Comparison of Early Morbidity and Mortality Between Sleeve Gastrectomy and Gastric Bypass in High-Risk Patients for Liver Disease: Analysis of American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

INTRODUCTION: Chronic liver disease is prevalent in obese patients presenting for bariatric surgery and is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality (M&M). There are no comparative studies on the safety of different types of bariatric operations in this subset of patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the 30-day postoperative M&M between laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-Y-gastric bypass (LRYGB) in the subset of patients with a model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score ≥ 8. METHODS: Data for LSG and LRYGB were extracted from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from years 2012 and 2013. MELD score was calculated using serum creatinine, bilirubin, INR, and sodium. Postoperative M&M were assessed in patients with a score ≥ 8 and compared for the type of operation. This was followed by analysis for MELD subcategories. Multiple logistic regression was performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: Out of 34,169, 9.8% of cases had MELD ≥ 8 and were included. Primary endpoint, 30-day M&M, was significantly lower post-LSG (9.5%) compared to LRYGB (14.7%); [AOR = 0.66(0.53, 0.83)]. Superficial wound infection, prolonged hospital stay, and unplanned readmission were more common in LRYGB. M&M post-LRYGB (30.6%) was significantly higher than LSG (15.7%) among MELD15-19 subgroup analysis. CONCLUSION: LRYGB is associated with a higher postoperative risk than LSG in patients with MELD ≥ 8. The difference in postoperative complications between procedures was magnified with higher MELD. This suggests that LSG might be a safer option in morbidly obese patients with higher MELD scores, especially above 15.

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: differences in outcome between attendings and assistants of different training backgrounds.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGBP) is associated with a significant learning curve. We hypothesize that differences in surgeon and assistant training backgrounds may significantly impact outcomes during the learning curve. METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed on patients undergoing LRYGBP at an academic medical center between January 1998 and August 2003. Operations were performed by surgeons with different training backgrounds: without formal laparoscopic fellowship (S1, n=95); immediately following laparoscopic fellowship (S2, n=100); and with extensive laparoscopic experience post fellowship (S3, n=88). First assistants were attendings, fellows, or residents. The variables analyzed included demographics, operative times, estimated blood loss (EBL), rate of conversion, length of stay (LOS), ICU stay, re-operation/re-admission rate, and complications. Results were analyzed by ANOVA and Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: There were significant differences among surgeons of different training backgrounds in EBL, LOS, rate of ICU admission, and intraoperative and late complications rates. Among assistants of different training levels, there were significant differences in operative time, EBL, intraoperative complication rates and re-admission rates. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in training background of the surgeons resulted in significant differences in outcome, including EBL, LOS, ICU admission and intraoperative and late complication rates. Lower assistant training levels significantly impacted efficiency through lengthened operative times and increased EBL, as well as increased intraoperative complication rates and re-admission rates. Our results suggested that participating in a laparoscopic fellowship and operating with a more experienced assistant may improve outcomes during the learning curve.

Trends in insurance coverage for bariatric surgery and the impact of evidence-based reviews.

The recent increase in demand for bariatric surgery has placed mounting economic pressure on insurance companies and other third-party payers (TPPs). As a result, some of the TPPs have responded by excluding or limiting their coverage of all or certain types of bariatric surgical procedures, and cite as their reason, a lack of evidence that supports the safety and efficacy of such procedures. Over the years, so-called "evidence-based reviews" have been used to back these claims. Some of these reviews have significant flaws and limitations that are discussed.

Comparison of totally robotic laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and traditional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic gastric bypass is a technically demanding operation, especially when hand-sewing is required. Robotics may help facilitate the performance of this difficult operation. This study was undertaken to compare a single surgeon's results using the daVinci Surgical System with those using traditional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) when the techniques were learned simultaneously. METHODS: From July 2004 to April 2005, the new laparoscopic fellow's first 50 patients were randomized to undergo either LRYGB or totally robotic laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (TRRYGB). Data were collected on patient age, gender, body mass index (BMI), co-morbidities, operative time, complication rates, and length of stay. Student's t test with unequal variances was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: No significant differences in age, gender, co-morbidities, complication rates, or length of stay were found between the two groups. The mean operating time was significantly shorter for TRRYGB than for LRYGB (130.8 versus 149.4 minutes; P = 0.02), with a significant difference in minutes per BMI (2.94 versus 3.47 min/BMI; P = 0.02). The largest difference was in patients with a BMI >43 kg/m(2), for whom the difference in procedure time was 29.6 minutes (123.5 minutes for TRRYGB versus 153.2 minutes for LRYGB; P = 0.009) and a significant difference in minutes per BMI (2.49 versus 3.24 min/BMI; P = 0.009). CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that the use of the daVinci Surgical System for TRRYGB is safe and feasible. The operating room time is shorter with the use of the robotic system during a surgeon's learning curve, and that decrease is maximized in patients with a larger BMI. TRRYGB may be a better approach to gastric bypass when hand-sewing is required, especially early in a surgeon's experience.