Association of Sex Differences on Weight Loss and Complications Following Bariatric Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Sex as a biologic variable remains largely understudied, even for the most commonly performed operations. The most effective treatment for obesity and obesity-associated comorbidities is bariatric surgery. There are limited data to describe potential differences in outcomes between male and female patients, particularly with regards to weight loss. Within this context, we examined weight loss and complications up to 1 y following sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass within a statewide bariatric quality improvement collaborative. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study among patients who had bariatric surgery. Using a state-wide bariatric-specific data registry, all patients who underwent gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy between June 2006 and June 2022 were identified. The primary outcome was percent excess body weight loss and change in body mass index (BMI) at 1 y. The secondary outcome was 30-d risk-adjusted complications. RESULTS: Among 107,504 patients, the majority (n = 85,135; 79.2%) were female and most patients (n = 49,731; 58%) underwent sleeve gastrectomy. Compared to female patients, male patients were older (47.6 y versus 44.8 y; P < 0.0001), had higher baseline weight (346.6 lbs versus 279.9 lbs; P < 0.0001), had higher preoperative BMI (49.9 kg/m2versus 47.2 kg/m2; P < 0.0001), and higher prevalence of most comorbid conditions including hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and sleep apnea (P < 0.0001). Compared to female patients, male patients experienced greater total body weight loss (105.1 lbs versus 84.9 lbs; P < 0.0001) and higher excess body weight loss (60.0% versus 58.8%; P < 0.0001) but had higher BMI overall (34.0 kg/m2versus 32.8 kg/m2; P < 0.0001) at 1-y follow-up. Males had higher rates of serious complications (2.5% versus 1.9%; P < 0.0001), leak and perforation (0.5% versus 0.4%; P < 0.0001), venous thromboembolism (0.7% versus 0.4%; P < 0.0001), and medical complications (1.5% versus 1%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In this study we found that both males and females experienced excellent weight loss with a low risk of complications following bariatric surgery. Male sex was associated with slightly greater weight loss and slightly higher incidence of complications. However, although statistically significant, clinically, the differences in weight loss was not. Due to males having higher prevalence of comorbidities, providers should consider referring males earlier for bariatric surgery which may improve outcomes for this population.

Barriers to Participation in a Structured Quality Improvement Initiative to Reduce Avoidable Emergency Department Visits-A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Barriers to quality improvement (QI) initiatives in multi-institutional hospital settings are understudied. Here we describe a qualitative investigation of factors negatively affecting a QI initiative focused on reducing avoidable emergency department (ED) visits after bariatric surgery across 17 hospitals. Our goal was to explore participant perspectives and identify themes describing why the program was not effectively implemented or why the program may have been ineffective when correctly implemented. METHODS: We performed semistructured group interviews with 17 sites (42 interviews) participating in a statewide bariatric QI program. We used descriptive content analysis to identify challenges, facilitators, and barriers to implementation of the QI program. All analyses were conducted using MAXQDA software. RESULTS: Results revealed barriers across hospitals related to four themes: buy-in, provider accessibility, resources at participating hospitals, and patient barriers to care. In particular, the initiative faced difficulty if it was not well-matched to the factors driving increasing ED visits at a particular site, such as lack of patient access to outpatient or primary care. Additional challenges occurred if the initiative was not adapted and customized to the working systems in place at each site, involving employees, surgeons, support staff, and leadership. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, findings can direct future focused efforts aimed at site-specific interventions to reduce unnecessary postoperative ED visits. Results demonstrated a need for a nuanced approach that can be adapted based on facility needs and resources.

Analysis of aborted bariatric surgeries and potential opportunities.

