower acute care costs in the first 2 years after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide study, patients with type 2 diabetes at baseline undergoing RYGB appear to experience a reduced need for ambulatory type 2 diabetes monitoring and reduced requirements for antidiabetes medication but, despite this, did not experience an overall medical cost-benefit in the first few years after RYGB versus SG.

Comparison of safety and healthcare utilization following sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass among medicare beneficiaries using sex as a biologic variable.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery is a common operation, but differences in outcomes between males and females are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To compare the risk of mortality, complications, reintervention, and healthcare utilization after sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass using sex as a biologic variable. SETTING: United States. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of adults undergoing sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2018 using Medicare claims data. We performed a heterogeneity of treatment effect analysis to determine the impact of sleeve gastrectomy versus gastric bypass comparing males to females. The primary outcome was safety (mortality, complications, and reinterventions) up to 5 years after surgery. The secondary outcome was healthcare utilization (hospitalization and emergency department use). RESULTS: Among 95,405 patients the majority (n = 71,348; 74.8%) were female and most (n = 57,008; 59.8%) underwent sleeve gastrectomy. For all patients, compared to gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a lower risk of complications and reintervention but a higher risk of revision. Compared to gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a lower risk of mortality for females (adjusted hazard ratio .86, 95% CI .75-.96) but not males. We found no difference in procedure treatment effect by sex for mortality, hospitalization, emergency department use, or overall reintervention when comparing sleeve to gastric bypass. CONCLUSIONS: Females and males have similar outcomes following bariatric surgery. Females have a lower risk of complications but a higher risk of reintervention. Decisions surrounding treatment for this common procedure should be tailored to include a discussion of sex-specific differences in treatment outcome.

Acute Care Utilization and Costs Up to 4 Years After Index Sleeve Gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A National Claims-based Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare acute care utilization and costs following sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Comparing postbariatric emergency department (ED) and inpatient care use patterns could assist with procedure choice and provide insights about complication risk. METHODS: We used a national insurance claims database to identify adults undergoing SG and RYGB between 2008 and 2016. Patients were matched on age, sex, calendar-time, diabetes, and baseline acute care use. We used adjusted Cox proportional hazards to compare acute care utilization and 2-part logistic regression models to compare annual associated costs (odds of any cost, and odds of high costs, defined as ≥80th percentile), between SG and RYGB, overall and within several clinical categories. RESULTS: The matched cohort included 4263 SG and 4520 RYGB patients. Up to 4 years after surgery, SG patients had slightly lower risk of ED visits [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR): 0.90; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85,0.96] and inpatient stays (aHR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.73,0.88), especially for events associated with digestive-system diagnoses (ED aHR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.62,0.75; inpatient aHR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.53,0.72). SG patients also had lower odds of high ED and high total acute costs (eg, year-1 acute costs adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.77; 95% CI: 0.66,0.90) in early follow-up. However, observed cost differences decreased by years 3 and 4 (eg, year-4 acute care costs aOR 1.10; 95% CI: 0.92,1.31). CONCLUSIONS: SG may have fewer complications requiring emergency care and hospitalization, especially as related to digestive system disease. However, any acute care cost advantages of SG may wane over time.

Out-of-pocket Costs for Commercially-insured Patients in the Years Following Bariatric Surgery: Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.

OBJECTIVE: To compare out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for patients up to 3 years after bariatric surgery in a large, commercially-insured population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: More information on OOP costs following bariatric surgery may affect patients' procedure choice. METHODS: Retrospective study using the IBM MarketScan commercial claims database, representing patients nationally who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2017. We compared total OOP costs after the surgical episode between the 2 procedures using difference-in-differences analysis adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, operative year, and insurance type. RESULTS: Of 63,674 patients, 64% underwent SG and 36% underwent RYGB. Adjusted OOP costs after SG were $1083, $1236, and $1266 postoperative years 1, 2, and 3. For RYGB, adjusted OOP costs were $1228, $1377, and $1369. In our primary analysis, SG OOP costs were $122 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -$155 to -$90) less than RYGB year 1. This difference remained consistent at -$119 (95%CI: -$158 to -$79) year 2 and -$80 (95%CI: -$127 to -$35) year 3. These amounts were equivalent to relative differences of -7%, -7%, and -5% years 1, 2, and 3. Plan features contributing the most to differences were co-insurance years 1, 2, and 3.The largest clinical contributors to differences were endoscopy and outpatient care year 1, outpatient care year 2, and emergency department use year 3. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first to examine the association between bariatric surgery procedure and OOP costs. Differences between procedures were approximately $100 per year which may be an important factor for some patients deciding whether to pursue SG or gastric bypass.

