Characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing paraesophageal hernia repair with selective use of biologic mesh.

BACKGROUND: The use of biologic mesh in paraesophageal hernia repair (PEHR) has been associated with decreased short-term recurrence but no statistically significant difference in long-term recurrence. Because of this, we transitioned from routine to selective use of mesh for PEHR. The aim of this study was to examine our indications for selective mesh use and to evaluate patient outcomes in this population. METHODS: We queried a prospectively maintained database for patients who underwent laparoscopic PEHR with biologic mesh from October 2015 to October 2018, then performed a retrospective chart review. The decision to use mesh was made intraoperatively by the surgeon. Recurrence was defined as the presence of > 2 cm intrathoracic stomach on postoperative upper gastrointestinal (UGI) series. RESULTS: Mesh was used in 61/169 (36%) of first-time PEHRs, and in 47/82 (57%) of redo PEHRs. Among first-time PEHRs, the indications for mesh included hiatal tension (85%), poor crural tissue quality (11%), or both (5%). Radiographic recurrence occurred in 15% of first-time patients (symptomatic N = 2, asymptomatic N = 3). There were no reoperations for recurrence. Among redo PEHRs, the indication for mesh was most commonly the redo nature of the repair itself (55%), but also hiatal tension (51%), poor crural tissue quality (13%), or both (4%). Radiographic recurrence occurred in 21% of patients (symptomatic N = 4, asymptomatic N = 1). There was 1 reoperation for recurrence in the redo-repair group. CONCLUSIONS: We selectively use biologic mesh in a third of our first-time repair patients and in over half of our redo-repair patients when there is a perceived high risk of recurrence based on hiatal tension, poor tissue quality, or prior recurrence. Despite the high risk for radiologic recurrence, there was only 1 reoperation for recurrence in the entire cohort.

Short- and long-term survival after laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy for gastric adenocarcinoma: a National database study.

BACKGROUND: The use of laparoscopic total gastrectomy for gastric cancer remains controversial. Our objective was to compare outcomes of laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) vs. open total gastrectomy (OTG) for gastric adenocarcinoma using a national cancer database. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (2010-2014) was analyzed for total gastrectomy cases performed for gastric adenocarcinoma. Patient demographics and surgical outcomes were stratified by stage and compared based on laparoscopic vs. open surgical approach. Primary outcome measures included 30-day and 90-day mortality and Kaplan-Meier curves to estimate long-term survival. RESULTS: There were 2584 cases analyzed, including 592 (22.9%) stage I, 710 (27.5%) stage II, and 1282 (49.6%) stage III cases. The distribution of LTG vs. OTG cases was 156 (26.4%) vs. 436 (73.6%) for stage I, 163 (23.0%) vs. 547 (77.0%) for stage II, and 241 (18.8%) vs. 1041 (81.2%) for stage III. For all stages analyzed, there was no difference between laparoscopic vs. open approach for adjusted 30-day mortality (stage I: adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 0.52, p = 0.75; stage II: AOR 1.36, p > 0.99; stage III: AOR 0.46, p = 0.29) or 90-day mortality (stage I: AOR 0.46, p = 0.99; stage II: AOR 1.17, p = 0.99; stage III: 0.57, p = 0.29). There was no difference between LTG vs. OTG 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimated survival curves for any stage (stage I: p = 0.20; stage II: p = 0.83; stage III: p = 0.46). When compared to OTG, LTG had a similar hazard ratio (HR) for mortality (HR 0.89 p = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic total gastrectomy and OTG have comparable 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, and long-term survival.

Venous thromboembolism risk for the contemporary bariatric surgeon.

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

Laparoscopic versus open resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumors: survival outcomes from the NCDB.