BACKGROUND: Aborted bariatric surgeries are an undesirable experience for patients as they are subjected to potential physical harm and emotional distress. A thorough investigation of aborted bariatric surgeries has not been previously reported. This information may allow the discovery of opportunities to mitigate the risk of aborting some bariatric operations. METHODS: Data from the Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative, a statewide bariatric surgery registry, were used to identify all aborted primary bariatric operations from June 2006 through January 2023. The reasons for aborting surgery were divided into seven categories. Stepwise logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictors of aborted procedures for potentially modifiable factors. RESULTS: A total of 115,004 patients underwent bariatric surgery with 555 (0.48%) procedures aborted. Of those having an aborted operation the mean age was 52 years and mean BMI was 49.8 with females accounting for 72%. Sleeve gastrectomy had the lowest aborted rate (0.38%) as compared to gastric bypass, adjustable gastric banding, and biliopancreatic diversion (p < 0.0001). The most common aborted surgery reason categories included adhesions and hernias, tumors and anatomic anomalies, and inadequate visualization due to either hepatomegaly or abdominal wall thickness. The most significant (p < 0.0001) independent predictors of aborted surgeries due to hepatomegaly or abdominal wall thickness were BMI ≥ 60 (OR 10.7), BMI 50 to 59 (OR 3.1) and diabetes mellitus (OR 2.7). Preoperative weight loss was a protective factor for aborting surgery due to hepatomegaly or abdominal wall thickness (OR 0.9; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Aborted surgeries are uncommon and occur in approximately 1 in 200 primary bariatric operations with the lowest rate identified in sleeve gastrectomy. Nearly 20% of operations are aborted due to hepatomegaly or abdominal wall thickness and targeting patients with elevated BMIs and diabetes mellitus for preoperative weight loss might reduce the risk of these types of aborted procedures.

Evaluating outcomes among surgeons who changed their technique for gastric bypass: a state-wide analysis from 2011 to 2021.

INTRODUCTION: Technical variation exists when performing the gastrojejunostomy during Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). However, it is unclear whether changing technique results in improved outcomes or patient harm. METHODS: Surgeons participating in a state-wide bariatric surgery quality collaborative who completed a survey on how they perform a typical RYGB in 2011 and again in 2021 were included in the analysis (n = 31). Risk-adjusted 30-day complication rates and case characteristics for cases in 2011 were compared to those in 2021 among surgeons who changed their gastrojejunostomy technique from end-to-end anastomosis (EEA) to either a linear staple or handsewn anastomosis (LSA/HSA). In addition, case characteristics and outcomes among surgeons who maintained an EEA technique throughout the study period were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 15 surgeons (48.3%) changed their technique from EEA to LSA/HSA while 7 surgeons (22.3%) did not. Nine surgeons did LSA or HSA the entire period and therefore were not included. Surgeons who changed their technique had significantly lower rates of surgical complications in 2021 when compared to 2011 (1.9% vs 5.1%, p = 0.0015), including lower rates of wound complications (0.5% vs 2.1%, p = 0.0030) and stricture (0.1% vs 0.5%, p = 0.0533). Likewise, surgeons who did not change their EEA technique, also experienced a decrease in surgical complications (1.8% vs 5.8%, p < 0.0001), wound complications (0.7% vs 2.1%, p < 0.0001) and strictures (0.2% vs 1.2%, p = 0.0006). Surgeons who changed their technique had a significantly higher mean annual robotic bariatric volume in 2021 (30.0 cases vs 4.9 cases, p < 0.0001) when compared to those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons who changed their gastrojejunostomy technique from circular stapled to handsewn demonstrated greater utilization of the robotic platform than those who did not and experienced a similar decrease in adverse events during the study period, despite altering their technique. Surgeons who chose to modify their operative technique may be more likely to adopt newer technologies.

Association of program-specific variation in bariatric surgery volume for Medicaid patients and access to care: a tale of inequality?

BACKGROUND: Although patients with lower socioeconomic status are at higher risk of obesity, bariatric surgery utilization among patients with Medicaid is low and may be due to program-specific variation in access. Our goal was to compare bariatric surgery programs by percentage of Medicaid cases and to determine if variation in distribution of patients with Medicaid could be linked to adverse outcomes. METHODS: Using a state-wide bariatric-specific data registry that included 43 programs performing 97,207 cases between 2006 and 2020, we identified all patients with Medicaid insurance (n = 4780, 4.9%). Bariatric surgery programs were stratified into quartiles according to the percentage of Medicaid cases performed and we compared program-specific characteristics as well as baseline patient characteristics, risk-adjusted complication rates and wait times between top and bottom quartiles. RESULTS: Program-specific distribution of Medicaid cases varied between 0.69 and 22.4%. Programs in the top quartile (n = 11) performed 18,885 cases in total, with a mean of 13% for Medicaid patients, while programs in the bottom quartile (n = 11) performed 32,447 cases in total, with a mean of 1%. Patients undergoing surgery at programs in the top quartile were more likely to be Black (20.2% vs 13.5%, p < 0.0001), have diabetes (35.1% vs 29.5%, p < 0.0001), hypertension (55.1% vs 49.6%, p < 0.0001) and hyperlipidemia (47.6% vs 45.2%, p < 0.0001). Top quartile programs also had higher complication rates (8.4% vs 6.6%, p < 0.0001), extended length of stay (5.6% vs 4.0%, p < 0.0001), Emergency Department visits (8.1% vs 6.5%, p < 0.0001) and readmissions (4.7% vs 3.9%, p < 0.0001). Median time from initial evaluation to surgery date was also significantly longer among top quartile programs (200 vs 122 days, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery programs that perform a higher proportion of Medicaid cases tend to care for patients with greater disease severity who experience delays in care and also require more resource utilization. Improving bariatric surgery utilization among patients with lower socioeconomic status may benefit from insurance standardization and program-centered incentives to improve access and equitable distribution of care.