Comparative Safety of Sleeve Gastrectomy and Gastric Bypass up to 5 Years After Surgery in Patients With Medicaid.

OBJECTIVE: Compare adverse outcomes up to 5 years after sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass in patients with Medicaid. BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy is the most common bariatric operation among patients with Medicaid; however, its long-term safety in this population is unknown. METHODS: Using Medicaid claims, we performed a retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2018. Instrumental variables survival analysis was used to estimate the cumulative incidence and heterogeneity of outcomes up to 5 years after surgery. RESULTS: Among 132,788 patients with Medicaid, 84,717 (63.8%) underwent sleeve gastrectomy and 48,071 (36.2%) underwent gastric bypass. A total of 69,225 (52.1%) patients were White, 33,833 (25.5%) were Black, and 29,730 (22.4%) were Hispanic. Compared with gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a lower 5-year cumulative incidence of mortality (1.29% vs 2.15%), complications (11.5% vs 16.2%), hospitalization (43.7% vs 53.7%), emergency department (ED) use (61.6% vs 68.2%), and reoperation (18.5% vs 22.8%), but a higher cumulative incidence of revision (3.3% vs 2.0%). Compared with White patients, the magnitude of the difference between sleeve and bypass was smaller among Black patients for ED use [5-y adjusted hazard ratios: 1.01; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.94-1.08 vs 0.94 (95% CI, 0.88-1.00), P <0.001] and Hispanic patients for reoperation [5-y adjusted hazard ratios: 0.95 (95% CI, 0.86-1.05) vs 0.76 (95% CI, 0.69-0.83), P <0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with Medicaid undergoing bariatric surgery, sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a lower risk of mortality, complications, hospitalization, ED use, and reoperations, but a higher risk of revision compared with gastric bypass. Although the difference between sleeve and bypass was generally similar among White, Black, and Hispanic patients, the magnitude of this difference was smaller among Black patients for ED use and Hispanic patients for reoperation.

Association of Insurance Coverage With Adoption of Sleeve Gastrectomy vs Gastric Bypass for Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery.

Importance: Instrumental variables can control for selection bias in observational research. However, valid instruments are challenging to identify. Objective: To evaluate regional variation in sleeve gastrectomy following insurance coverage implementation as an instrumental variable in comparative effectiveness research. Design, Setting, and Participants: This serial cross-sectional study included adult patients in a national Medicare claims database who underwent sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass from 2012 to 2017. Data analysis was performed from January to June 2021. Exposures: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Main Outcomes and Measures: The association of the instrumental variable with treatment (ie, undergoing sleeve gastrectomy), as well as mortality, complications, emergency department visits, hospitalization, reinterventions, and surgical revision. Results: A total of 76 077 patients underwent bariatric surgery, of whom 44 367 underwent sleeve gastrectomy (mean [SD] age, 56.9 [11.9] years; 32 559 [73.5%] women) and 31 710 underwent gastric bypass (mean (SD) age, 55.9 (11.8) years; 23 750 [74.9%] women). After insurance coverage initiation, there was substantial regional and temporal variation in adoption of sleeve gastrectomy. Prior-year state-level utilization of sleeve gastrectomy was highly associated with undergoing sleeve gastrectomy (Kleibergen-Paap Wald F statistic, 910.3). All but 2 patient characteristics (race and diagnosis of depression) were well-balanced between the top and bottom quartiles of the instrumental variable. Regarding 1-year outcomes, compared with patients undergoing gastric bypass, patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy had a lower 1-year risk of mortality (0.9%; 95% CI, 0.8%-1.1% vs 1.7%; 95% CI, 1.3%-2.0%), complications (11.6%; 95% CI, 10.9%-12.3% vs 14.1%; 95% CI, 13.0%-15.3%), emergency department visits (48.3%; 95% CI, 46.9%-49.8% vs 53.6%; 95% CI, 52.3%-55.0%), hospitalization (23.4%; 95% CI, 22.4%-24.4% vs 26.5%; 95% CI, 25.1%-28.0%), and reinterventions (8.7%; 95% CI, 8.0%-9.4% vs 12.2%; 95% CI, 11.2%-13.3%). The risk of revision was not different between groups (0.6%; 95% CI, 0.3%-0.8% vs 0.4%; 95% CI, 0.3%-0.6%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of patients undergoing bariatric surgery, there was significant geographic variation in the use of sleeve gastrectomy following initiation of insurance coverage, which served as a strong instrument to compare 2 bariatric surgical procedures. This approach could be applied to other areas of health services research to serve as a complement to clinical trials.