BACKGROUND: Studies comparing laparoscopic versus open resection of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) typically involve small comparative groups and often do not control for tumor size or stage of disease. The objective of this study was to compare adjusted survival outcomes for laparoscopic versus open GIST. METHOD: The National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2010 to 2014 was evaluated for gastric and small intestinal GIST resections. After stratification by disease stage and adjustment for patient demographics, comorbidity score, tumor size, and tumor location, 90-day mortality rates were compared based on laparoscopic versus open resection. Kaplan-Meier estimates of long-term survival were also compared. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine hazard ratios (HR) for survival. RESULTS: There were 5096 cases analyzed, including 2910 (57%) stage I, 954 (19%) stage II, and 1232 (24%) stage III cases. The distribution of laparoscopic versus open cases was 1291 (44%) versus 1619 (56%) for stage I, 318 (33%) versus 636 (67%) for stage II, and 286 (23%) versus 946 (77%) for stage III. There was no significant difference in adjusted 90-day mortality between laparoscopic and open resection. Kaplan-Meier estimates of long-term survival demonstrated improved overall survival curves for laparoscopic resection for stage I and stage II disease, but no significant difference for stage III disease. Factors associated with statistically significant higher adjusted overall mortality included older age (HR 1.06; p < 0.001), black race (HR 1.33; p = 0.04), higher comorbidity score (HR 1.47; p < 0.001), and small intestinal versus gastric tumor location (HR 1.28; p = 0.03). The hazards model suggested improved overall survival for females (HR 0.59; p < 0.001) and laparoscopic approach (HR 0.80; p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic and open GIST resection have comparable 90-day mortality with possible improved long-term survival with laparoscopy for early-stage disease. These findings support the use of laparoscopy as a viable and potentially more effective approach to GIST resection.

Robotic versus laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a MBSAQIP analysis.

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

Laparoscopic loop ileostomy reversal with intracorporeal anastomosis is associated with shorter length of stay without increased direct cost.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic ileostomy closure with intracorporeal anastomosis offers potential advantages over open reversal with extracorporeal anastomosis, including earlier return of bowel function and reduced postoperative pain. In this study, we aim to compare the outcome and cost of laparoscopic ileostomy reversal (utilizing either intracorporeal or extracorporeal anastomosis) with open ileostomy reversal. METHODS: A retrospective review of sequential patients undergoing elective loop ileostomy reversal between 2013 and 2016 at a single, high-volume institution was performed. Patients were stratified on the basis of operative approach: open reversal, laparoscopic-assisted reversal with extracorporeal anastomosis (LE), and laparoscopic reversal with intracorporeal anastomosis (LI). Linear and logistic regressions were utilized to perform multivariate analysis and determine risk-adjusted outcomes. RESULTS: Of 132 sequential cases of loop ileostomy reversal, 50 (38%) underwent open, 49 (37%) underwent LE, and 33 (22%) underwent LI. Demographic data and preoperative comorbidities were similar between the three cohorts. Median length of stay was significantly shorter for LI (52.1 h, p < 0.05) compared to open (69.0 h) and LE (69.6 h). After risk-adjusted analysis, length of stay was significant shorter in LI compared to LE (GM 0.78, 95% CI 0.64-0.93, p < 0.01) and open reversal (GM 0.78, 95% CI 0.66-0.93, p < 0.01). Risk-adjusted 30-day morbidity rates were similar for LI compared to LE (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.081-2.33, p = 0.33) and open reversal (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.09-3.125, p = 0.48). Median in-hospital direct cost was similar for LI ($6575.00), LE ($6722.50), and open reversal ($6181.00). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic ileostomy reversal with intracorporeal anastomosis was associated with shorter length of stay without increased overall direct cost. The technique of laparoscopic ileostomy reversal warrants continued study in a randomized clinical trial.

An endoscopic mucosal grading system is predictive of leak in stapled rectal anastomoses.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak is a devastating postoperative complication following rectal anastomoses associated with significant clinical and oncological implications. As a result, there is a need for novel intraoperative methods that will help predict anastomotic leak. METHODS: From 2011 to 2014, patient undergoing rectal anastomoses by colorectal surgeons at our institution underwent prospective application of intraoperative flexible endoscopy with mucosal grading. Retrospective review of patient medical records was performed. After creation of the colorectal anastomosis, application of a three-tier endoscopic mucosal grading system occurred. Grade 1 was defined as circumferentially normal appearing peri-anastomotic mucosa. Grade 2 was defined as ischemia or congestion involving <30% of either the colon or rectal mucosa. Grade 3 was defined as ischemia or congestion involving >30% of the colon or rectal mucosa or ischemia/congestion involving both sides of the staple line. RESULTS: From 2011 to 2014, a total of 106 patients were reviewed. Grade 1 anastomoses were created in 92 (86.7%) patients and Grade 2 anastomoses were created in 10 (9.4%) patients. All 4 (3.8%) Grade 3 patients underwent immediate intraoperative anastomosis takedown and re-creation, with subsequent re-classification as Grade 1. Demographic and comorbidity data were similar between Grade 1 and Grade 2 patients. Anastomotic leak rate for the entire cohort was 12.2%. Grade 1 patients demonstrated a leak rate of 9.4% (9/96) and Grade 2 patients demonstrated a leak rate of 40% (4/10). Multivariate logistic regression associated Grade 2 classification with an increased risk of anastomotic leak (OR 4.09, 95% CI 1.21-13.63, P = 0.023). CONCLUSION: Endoscopic mucosal grading is a feasible intraoperative technique that has a role following creation of a rectal anastomosis. Identification of a Grade 2 or Grade 3 anastomosis should provoke strong consideration for immediate intraoperative revision.