Racial variation in baseline characteristics and wait times among patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Although bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for obesity and weight-related comorbid diseases, utilization rates are disproportionately low among non-white patients. We sought to understand if variation in baseline characteristics or access to care exists between white and non-white patients. METHODS: Using a statewide bariatric-specific data registry, we evaluated all patients who underwent bariatric surgery between 2006 and 2020 and completed a preoperative baseline questionnaire, which included a question about self-identification of race. Patient characteristics, co-morbidities, and time from initial preoperative clinic evaluation to date of surgery were compared among racial groups. RESULTS: A total of 73,141 patients met inclusion criteria with 18,741 (25.5%) self-identified as non-white. These included Black/African American (n = 11,904), Hispanic (n = 3448), Asian (n = 121), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (n = 41), Middle Eastern (n = 164), Multiple (n = 2047) and other (n = 608). Non-white males were the least represented group, accounting for only 4% of all bariatric cases performed. Non-white patients were more likely to be younger (43.0 years vs. 46.6 years, p < 0.0001), disabled (16% vs. 11.4%, p < 0.0001) and have Medicaid (8.4% vs. 3.8%, p < 0.0001) when compared to white patients, despite having higher rates of college education (78.0% vs. 76.6, p < 0.0001). In addition, median time from initial evaluation to surgery was also longer among non-white patients (157 days vs. 127 days, p < 0.0001), despite having higher rates of patients with a body mass index above 50 kg/m2 (39.0% vs. 33.2%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Non-white patients undergoing bariatric surgery represent an extremely diverse group of patients with more socioeconomic disadvantages and longer wait times when compared to white patients despite presenting with higher rates of severe obesity. Current guidelines and referral patterns for bariatric surgery may not be equitable and need further examination when considering the management of obesity within diverse populations to reduce disparities in care-of which non-white males are particularly at risk.

Depression as a risk factor for adverse outcomes and increased healthcare utilization in bariatric surgery patients.

INTRODUCTION: Depression is strongly associated with obesity and is common among patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Little is known about the impact of depression on early postoperative outcomes or its association with substance use. METHODS: The Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative is a statewide quality improvement program that maintains a large clinical registry. We evaluated patients undergoing primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy between 2017 and 2022. Patients self-reported symptoms of depression (PHQ-8) and use of alcohol (AUDIT-C), smoking, prescription opiates, and marijuana at baseline. Preoperative PHQ-8 scores stratified patients based on severity: no depression (0-4), mild (5-9), moderate (10-14), or severe (15-24). We compared 30-day outcomes and substance use between patients with and without depression. RESULTS: Among 44,301 patients, 30.8% had some level of depression, with 19.8% mild, 7.5% moderate, and 3.5% severe. Patients with depression were more likely to have an extended length of stay (LOS) (> 3 days) than those without depression (no depression 2.1% vs. severe depression 3.0%, p = 0.0452). There were no significant differences between no depression and severe depression groups in rates of complications (5.7% vs. 5.2%, p = 0.1564), reoperations (0.9%, vs. 0.8%, p = 0.7394), ED visits (7.7% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.5353), or readmissions (3.2% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.3034). Patients with severe depression had significantly higher rates of smoking (9.7% vs. 12.5%, p < 0.0001), alcohol use disorder (8.6% vs. 14.0%, p < 0.0001), opiate use (14.5% vs. 22.4%, p < 0.0001) and marijuana use (8.4%, vs. 15.5%, p = 0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that nearly one-third of patients undergoing bariatric surgery have depression, with over 10% in the moderate to severe range. There was a significant association between preoperative depressive symptoms and extended LOS after bariatric surgery, as well as higher rates of smoking and use of marijuana, prescription opiates and alcohol. There was no significant effect on adverse events or other measures of healthcare utilization.