Long-term comparative effectiveness of gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy on use of antireflux medication: a difference-in-differences analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux (GERD) is common among patients with obesity who undergo bariatric surgery. Although gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy are the most common bariatric operations performed in the United States, their long-term comparative effectiveness on GERD medication use is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare the long-term effectiveness of gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy on use of antireflux medication. SETTING: National cohort undergoing inpatient bariatric surgery. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2017. A difference-in-differences analysis was conducted to evaluate the differential change in antireflux medication use between groups before and after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 16,640 patients underwent gastric bypass, and 26,724 patients underwent sleeve gastrectomy. Before surgery, GERD medication use was higher among patients who underwent gastric bypass (62.4%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 62.0%-63.7%) compared with patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy (60.1%; 95% CI: 59.3%-60.9%). Five years after surgery, GERD medication use was lower in patients who underwent gastric bypass (47.8%; 95% CI: 46.3%-49.3%) compared with patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy (53.7%; 95% CI: 50.5%-56.9%). The differential decrease from baseline GERD medication use was greater for patients who underwent gastric bypass at 2 years (-4.1 percentage points [pp]; 95% CI: -1.7 to -6.5 pp), 3 years (-4.3 pp; 95% CI: -1.6 to -7.0 pp), 4 years (-6.9 pp; 95% CI: -4.1 to -9.6 pp), and 5 years (-8.3 pp; 95% CI: -3.7 to 12.8 pp) after surgery. CONCLUSION: Though use of antireflux medication decreased following both procedures, gastric bypass was associated with a greater reduction in antireflux medication use 5 years after surgery compared with sleeve gastrectomy. Understanding the long-term comparative effectiveness of these common bariatric operations may better inform treatment decisions among patients and surgeons.

Comparison of Ambulatory Health Care Costs and Use Associated With Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass vs Sleeve Gastrectomy.

Importance: Studies comparing contemporary bariatric surgical types could facilitate procedure selection for patients interested in reducing their frequency of health care visits and reliance on prescription drugs. Objective: To compare the association of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) with ambulatory health care costs and use for as long as 4 years after surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This comparative effectiveness study, which included patients undergoing bariatric surgery who were aged 18 to 64 years with at least 24 months of enrollment data before surgery and 12 months of enrollment data after surgery, used a retrospective interrupted time series with a comparison group. Data represent insurance claims dated January 2006 to June 2017, with analyses completed in September 2021. Data were collected from US commercial and Medicare Advantage claims database. Cohorts were matched on characteristics including baseline body mass index category, diabetes status, baseline ambulatory care costs, region of the United States, and year of surgery. Exposures: SG or RYGB, based on procedure codes. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual ambulatory health care costs, and subtypes of cost and use including prescriptions, office visits, laboratory encounters, and radiology. Results: Matched cohorts included 3049 patients who underwent SG and 3251 patients who underwent RYGB, with a mean (SD) age of 45.2 (10.0) years; 4820 (77%) were women. Full follow-up was 37% for SG (514 patients) and 38% for RYGB (643 patients) among those eligible for 4-year follow-up. There were no significant differences between SG and RYGB in total ambulatory costs, office visit costs, or radiology costs in all follow-up years. Patients who underwent SG had significantly higher prescription costs than those who underwent RYGB bypass in year 4 ($852.8 per patient per year; 95% CI: $395.6-$1310.0 per patient per year) with more cardiometabolic medication fills in each year (eg, year 4: 42.5%; 95% CI, 13.7%-71.2%). In contrast, early after surgery, patients who underwent SG had relatively fewer specialist visits (eg, year 1: -7.2%; 95% CI, -14.3% to -0.2%) and lower laboratory costs (eg, year 1: -$118.9 per patient per year; 95% CI, -$220.2 to -$17.5 per patient per year). Conclusions and Relevance: Despite clinical studies showing greater weight loss and comorbidity improvement with RYGB vs SG, this study found no difference in total ambulatory costs for as long as 4 years after SG and RYGB. These findings may reflect the trade-off between greater improvements in cardiometabolic health and additional surgery-related care among patients undergoing RYGB. Studies with longer follow-up time could determine whether greater sustained weight loss from RYGB eventually results in lower costs compared with SG.