Respiratory complications after colonic procedures in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: does laparoscopy offer a benefit?

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are at a higher risk for postoperative respiratory complications. Despite the benefits of a minimally invasive approach, laparoscopic pneumoperitoneum can substantially reduce functional residual capacity and raise alveolar dead space, potentially increasing the risk of respiratory failure which may be poorly tolerated by COPD patients. This raises controversy as to whether open techniques should be preferentially employed in this population. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database from 2011 to 2014 was used to examine the clinical data from patients with COPD who electively underwent laparoscopic and open colectomy. Patients defined as having COPD demonstrated either functional disability, chronic use of bronchodilators, prior COPD-related hospitalization, or reduced forced expiratory reserve volumes on lung testing (FEV1 <75%). Demographic data and preoperative characteristics were compared. Linear and logistic regressions were utilized to perform multivariate analysis and determine risk-adjusted outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 4397 patients with COPD, 53.8% underwent laparoscopic colectomy (LC) while 46.2% underwent open colectomy (OC). The LC and OC groups were similar with respect to demographic data and preoperative comorbidities. Equivalent frequencies of exertional dyspnea (LC 35.4 vs OC 37.7%, P = 0.11) were noted. After multivariate risk adjustment, OC demonstrated an increased rate of overall respiratory complications including pneumonia, reintubation, and prolonged ventilator dependency when compared to LC (OR 1.60, 95% CI 1.30-1.98, P < 0.01). OC was associated with longer length of stay (10 ± 8 vs. 6.7 ± 7 days, P < 0.01) and higher readmission (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.09-1.68, P < 0.01) compared to LC. CONCLUSION: Despite the potential risks of laparoscopic pneumoperitoneum in the susceptible COPD population, a minimally invasive approach was associated with lower risk of postoperative respiratory complications, shorter length of stay, and decrease in postoperative morbidity.

Defining the Role of Minimally Invasive Proctectomy for Locally Advanced Rectal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: National examination of open proctectomy (OP), laparoscopic proctectomy (LP), and robotic proctectomy (RP) in pathological outcomes and overall survival (OS). BACKGROUND: Surgical management for rectal adenocarcinoma is evolving towards utilization of LP and RP. However, the oncological impacts of a minimally invasive approach to rectal cancer have yet to be defined. METHODS: Retrospective review of the National Cancer Database identified patients with nonmetastatic locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma from 2010 to 2014, who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation, surgical resection, and adjuvant therapy. Cases were stratified by surgical approach. Multivariate analysis was used to compare pathological outcomes. Cox proportional-hazard modeling and Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to estimate long-term OS. RESULTS: Of 6313 cases identified, 53.8% underwent OP, 31.8% underwent LP, and 14.3% underwent RP. Higher-volume academic/research and comprehensive community centers combined to perform 80% of laparoscopic cases and 83% of robotic cases. In an intent-to-treat model, multivariate analysis demonstrated superior circumferential margin negativity rates with LP compared with OP (odds ratio 1.34, 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.77, P = 0.036). Cox proportional-hazard modeling demonstrated a lower death hazard ratio for LP compared with OP (hazard ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.67-0.99, P = 0.037). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a 5-year OS of 81% in LP compared with 78% in RP and 76% in OP (P = 0.0198). CONCLUSION: In the hands of experienced colorectal specialists treating selected patients, LP may be a valuable operative technique that is associated with oncological benefits. Further exploration of pathological outcomes and long-term survival by means of prospective randomized trials may offer more definitive conclusions regarding comparisons of open and minimally invasive technique.

Laparoscopic Heller Myotomy and Toupet Fundoplication for Achalasia.