Evaluation of Patient Reported Gastroesophageal Reflux Severity at Baseline and at 1-year After Bariatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient-reported gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) severity before and after SG and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Development of new-onset or worsening GERD symptoms after bariatric surgery varies by procedure, but there is a lack of patient-reported data to help guide decision-making. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing bariatric surgery in a statewide quality collaborative between 2013 and 2017. We used a validated GERD survey with symptom scores ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 5 (severe daily symptoms) and included patients who completed surveys both at baseline and 1-year after surgery (n = 10,451). We compared the rates of improved and worsened GERD symptoms after SG and RYGB. RESULTS: Within our study cohort, 8680 (83%) underwent SG and 1771 (17%) underwent RYGB. Mean baseline score for all patients was 0.94. Patients undergoing SG experienced similar improvement in GERD symptoms when compared to RYGB (30.4% vs 30.8%, P = 0.7015). However, SG patients also reported higher rates of worsening symptoms (17.8% vs 7.5%, P < 0.0001) even though they were more likely to undergo concurrent hiatal hernia repair (35.1% vs 20.0%, P<0.0001). More than half of patients (53.5%) did not report a change in their score. CONCLUSIONS: Although SG patients reported higher rates of worsening GERD symptoms when compared to RYGB, the majority of patients (>80%) in this study experienced improvement or no change in GERD regardless of procedure. Using clinically relevant patient-reported outcomes can help guide decisions about procedure choice in bariatric surgery for patients with GERD.

Evaluating the Impact of Surgeon Self-awareness by Comparing Self Versus Peer Ratings of Surgical Skill and Outcomes for Bariatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate variation in self versus peer-assessments of surgical skill using surgical videos and compare surgeon-specific outcomes with bariatric surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Prior studies have demonstrated that surgeons with lower peer-reviewed ratings of surgical skill had higher complication rates after bariatric surgery. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of 25 surgeons who voluntarily submitted a video of a typical laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) between 2015 and 2016. Videos were self and peer-rated using a validated instrument based on a 5-point Likert scale (5= "master surgeon" and 1= "surgeon-in-training"). Risk adjusted 30-day complication rates were compared between surgeons who over-rated and under-rated their skill based on data from 24,186 SG cases and 12,888 gastric bypass (GBP) cases. RESULTS: individual overall self-rating of surgical skill varied between 2.5 and 5. Surgeons in the top quartile for self:peer ratings (n = 6, ratio 1.58) had lower overall mean peer-scores (2.98 vs 3.79, P = 0.0150) than surgeons in the lowest quartile (n = 6, ratio 0.94). Complication rates between top and bottom quartiles were similar after SG, however leak rates were higher with gastric bypass among surgeons who over-rated their skill with SG (0.65 vs 0.27, P = 0.0181). Surgeon experience was similar between comparison groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Self-perceptions of surgical skill varied widely. Surgeons who over-rated their skill had higher leak rates for more complex procedures. Video assessments can help identify surgeons with poor self-awareness who may benefit from a surgical coaching program.

Patient characteristics and outcomes among bariatric surgery patients with high narcotic overdose scores.

BACKGROUND: Obesity-related chronic pain can increase the risk of narcotic abuse in bariatric surgery patients. However, assessment of overdose risk has not been evaluated to date. METHODS: A NARxCHECK® overdose score ("Narx score") was obtained preoperatively on all patients undergoing bariatric surgery (n = 306) between 2018 and 2020 at a single-center academic bariatric surgery program. The 3-digit score ranges from 000 to 999 and is based on patient risk factors found within the Prescription Drug Monitoring Program. A Narx score ≥ 200 indicates tenfold increased risk of narcotic overdose. Patient characteristics, comorbidities, and emergency room (ER) visits were compared between patients in the upper (≥ 200) and lower (000) terciles of Narx scores. Morphine milligram equivalent (MME) prescribed at discharge and refills was also evaluated. RESULTS: Patients in the upper tercile represented 32% (n = 99) of the study population, and compared to the lower tercile (n = 101, 33%), were more likely to have depression (63.6% vs 38.6%, p = 0.0004), anxiety (47.5% vs 30.7%, p = 0.0150), and bipolar disorder (6.1% vs 0.0%, p = 0.0120). Median MME prescribed at discharge was the same between both groups (75); however, high-risk patients were more likely to be prescribed more than 10 tablets of a secondary opioid (83.3% vs 0.0%, p = 0.0111), which was prescribed by another provider in 67% of cases. ER visits among patients who did not have a complication or require a readmission was also higher among high-risk patients (7.8% vs 0.0%, p = 0.0043). There were no deaths or incidents of mental health-related ER visits in either group. CONCLUSION: Patients with a Narx score ≥ 200 were more likely to have mental health disorders and have potentially avoidable ER visits in the setting of standardized opioid prescribing practices. Narx scores can help reduce ER visits by identifying at-risk patients who may benefit from additional clinic or telehealth follow-up.