Medication Use for Obesity-Related Comorbidities After Sleeve Gastrectomy or Gastric Bypass.

IMPORTANCE: Sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass are the most common bariatric surgical procedures in the world; however, their long-term medication discontinuation and comorbidity resolution remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of medication discontinuation and restart of diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia medications up to 5 years after sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This comparative effectiveness research study of adult Medicare beneficiaries who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass between January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2018, and had a claim for diabetes, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia medication in the 6 months before surgery with a corresponding diagnosis used instrumental-variable survival analysis to estimate the cumulative incidence of medication discontinuation and restart. Data analyses were performed from February to June 2021. EXPOSURES: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was discontinuation of diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia medication for any reason. Among patients who discontinued medication, the adjusted cumulative incidence of restarting medication was calculated up to 5 years after discontinuation. RESULTS: Of the 95 405 patients included, 71 348 (74.8%) were women and the mean (SD) age was 56.6 (11.8) years. Gastric bypass compared with sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a slightly higher 5-year cumulative incidence of medication discontinuation among 30 588 patients with diabetes medication use and diagnosis at the time of surgery (74.7% [95% CI, 74.6%-74.9%] vs 72.0% [95% CI, 71.8%-72.2%]), 52 081 patients with antihypertensive medication use and diagnosis at the time of surgery (53.3% [95% CI, 53.2%-53.4%] vs 49.4% [95% CI, 49.3%-49.5%]), and 35 055 patients with lipid-lowering medication use and diagnosis at the time of surgery (64.6% [95% CI, 64.5%-64.8%] vs 61.2% [95% CI, 61.1%-61.3%]). Among the subset of patients who discontinued medication, gastric bypass was also associated with a slightly lower incidence of medication restart up to 5 years after discontinuation. Specifically, the 5-year cumulative incidence of medication restart was lower after gastric bypass compared with sleeve gastrectomy among 19 599 patients who discontinued their diabetes medication after surgery (30.4% [95% CI, 30.2%-30.5%] vs 35.6% [95% CI, 35.4%-35.9%]), 21 611 patients who discontinued their antihypertensive medication after surgery (67.2% [95% CI, 66.9%-67.4%] vs 70.6% [95% CI, 70.3%-70.9%]), and 18 546 patients who discontinued their lipid-lowering medication after surgery (46.2% [95% CI, 46.2%-46.3%] vs 52.5% [95% CI, 52.2%-52.7%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Findings of this study suggest that, compared with sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass was associated with a slightly higher incidence of medication discontinuation and a slightly lower incidence of medication restart among patients who discontinued medication. Long-term trials are needed to explain the mechanisms and factors associated with differences in medication discontinuation and comorbidity resolution after bariatric surgery.

Bariatric Surgery in Medicare Patients: Examining Safety and Healthcare Utilization in the Disabled and Elderly.