Achalasia manifests as failure of relaxation of the lower esophageal sphincter resulting in dysphagia. Although there are several medical and endoscopic treatment options, laparoscopic Heller myotomy has excellent short- and long-term outcomes. This article describes in detail our surgical approach to this operation. Key steps include extensive esophageal mobilization, division of the short gastric vessels, mobilization of the anterior vagus nerve, an extended gastric myotomy (3 cm as opposed to the conventional 1-2 cm gastric myotomy), a minimum 6 cm esophageal myotomy through circular and longitudinal muscle layers, and a Toupet partial fundoplication. We routinely use intraoperative endoscopy both to check for inadvertent full-thickness injury and to assess completeness of the myotomy and the geometry of the anti-reflux wrap.

Operative time as a marker of quality in bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the effect of prolonged operative time (OT) on outcomes in laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Existing studies mostly focus on 30-day complications, whereas serious complications may not occur until well after 30 days from the index operation. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of prolonged OT on 1-year morbidity and mortality after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). SETTING: The Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database (BOLD). METHODS: Data on primary LRYGB and LSG cases performed between 2008 and 2012 in the BOLD were analyzed. Converted cases and cases concurrent with other procedures were excluded. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the association between OT and 1-year morbidity and mortality, with adjustment for preoperative demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 93,051 cases were examined, including 74,745 (80.3%) LRYGB and 18,306 (19.7%) LSG cases. For LRYGB, mean OT was 104 minutes (standard deviation [SD] 46.6). Every additional 10 minutes of OT was associated with increased odds of 1-year mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.04; P = .02), leak (AOR 1.07; P < .0001), and any adverse event (AOR 1.03; P < .001). For LSG, mean OT was 78 minutes (SD 37.4). Every additional 10 minutes of OT was associated with increased odds of 1-year leak (AOR 1.07; P = .0002). Data on patients lost to follow-up was unavailable. CONCLUSION: Prolonged operative time is associated with a significant increase in the odds of mortality and serious complications after laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Operative time may be a useful marker of quality in primary laparoscopic bariatric surgery.

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

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

Outcomes of Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery in the Elderly Population.

There have been limited data on the safety of laparoscopic bariatric surgery in the elderly. To compare outcomes of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) between elderly (≥65 years) and nonelderly (18-64 years) patients. Using the 2011 to 2015 NSQIP database, we analyzed severely obese patients who underwent LRYGB or LSG. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess primary outcomes including 30-day mortality, serious morbidity, length of stay, and readmission. There were 41,475 LRYGB cases performed, including 2,010 (4.8%) cases in elderly patients. Compared with the nonelderly, elderly patients who underwent LRYGB had higher serious morbidity [odds ratio (OR) = 1.43, confidence interval (CI) = 1.16-1.76, P = 0.001], but similar 30-day mortality (OR = 0.8, CI = 0.28-2.34, P = 0.688). There were 44,550 LSG cases performed, including 2,055 (4.6%) cases in elderly patients. Compared with the nonelderly, elderly patients who underwent LSG had significantly higher serious morbidity (OR = 1.44, CI = 1.12-1.84, P = 0.005) and higher 30-day mortality (OR = 3.62, CI = 1.34-9.83, P = 0.011). Laparoscopic bariatric surgery is safe in the elderly population, and is similar between bariatric procedures. However, elderly patients have higher serious morbidity; therefore, they should be counseled regarding their higher risk, but should not be denied bariatric surgery based solely on their age.

Same-Day Discharge after Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: An Analysis of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program Database.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) has been performed with successful discharge on postoperative day 1 (POD1). There are limited studies on same-day discharge after LRYGB. The objective of this study was to examine the frequency and outcomes of same-day discharge after LRYGB. STUDY DESIGN: The 2015 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database was analyzed for adult patients who underwent elective LRYGB cases with same-day vs POD1 discharge. Open and revisional cases were excluded. Multivariate analysis was performed to compare risk-adjusted 30-day mortality, overall morbidity, readmission, and reoperation. RESULTS: There were 354 (0.9%) patients who were discharged on the same day as surgery after LRYGB. After exclusion criteria, 319 patients with same-day discharge and 9,402 patients with POD1 discharge were examined. For same-day vs POD1 discharge groups, mean ages were 45.0 and 44.5 years, respectively, and mean BMIs were 47.3 kg/m2 and 45.9 kg/m2, respectively. The unadjusted mortality rate was significantly higher for same-day compared with POD1 discharge (0.94% vs. 0.05%, respectively; p = 0.0017). Compared with POD1 discharge, same-day discharge had higher overall morbidity (3.76% vs 1.54%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 2.41; p = 0.0216), but no statistically significant differences for readmissions (3.45% vs. 3.66%; AOR 0.85; p = 0.9999) or reoperations (1.88% vs. 0.89%; AOR 2.33; p = 0.2428). CONCLUSIONS: Same-day discharge after LRYGB is associated with increased morbidity and mortality compared with POD1 discharge. The practice of same-day discharge after LRYGB should be considered experimental until further studies confirm which patient characteristics will ensure safe same-day discharge.