Impact of hiatal hernia repair technique on patient-reported gastroesophageal reflux symptoms following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Repairing a hiatal hernia at the time of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) can reduce or even prevent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) symptoms in the post-operative period. Several different hiatal hernia repair techniques have been described but their impact on GERD symptoms after SG is unclear. METHODS: Surgeons (n = 74) participating in a statewide quality collaborative were surveyed on their typical technique for repair of hiatal hernias during SG. Options included posterior repair with mesh (PRM), posterior repair (PR), and anterior repair (AR). Patients who underwent SG with concurrent hiatal hernia repair (n = 7883) were compared according to their surgeon's reported technique. Patient characteristics, baseline and 1-year GERD health-related quality of life surveys, weight loss and 30-day risk-adjusted complications were analyzed. RESULTS: The most common technique reported by surgeons for hiatal hernia repair was PR (n = 64, 85.3%), followed by PRM (n = 7, 9.3%) and AR (n = 4, 5.3%). Patients who underwent SG by surgeons who perform AR had lower rates of baseline GERD diagnosis (AR 55.3%, PR 59.5%, PRM 64.8%, p < 0.01), but were more likely to experience worsening GERD symptoms at 1 year (AR 29.8%, PR 28.7%, PRM 28.2%, p < 0.0001), despite similar weight loss (AR 29.8%, PR 28.7%, PRM 28.2%, p = 0.08). Satisfaction with GERD symptoms at 1 year was high (AR 73.2%, PR 76.3%, PRM 75.7%, p = 0.43), and risk-adjusted 30-day outcomes were similar among all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing SG with concurrent hiatal hernia repair by surgeons who typically perform an AR were more likely to report worsening GERD at 1 year despite excellent weight loss. Surgeons who typically performed an AR had nearly one-half of their patients report increased GERD severity after surgery despite similar weight loss. While GERD symptom control may be multifactorial, technical approach to hiatal hernia repair at the time of SG may play a role and a posterior repair is recommended.

Evaluating the Effect of Surgical Skill on Outcomes for Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Video-based Study.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have demonstrated a correlation between surgical skill and complication rates after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. However, the impact of surgical skill on a similar but less technically challenging procedure such as sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is unknown. METHODS: Practicing bariatric surgeons (n = 25) participating in a statewide quality improvement collaborative submitted an unedited deidentified video of a representative laparoscopic SG. Videos were obtained between 2015 and 2016 and were rated by bariatric surgeons in a blinded fashion using a validated instrument that assesses surgical skill. Overall scores were based on a 5-point Likert scale with 5 representing a "master surgeon" and 1 representing a "surgeon-in-training." Risk-adjusted 30-day complication rates, 1-year weight loss among cases performed during the study period, and operative technique were compared between surgeons rated in the top and bottom quartiles according to skill. RESULTS: Surgeon ratings for skill varied between 2.73 and 4.60. Ratings for skill did not correlate with overall 30-day risk-adjusted complication rates (Pearson correlation coefficient, 0.213, P = 0.303). However, surgeons with higher skill ratings had lower rates of specific surgical complications, including postoperative obstruction (0.13% vs 0.3%, P = 0.017), hemorrhage (0.85% vs 1.27%, P = 0.005), and reoperation (0.24% vs 0.92%, P < 0.0001). Surgeons ranked in the top quartile for skill had faster operating times for SG (59.0 vs 82.1 min, P < 0.0001) and higher annual case volumes for both SG and any bariatric procedure (224.3 cases/yr vs 73.4 cases/yr, P = 0.009 and 244.9 cases/yr and 93.9 cases/yr, P = 0.009) when compared with surgeons in the bottom quartile. When comparing operative technique, top rated surgeons were noted to have a higher likelihood of using buttressing (83.3% vs 0%, P = 0.0041) and intraoperative endoscopy (83.3% vs 0%, P = 0.0041). CONCLUSIONS: Peer ratings for surgical skill varied for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy but did not have a significant impact on overall complication rates. Top rated surgeons had lower rates of obstruction, hemorrhage, and reoperation; however, severe morbidity remained extremely low among all surgeons.