OBJECTIVE: To compare safety and healthcare utilization after sleeve gastrectomy versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in a national Medicare cohort. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Though bariatric surgery is increasing among Medicare beneficiaries, no long-term, national studies examining comparative effectiveness between procedures exist. Bariatric outcomes are needed for shared decision-making and coverage policy concerns identified by the cMS Medicare Evidence Development and Coverage Advisory Committee. METHODS: Retrospective instrumental variable analysis of Medicare claims (2012-2017) for 30,105 bariatric surgery patients entitled due to disability or age. We examined clinical safety outcomes (mortality, complications, and reinterventions), healthcare utilization [Emergency Department (ED) visits, rehospitalizations, and expenditures], and heterogeneity of treatment effect. We compared all outcomes between sleeve and bypass for each entitlement group at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years. RESULTS: Among the disabled (n = 21,595), sleeve was associated with lower 3-year mortality [2.1% vs 3.2%, absolute risk reduction (ARR) 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.2% to -0.03%], complications (22.2% vs 27.7%, ARR 95%CI: -8.5% to -2.6%), reinterventions (20.1% vs 27.7%, ARR 95%CI: -10.7% to -4.6%), ED utilization (71.6% vs 77.1%, ARR 95%CI: -8.5% to -2.4%), and rehospitalizations (47.4% vs 52.3%, ARR 95%Ci: -8.0% to -1.7%). Cumulative expenditures were $46,277 after sleeve and $48,211 after bypass (P = 0.22). Among the elderly (n = 8510), sleeve was associated with lower 3-year complications (20.1% vs 24.7%, ARR 95%CI: -7.6% to -1.7%), reinterventions (14.0% vs 21.9%, ARR 95%CI: -10.7% to -5.2%), ED utilization (51.7% vs 57.2%, ARR 95%CI: -9.1% to -1.9%), and rehospitalizations (41.8% vs 45.8%, ARR 95%Ci: -7.5% to -0.5%). Expenditures were $38,632 after sleeve and $39,270 after bypass (P = 0.60). Procedure treatment effect significantly differed by entitlement for mortality, revision, and paraesophageal hernia repair. CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery is safe, and healthcare utilization benefits of sleeve over bypass are preserved across both Medicare elderly and disabled subpopulations.

Comparative Safety of Sleeve Gastrectomy and Gastric Bypass Up to 5 Years After Surgery in Patients With Severe Obesity.

Importance: Sleeve gastrectomy is the most widely used bariatric operation; however, its long-term safety is largely unknown. Objective: To compare the risk of mortality, complications, reintervention, and health care use 5 years after sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study included adult patients in a national Medicare claims database who underwent sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2018. Instrumental variables survival analysis was used to estimate the cumulative incidence of outcomes up to 5 years after surgery. Exposures: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was risk of mortality, complications, and reinterventions up to 5 years after surgery. Secondary outcomes were health care use after surgery, including hospitalization, emergency department (ED) use, and total spending. Results: Of 95 405 patients undergoing bariatric surgery, 57 003 (60%) underwent sleeve gastrectomy (mean [SD] age, 57.1 [11.8] years), of whom 42 299 (74.2%) were women; 124 (0.2%) were Asian; 10 101 (17.7%), Black; 1951 (3.4%), Hispanic; 314 (0.6%), North American Native; 43 194 (75.8%), White; 534 (0.9%), of other race or ethnicity; and 785 (1.4%), of unknown race or ethnicity. A total of 38 402 patients (40%) underwent gastric bypass (mean [SD] age, 55.9 [11.7] years), of whom 29 050 (75.7%) were women; 109 (0.3%), Asian; 6038 (15.7%), Black; 1215 (3.2%), Hispanic; 278 (0.7%), North American Native; 29 986 (78.1%), White; 373 (1.0%), of other race or ethnicity; and 404 (1.1%), of unknown race or ethnicity. Compared with patients undergoing gastric bypass, at 5 years after surgery, patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy had a lower cumulative incidence of mortality (4.27%; 95% CI, 4.25%-4.30% vs 5.67%; 95% CI, 5.63%-5.69%), complications (22.10%; 95% CI, 22.06%-22.13% vs 29.03%; 95% CI, 28.99%-29.08%), and reintervention (25.23%; 95% CI, 25.19%-25.27% vs 33.57%; 95% CI, 33.52%-33.63%). Conversely, patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy had a higher cumulative incidence of surgical revision at 5 years (2.91%; 95% CI, 2.90%-2.93% vs 1.46%; 95% CI, 1.45%-1.47%). The adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of all-cause hospitalization and ED use was lower for patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy at 1 year (hospitalization, aHR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.80-0.86; ED use, aHR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.90) and 3 years (hospitalization, aHR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.90-0.98; ED use, aHR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.90-0.97) after surgery but similar between groups at 5 years (hospitalization, aHR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.94-1.04; ED use, aHR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.92-1.01). Total health care spending among patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy was lower at 1 year after surgery ($28 706; 95% CI, $27 866-$29 545 vs $30 663; 95% CI, $29 739-$31 587), but similar between groups at 3 ($57 411; 95% CI, $55 239-$59 584 vs $58 581; 95% CI, $56 551-$60 611) and 5 years ($86 584; 95% CI, $80 183-$92 984 vs $85 762; 95% CI, $82 600-$88 924). Conclusions and Relevance: In a large cohort of patients undergoing bariatric surgery, sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a lower long-term risk of mortality, complications, and reinterventions but a higher long-term risk of surgical revision. Understanding the comparative safety of these operations may better inform patients and surgeons in their decision-making.