How safe is same-day discharge after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is associated with low morbidity and mortality and a short length of stay. Studies on the safety of same-day discharge after LSG are limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes between same-day versus first-postoperative-day (POD1) discharge after LSG. SETTING: Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program national database. METHODS: The 2015 to 2016 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database was analyzed for elective LSG cases with same-day or POD1 discharge. Open, revisional, and converted cases were excluded. Multivariate analysis was performed to compare adjusted 30-day mortality, morbidity, readmission, and reoperation for same-day versus POD1 discharge. RESULTS: We examined 85,321 LSG cases, including 4728 same-day discharges and 80,593 POD1 discharges. Compared with POD1 discharges, same-day discharges were associated with higher overall morbidity (1.31% versus .84%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.72; P = .0002), a higher readmission rate (2.14% versus 1.64%, respectively; AOR 1.40; P = 0.0034), and a higher reoperation rate (.61% versus .27%, respectively; AOR 2.35; P < .0001). There was no difference in mortality (.08% versus .04%, respectively; AOR 2.62; P = .0923). CONCLUSION: Same-day discharge after LSG is associated with increased complications, readmissions, and reoperations compared with POD1 discharge. Further studies are needed to examine objective criteria for safe same-day discharge after LSG.

One-Year Mortality after Contemporary Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: An Analysis of the Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary mortality after bariatric surgery is low and has been decreasing over the past 2 decades. Most studies have reported inpatient or 30-day mortality, which may not represent the true risk of bariatric surgery. The objective of this study was to examine 1-year mortality and factors predictive of 1-year mortality after contemporary laparoscopic bariatric surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Using the 2008 to 2012 Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database (BOLD), data from 158,606 operations were analyzed, including 128,349 (80.9%) laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and 30,257 (19.1%) laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) operations. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine independent risk factors associated with 1-year mortality for each type of procedure. RESULTS: The 30-day and 1-year mortality rates for LRYGB were 0.13% and 0.23%, respectively, and for LSG were 0.06% and 0.11%, respectively. Risk factors for 1-year mortality included older age (LRYGB: adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.05 per year, p < 0.001; LSG: AOR 1.08 per year, p < 0.001); male sex (LRYGB: AOR 1.88, p < 0.001); higher BMI (LRYGB: AOR 1.04 per unit, p < 0.001; LSG: AOR 1.05 per unit, p = 0.009); and the presence of 30-day leak (LRYGB: AOR 25.4, p < 0.001; LSG: AOR 35.8, p < 0.001), 30-day pulmonary embolism (LRYGB: AOR 34.5, p < 0.001; LSG: AOR 252, p < 0.001), and 30-day hemorrhage (LRYGB: AOR 2.34, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary 1-year mortality after laparoscopic bariatric surgery is much lower than previously reported, at <0.25%. It is important to continually refine techniques and perioperative management in order to minimize leaks, hemorrhage, and pulmonary embolus after bariatric surgery because these complications contribute to a higher risk of mortality.

Association of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Overall Hospital Quality Star Rating With Outcomes in Advanced Laparoscopic Abdominal Surgery.