Comparison of early outcomes between Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy among patients with body mass index ≥ 60 kg/m2.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on the ideal bariatric operation to choose for patients with extremely high body mass index (BMI). The aim of this study was to compare the perioperative complications, weight loss, and comorbidity remission between laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) among patients with BMI ≥ 60 kg/m2. METHODS: Data from a statewide bariatric surgery registry were used to identify all patients with BMI ≥ 60 kg/m2 undergoing LRYGB or LSG between January 2006 and June 2019. Risk and reliability adjustment were used to compare outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 6015 patients were identified and 2505 (41.6%) underwent LRYGB and 3510 (58.4%) underwent LSG. The overall mean age was 43.1 ± 11.2 years with a mean preoperative BMI of 66.7 ± 6.4 kg/m2. Females accounted for 69.3% and the majority were either white (68.5%) or black (21.2%). LRYGB was associated with a higher rate of adjusted 30-day postoperative serious complications (4.0% vs 2.2%; p < 0.01) including anastomotic leak, obstruction, and bleeding. Resource utilization was also higher with LRYGB (23.7% vs 14.8%; p < 0.01) and included more emergency department visits, readmissions, reoperations, and length of stay ≥ 4 days. The overall 1-year follow-up rate was 38.8%. The adjusted percent total weight loss at 1 year was significantly higher following LRYGB compared to LSG (36.6 ± 9.3 vs 31.3 ± 9.3%; p < 0.01). LRYGB was associated with a higher rate of treatment discontinuation for diabetes mellitus, hyperlipidemia, and obstructive sleep apnea. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with BMI ≥ 60 kg/m2, LRYGB was associated with better weight loss and medication discontinuation 1 year following surgery at the expense of an increase in perioperative complications and resource utilization compared to LSG.

Surgeon variation in severity of reflux symptoms after sleeve gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have demonstrated an increase in gastroesophageal reflux after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). However, it is unknown whether symptom severity varies or if outcomes are surgeon-specific. METHODS: A validated reflux symptom survey was obtained at baseline and at 1 year after primary LSG on 7358 patients participating in a state-wide quality improvement collaborative between 2013 and 2018. Patients with worsening symptoms after surgery were divided into terciles based on the degree of increase in survey score (0 = no symptoms, 50 = max symptoms). Surgeon-level data was obtained on 52 bariatric surgeons performing at least 25 LSG cases/year during the study period. Surgeon characteristics, operative experience, and risk-adjusted 30-day complication rates were compared between surgeons in the highest tercile for moderate worsening of symptoms vs those in the lowest. RESULTS: A total of 2294 (31.2%) patients had worsening symptoms of reflux after sleeve gastrectomy. Overall mean increase in severity score was 6.11 (range 1 to 48) and patients with minimal, mild, and moderate symptoms had a mean increase of 1.4, 4.2, and 13.8, respectively. There were no significant differences in surgeon-specific characteristics when comparing surgeons in the highest tercile for moderate worsening of symptoms (44.7% of patients) vs those in the lowest tercile (18.7% of patients). In addition, there were no significant differences in risk-adjusted rates of overall complications (3.70% vs. 4.33%, p = 0.686), endoscopic dilations (2.83% vs. 1.91%, p = 0.417), or concurrent hiatal hernia repair (34.3% vs. 27.0%, p = 0.415) between surgeons in the highest and lowest terciles. CONCLUSIONS: We found that 1/3 of patients had worsening symptoms of reflux after LSG and that severity of symptoms varied. Surgeons with the highest rates of worsening reflux had similar operative experience and complication rates than those with the lowest. Further assessment of operative technique and skill may be informative.

Assessing variation in technique for sleeve gastrectomy based on outcomes of surgeons ranked by safety and efficacy: a video-based study.