Comparative Effectiveness of Vertical Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass for Diabetes Treatment: A Claims-based Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare diabetes outcomes following vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). BACKGROUND: There are few comparative studies on diabetes outcomes after VSG and RYGB. METHODS: We used a US-wide commercial insurance claims database to identify adults with diabetes undergoing VSG or RYGB in 2010 to 2016. We matched patients on baseline insulin use, total diabetes medication burden, age, presence of diabetes complications, and follow-up duration, and used adjusted Cox proportional hazards models to compare diabetes medication discontinuation between procedures. We used difference-in-differences analyses to compare changes in medication use intensity up to 2 years after surgery. RESULTS: The matched cohort included 1111 VSG and 922 RYGB patients: 16% were younger than 40 years, 11% were 60 years or older, 67% were women, 67% had a body mass index of 40 kg/m2 or higher, and 23% were on insulin at the time of surgery. Thirteen percent were lost to follow-up at 1 year, and 30% at 2 years after surgery. Patients with VSG were less likely than matched RYGB patients to discontinue all diabetes medications (hazard ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.72-0.88). Although both groups had substantial decreases in medication use after surgery, RYGB patients had an 86% (32%, 140%) lower total diabetes medication dose than VSG by the second half of postoperative year 2. CONCLUSIONS: In a large claims-based, nationwide cohort of bariatric patients with diabetes, those undergoing RYGB were more likely to come off all medications than those undergoing VSG. Patients with diabetes should consider this potential benefit of RYGB when making informed decisions about obesity treatments.

Risk of Operative and Nonoperative Interventions Up to 4 Years After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass vs Vertical Sleeve Gastrectomy in a Nationwide US Commercial Insurance Claims Database.

Importance: There are few nationwide studies comparing the risk of reintervention after contemporary bariatric procedures. Objective: To compare the risk of intervention after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) vs vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG). Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used a nationwide US commercial insurance claims database. Adults aged 18 to 64 years who underwent a first RYGB or VSG procedure between January 1, 2010, and June 30, 2017, were matched on US region, year of surgery, most recent presurgery body mass index (BMI) category (based on diagnosis codes), and baseline type 2 diabetes. The prematch pool included 4496 patients undergoing RYGB and 8627 patients undergoing VSG, and the final weighted matched sample included 4476 patients undergoing RYGB and 8551 patients undergoing VSG. Exposures: Bariatric surgery procedure type (RYGB vs VSG). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was any abdominal operative intervention after the index procedure. Secondary outcomes included the following subtypes of operative intervention: biliary procedures, abdominal wall hernia repair, bariatric conversion or revision, and other abdominal operations. Nonoperative outcomes included endoscopy and enteral access. Time to first event was compared using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression modeling. Results: Among 13 027 patients, the mean (SD) age was 44.4 (10.3) years, and 74.1% were female; 13.7% had a preoperative BMI between 30 and 39.9, 45.8% had a preoperative BMI between 40 and 49.9, and 24.2% had a preoperative BMI of at least 50. Patients were followed up for up to 4 years after surgery (median, 1.6 years; interquartile range, 0.7-3.2 years), with 41.9% having at least 2 years of follow-up and 16.3% having at least 4 years of follow-up. Patients undergoing VSG were less likely to have any subsequent operative intervention than matched patients undergoing RYGB (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.80; 95% CI, 0.72-0.89) and similarly were less likely to undergo biliary procedures (aHR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.90), abdominal wall hernia repair (aHR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47-0.75), other abdominal operations (aHR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61-0.82), and endoscopy (aHR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.49-0.59) or have enteral access placed (aHR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39-0.86). Patients undergoing VSG were more likely to undergo bariatric conversion or revision (aHR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.19-2.80). Conclusions and Relevance: In this nationwide study, patients undergoing VSG appeared to be less likely than matched patients undergoing RYGB to experience subsequent abdominal operative interventions, except for bariatric conversion or revision procedures. Patients considering bariatric surgery should be aware of the increased risk of subsequent procedures associated with RYGB vs VSG as part of shared decision-making around procedure choice.