IMPORTANCE: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently released the Overall Hospital Quality Star Rating to help patients compare hospitals based on a 5-star scale. The star rating was designed to assess overall quality of the institution; thus, its validity toward specifically assessing surgical quality is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To examine whether CMS high-star hospitals (HSHs) have improved patient outcomes and resource use in advanced laparoscopic abdominal surgery compared with low-star hospitals (LSHs). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using the University HealthSystem Consortium database (which includes academic centers and their affiliate hospitals) from January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2015, this administrative database observational study compared outcomes of 72 662 advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations between HSHs (4-5 stars) and LSHs (1-2 stars). The star rating includes 57 measures across 7 areas of quality. Patients who underwent advanced laparoscopic abdominal surgery, including bariatric surgery (sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass), colorectal surgery (colectomy, proctectomy), or hiatal hernia surgery (paraesophageal hernia repair, Nissen fundoplication), were included. Risk adjustment included exclusion of patients with major and extreme severity of illness. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Main outcome measures included serious morbidity, in-hospital mortality, intensive care unit admissions, and cost. RESULTS: A total of 72 662 advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations were performed in patients at 66 HSHs (n = 38 299; mean [SD] age, 51.26 [15.25] years; 12 096 [31.5%] male and 26 203 [68.4%] female; 28 971 [75.6%] white and 9328 [24.4%] nonwhite) and 78 LSHs (n = 34 363; mean [SD] age, 49.77 [14.77] years; 9902 [28.8%] male and 24 461 [71.2%] female; 21 876 [67.6%] white and 12 487 [32.4%] nonwhite). The HSHs were observed to have fewer intensive care unit admissions (1007 [2.6%] vs 1711 [5.0%], P < .001) and lower mean cost ($7866 vs $8708, P < .001). No significant difference was found in mortality between HSHs and LSHs for any advanced laparoscopic abdominal surgery. No significant difference was found in serious morbidity between HSHs and LSHs for bariatric or hiatal hernia surgery. However, for colorectal surgery, serious morbidity was lower at HSHs compared with LSHs (258 [2.2%] vs 276 [2.9%], P = .002). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study found that HSHs treat fewer ethnic minorities and have similar outcomes as LSHs for advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations. However, HSHs may represent hospitals with improved resource use and cost.

The effect of hospital teaching status on outcomes in bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Studies have shown conflicting effects of resident involvement on outcomes after laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Resident involvement may be a proxy for a teaching environment in which multiple factors affect patient outcomes. However, no study has examined outcomes of laparoscopic bariatric surgery based on hospital teaching status. OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) between teaching hospitals (THs) and nonteaching hospitals (NTHs). SETTING: Retrospective review of a national database in the United States. METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database (2011-2013) was reviewed for obese patients who underwent LRYGB or LSG. Patient demographic characteristics and outcomes were analyzed according to hospital teaching status. Primary outcome measures included risk-adjusted inpatient mortality and serious morbidity. RESULTS: We analyzed 32,449 LRYGBs and 26,075 LSGs. There were 35,160 (60.1%) cases performed at THs and 23,364 (39.9%) cases performed at NTHs. At THs, the distribution of LRYGB versus LSG cases was 20,461 (58.2%) versus 14,699 (41.8%), respectively; at NTHs, the distribution was 11,988 (51.3%) versus 11,376 (48.7%), respectively. For LRYGB, there were no significant differences between THs versus NTHs in mortality (AOR 1.14; P = 0.99), but there was an increase in odds of serious morbidity at THs (AOR 1.36; P<0.001). For LSG, there were no significant differences between THs versus NTHs for mortality (AOR 1.15; P = 0.99) or serious morbidity (AOR 1.03; P = 0.99). CONCLUSIONS: There is an association between THs and increased serious morbidity for LRYGB, but hospital teaching status has no effect on morbidity or mortality after LSG. Further research is warranted to elucidate the reasons for these associations.

Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Band Explantation and Implantation at Academic Centers.

BACKGROUND: The laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) was approved for use in the US in 2001 and has been found to be a safe and effective surgical treatment for morbid obesity. However, there is a recent trend toward reduced use of LAGB nationwide. The objective of this study was to examine the prevalence and outcomes of primary LAGB implantation compared with revision and explantation at academic centers. STUDY DESIGN: Data were obtained from the Vizient database from 2007 through 2015. The ICD-9-Clinical Modification and ICD-10-Clinical Modification were used to select patients with a primary diagnosis of obesity who had undergone LAGB implantation, revision, or explantation. Prevalence and outcomes of primary LAGB implantation compared with revision or explantation were analyzed. Outcomes measures included length of stay, ICU admission, morbidity, mortality, and cost. RESULTS: From 2007 through 2015, a total of 28,202 patients underwent LAGB implantation for surgical weight loss. The annual number of LAGB implantation procedures decreased steadily after 2010. In the same time period, 12,157 patients underwent LAGB explantation. In 2013, the number of LAGB explantation procedures exceeded that of implantation. Laparoscopic adjustable gastric band revision rates remained stable throughout the study period. Mean length of stay, serious morbidity, and proportion of patients requiring ICU admission were higher for gastric band revision and explantation cases compared with primary LAGB implantation cases. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality or mean cost between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Since 2013, the number of gastric band explantation procedures has exceeded that of implantation procedures at academic centers. Laparoscopic adjustable gastric band revision or explantation is associated with longer length of stay, higher rate of postoperative ICU admissions, and higher overall morbidity compared with LAGB implantation.