BACKGROUND: Considerable technical variation exists when performing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). However, little is known about which techniques are associated with optimal outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To compare technical variation among surgeons with the lowest complication rates and whose patients achieved the most weight loss. METHODS: Practicing bariatric surgeons (n = 30) voluntarily submitted a video of a typical LSG performed between 2015 and 2016. Technique-specific data captured from videos and a questionnaire included bougie size, stapler vendor, number of staple loads, use of staple line reinforcement, fibrin sealant, intraoperative leak test, endoscopy, and drain placement. Surgeon-specific outcomes were obtained from cases performed by surgeons during the study period (n = 7023) using a state-wide bariatric-specific data registry. Surgeons were ranked based on 30-day risk-adjusted surgical complication rates ("safety") and excess body weight loss (EBWL) % ("efficacy") at 1 year after surgery. Technique-specific variables were compared between surgeons ranked in the top and bottom quartile for both safety and efficacy. RESULTS: Surgical complication rates ranged from 0 to 4.32% while EBWL varied from 45.3 to 65.3%. There was no correlation between surgeon rankings for safety and efficacy (Pearson's r = 0.063, p = 0.741). Surgeons ranked in the top quartile for safety and efficacy had significantly shorter mean operative times than surgeons ranked in the bottom quartile (65 min vs. 69 min, p < 0.0001). Surgeons with the highest leak rates were more likely to use buttressing (85.7% vs 40.0%, p = 0.032), otherwise operative techniques varied considerably. CONCLUSIONS: Technical variation appears to have minimal effect on the safety or efficacy of sleeve gastrectomy among surgeons participating in a state-wide quality improvement collaborative. Top ranked surgeons did have faster mean operative times indicating that there may be other metrics of technical quality that correlate to optimal outcomes.

Effect of new persistent opioid use on physiologic and psychologic outcomes following bariatric surgery.

INTRODUCTION: New persistent opioid use following surgery is a common iatrogenic complication, developing in roughly 6% of patients after elective surgery. Despite increased awareness of misuse and associated morbidity, opioids remain the cornerstone of pain management in bariatric surgery. The potential impact of new persistent opioid use on long-term postoperative outcomes is unknown. We sought to determine the relationship between new persistent opioid use and 1-year postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing bariatric surgery. METHODS: Using data from the MBSC registry, we identified patients undergoing primary bariatric surgery between 2006 and 2016. Using previously validated patient-reported survey methodology, we evaluated patient opioid use preoperatively and at 1 year following surgery. New persistent use was defined as a previously opioid-naïve patient who self-reported opioid use 1 year after surgery. We used multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate the association between new persistent opioid use, risk-adjusted weight loss, and psychologic outcomes (psychological wellbeing, body image, and depression). RESULTS: 27,799 patients underwent primary bariatric surgery between 2006 and 2016. Among opioid-naïve patients, the rate of new persistent opioid use was 6.3%. At 1-year after surgery, patients with new persistent opioid user lost significantly less excess body weight compared to those without new persistent use (57.6% vs. 60.3%; p < 0.0001). Patients with new persistent opioid use had significantly worse psychological wellbeing (35.0 vs. 33.1; p < 0.0001), body image (19.9 vs. 18.0; p < 0.0001), and depression scores (2.4 vs. 5.0; p < 0.0001). New persistent opioid users also reported less overall satisfaction with their bariatric surgery (75.1% vs. 85.7%; p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: New persistent opioid use is common following bariatric surgery and associated with significantly worse physiologic and psychologic outcomes. More effective screening and postoperative surveillance tools are needed to identify these patients, who likely require more aggressive counseling and treatment to maximize the benefits of bariatric surgery.

Site-specific Approach to Reducing Emergency Department Visits Following Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to explore the efficacy of current bariatric perioperative measures at reducing emergency department (ED) visits following bariatric surgery in the state of Michigan. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Many ED visits following bariatric surgery do not result in readmission and may be preventable. Little research exists evaluating the efficacy of perioperative measures aimed at reducing ED visits in this population. Therefore, understanding the driving factors behind these preventable ED visits may be a fruitful approach to prevention. Furthermore, evaluating the efficacy of current perioperative measures may shed light on how to achieve meaningful reductions in ED visits. METHODS: We studied 48,035 eligible bariatric surgery patients across 37 Michigan Bariatric Surgical Collaborative (MBSC) sites between January 2012 and October 2015. Hospitals were ranked according to their risk- and reliability-adjusted ED visit rates. For hospitals in each ED visit rate tercile, several patient, surgery, and hospital summary characteristics were compared. We then studied whether a hospital's compliance with specific perioperative measures was significantly associated with reduced ED visit rates. RESULTS: Only 3 of the 30 surgery, hospital, and patient summary characteristics studied were significant predictors of a hospital's ED visit rate: rate of sleeve gastrectomies, rate of readmissions, and rate of venous thromboembolism complications (P = 0.04, P = 0.0065, and P = 0.0047, respectively). Also, a hospital's compliance with the perioperative measures evaluated was not a significant predictor of ED visit rates (P = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: Current practices aimed at reducing ED visits appear to be ineffective. Due to heterogeneity in patient populations and local infrastructure, a more tailored approach to ED visit reduction may be more successful.