Association Between Bariatric Surgery and Long-term Health Care Expenditures Among Veterans With Severe Obesity.

Importance: Bariatric surgery has been associated with improvements in health in patients with severe obesity; however, it is unclear whether these health benefits translate into lower health care expenditures. Objective: To examine 10-year health care expenditures in a large, multisite retrospective cohort study of veterans with severe obesity who did and did not undergo bariatric surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: A total of 9954 veterans with severe obesity between January 1, 2000, and September 30, 2011, were identified from veterans affairs (VA) electronic health records. Of those, 2498 veterans who underwent bariatric surgery were allocated to the surgery cohort. Sequential stratification was used to match each patient in the surgery cohort with up to 3 patients who had not undergone bariatric surgery but were of the same sex, race/ethnicity, diabetes status, and VA regional network and were closest in age, body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared), and comorbidities. A total of 7456 patients were identified and allocated to the nonsurgery (control) cohort. The VA health care expenditures among the surgery and nonsurgery cohorts were estimated using regression models. Data were analyzed from July to August 2018 and in April 2019. Interventions: The bariatric surgical procedures (n = 2498) included in this study were Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (1842 [73.7%]), sleeve gastrectomy (381 [15.3%]), adjustable gastric banding (249 [10.0%]), and other procedures (26 [1.0%]). Main Outcomes and Measures: The study measured total, outpatient, inpatient, and outpatient pharmacy expenditures from 3 years before surgery to 10 years after surgery, excluding expenditures associated with the initial bariatric surgical procedure. Results: Among 9954 veterans with severe obesity, 7387 (74.2%) were men; the mean (SD) age was 52.3 (8.8) years for the surgery cohort and 52.5 (8.7) years for the nonsurgery cohort. Mean total expenditures for the surgery cohort were $5093 (95% CI, $4811-$5391) at 7 to 12 months before surgery, which increased to $7448 (95% CI, $6989-$7936) at 6 months after surgery. Postsurgical expenditures decreased to $6692 (95% CI, $6197-$7226) at 5 years after surgery, followed by a gradual increase to $8495 (95% CI, $7609-$9484) at 10 years after surgery. Total expenditures were higher in the surgery cohort than in the nonsurgery cohort during the 3 years before surgery and in the first 2 years after surgery. The expenditures of the 2 cohorts converged 5 to 10 years after surgery. Outpatient pharmacy expenditures were significantly lower among the surgery cohort in all years of follow-up ($509 lower at 3 years before surgery and $461 lower at 7 to 12 months before surgery), but these cost reductions were offset by higher inpatient and outpatient (nonpharmacy) expenditures. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 9954 predominantly older male veterans with severe obesity, total health care expenditures increased immediately after patients underwent bariatric surgery but converged with those of patients who had not undergone surgery at 10 years after surgery. This finding suggests that the value of bariatric surgery lies primarily in its associations with improvements in health and not in its potential to decrease health care costs.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in the Prevalence of Diabetes and Prediabetes by BMI: Patient Outcomes Research To Advance Learning (PORTAL) Multisite Cohort of Adults in the U.S.