Incisional Hernia Repair: What the Radiologist Needs to Know.

OBJECTIVE: Incisional hernias are becoming more prevalent with increases in the obesity of the population and the complexity of abdominal surgeries. Radiologists' understanding of these hernias is limited. This article examines abdominal wall anatomy, surgical techniques, the role of imaging (current and emerging), and complications from the surgical perspective, to enhance to the role of the radiologist. CONCLUSION: Knowledge of the relevant anatomy, surgical techniques, and postoperative complications in patients with incisional hernial repair can help the radiologist improve care.

Are Patient-reported Outcomes Correlated With Clinical Outcomes After Surgery?: A Population-based Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the extent to which patient-reported outcomes (PROs) (eg, health-related quality of life) are distinct from clinical outcomes following bariatric surgery. BACKGROUND: Hospital quality measurement often focuses on traditional clinical outcomes (eg, complications). However, PROs may provide a unique perspective regarding performance, particularly for common, low-risk procedures. METHODS: We used data from 11,420 patients who underwent bariatric surgery (2008-2012) from the Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative (39 hospitals). We included both short-term (30-day complication rates) and long-term (1-year weight loss and comorbidity resolution) outcomes. For PROs, we used health-related quality of life assessed by the Health and Activities Limitations Index (HALex) and Bariatric Quality of Life (BQL) index preoperatively and at 1 year. We used multivariable linear regression to determine the association between these PROs and both short and long-term clinical outcomes, adjusting for patient factors and the type of surgical procedure. RESULTS: After adjustment for risk factors and surgical procedure, hospital rankings based on PROs (either the average change in HALex or BQL scores) were not correlated with hospital rankings based on complications. In contrast, both PRO measures were correlated with weight loss. Specifically, the average change in HALex score (R = 0.24, P < 0.002) and average change in BQL score (R = 0.44, P < 0.001) were correlated with hospital average percent excess. One PRO measure-BQL score-was correlated with a decline in the need for medications due to associated comorbidities (R = 0.16, P < 0.01). After accounting for short and long-term clinical outcomes, between 15% and 44% of the variation in PROs remained unexplained at the hospital level. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported outcomes are not correlated with early perioperative events, but are correlated with measures of clinical effectiveness after bariatric surgery. A comprehensive approach to surgical quality should incorporate both clinical events and self-reported measures of health status throughout the short and long-term recovery period.

Surgical skill and complication rates after bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Clinical outcomes after many complex surgical procedures vary widely across hospitals and surgeons. Although it has been assumed that the proficiency of the operating surgeon is an important factor underlying such variation, empirical data are lacking on the relationships between technical skill and postoperative outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a study involving 20 bariatric surgeons in Michigan who participated in a statewide collaborative improvement program. Each surgeon submitted a single representative videotape of himself or herself performing a laparoscopic gastric bypass. Each videotape was rated in various domains of technical skill on a scale of 1 to 5 (with higher scores indicating more advanced skill) by at least 10 peer surgeons who were unaware of the identity of the operating surgeon. We then assessed relationships between these skill ratings and risk-adjusted complication rates, using data from a prospective, externally audited, clinical-outcomes registry involving 10,343 patients. RESULTS: Mean summary ratings of technical skill ranged from 2.6 to 4.8 across the 20 surgeons. The bottom quartile of surgical skill, as compared with the top quartile, was associated with higher complication rates (14.5% vs. 5.2%, P<0.001) and higher mortality (0.26% vs. 0.05%, P=0.01). The lowest quartile of skill was also associated with longer operations (137 minutes vs. 98 minutes, P<0.001) and higher rates of reoperation (3.4% vs. 1.6%, P=0.01) and readmission (6.3% vs. 2.7%) (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The technical skill of practicing bariatric surgeons varied widely, and greater skill was associated with fewer postoperative complications and lower rates of reoperation, readmission, and visits to the emergency department. Although these findings are preliminary, they suggest that peer rating of operative skill may be an effective strategy for assessing a surgeon's proficiency.