OBJECTIVE: To examine racial/ethnic disparities in the prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes by BMI category. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a consortium of three U.S. integrated health care systems, 4,906,238 individuals aged ≥20 years during 2012-2013 were included. Diabetes and prediabetes were ascertained by diagnosis and laboratory results; antihyperglycemic medications were also included for diabetes ascertainment. RESULTS: The age-standardized diabetes and prediabetes prevalence estimates were 15.9% and 33.4%, respectively. Diabetes but not prediabetes prevalence increased across BMI categories among all racial/ethnic groups (P for trend < 0.001). Racial/ethnic minorities reached a given diabetes prevalence at lower BMIs than whites; Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders and Asians had a diabetes prevalence of 24.6% (95% CI 24.1-25.2%) in overweight and 26.5% (26.3-26.8%) in obese class 1, whereas whites had a prevalence of 23.7% (23.5-23.8%) in obese class 2. The age-standardized prediabetes prevalence estimates in overweight among Hispanics (35.6% [35.4-35.7%]), Asians (38.1% [38.0-38.3%]), and Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders (37.5% [36.9-38.2%]) were similar to those in obese class 4 among whites (35.3% [34.5-36.0%]), blacks (36.8% [35.5-38.2%]), and American Indians/Alaskan Natives (34.2% [29.6-38.8%]). In adjusted models, the strength of association between BMI and diabetes was highest among whites (relative risk comparing obese class 4 with normal weight 7.64 [95% CI 7.50-7.79]) and lowest among blacks (3.16 [3.05-3.27]). The association between BMI and prediabetes was less pronounced. CONCLUSIONS: Racial/ethnic minorities had a higher burden of diabetes and prediabetes at lower BMIs than whites, suggesting the role of factors other than obesity in racial/ethnic disparities in diabetes and prediabetes risk and highlighting the need for tailored screening and prevention strategies.

Pilot randomized trial of a telephone-delivered physical activity and weight management intervention for individuals with lower extremity amputation.

BACKGROUND: Obesity and inactivity are common and burdensome for people with lower extremity amputation (LEA). The extent to which home-based physical activity/weight management programs are effective and safe for people with LEA is unknown. Translating effective interventions for understudied disability groups is needed. OBJECTIVE: To test the feasibility, acceptability, and safety of a weight management and physical activity intervention and obtain preliminary efficacy estimates for changes in weight, body composition, and physical functioning. METHODS: Eligibility criteria included: LEA ≥1 year prior, 18-69 years of age, overweight or obese and living in the Seattle area. The intervention arm received self-monitoring tools (e.g., pedometer, scale) and written materials, a single exercise counseling home visit by a physical therapist, and up to 11 telephone calls from a health coach over 20 weeks that involved motivational interviewing to set specific, attainable, and measurable goals. The self-directed control group received the same tools and materials but no home visit or coaching calls. RESULTS: Nineteen individuals consented to participate, 15 were randomized (mean age = 56, 73% male, 80% transtibial amputation) and 11 completed 20-week follow-up assessments. The intervention was acceptable and safe. Coached participants had greater decreases in waist circumference (mean difference between groups over 20 weeks, baseline values carried forward: -4.3 cm, 95% CI -8.2, -0.4, p = 0.03) and fat mass (-2.1 kg, 95% CI -3.8, -0.4, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The home-based intervention was promising in terms of efficacy, safety and acceptability. Inclusion of multiple trial centers and increased use of technology may facilitate recruitment and retention.

Economic Value of Greater Access to Bariatric Procedures for Patients With Severe Obesity and Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Designing optimal insurance is important to ensure access to care for individuals that are most likely to benefit. We examined the potential impact of lowering patient cost-sharing for bariatric procedures. METHODS: After defining 10 subgroups by body mass index (BMI) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), we analyzed the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey datasets to estimate the prevalence of each subgroup. The MarketScan claims database provided utilization rates and costs of bariatric procedures. Using an existing cost-effectiveness model, we estimated the economic value of bariatric procedures under various cost-sharing levels (0%-25%) with 2 frameworks: (1) a traditional cost-effectiveness analysis and (2) a new approach that incorporates utilization effects across subgroups. RESULTS: The utilization rate was higher among individuals with T2DM than those without T2DM (90.4 vs. 59.1 cases per 100,000) for bariatric procedures, which were more cost-effective for those with T2DM and a higher BMI. After accounting for utilization effects, the economic value of bariatric surgery was $177 and $63 per individual from a lifetime and a 5-year time horizon, respectively. Under no patient cost-sharing for individuals with BMI≥40 and T2DM, utilization rates were expected to increase by 21 cases per 100,000, resulting in additional $2 realized value per patient and $7.07 million in returns at the US population level. CONCLUSIONS: Cost-sharing is a barrier to uptake of a clinical and cost-effective treatment for severe obesity. Reducing cost-sharing for patients with severe obesity and T2DM could potentially increase the utilization of bariatric procedures and result in greater economic value to payers.