Outcomes of primary versus revisional robotically assisted laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a multicenter analysis of ten-year experience.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative morbidity after laparoscopic bariatric surgery is considered higher for patients undergoing revisional versus primary procedures. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to compare outcomes between patients undergoing primary versus revisional robotically assisted laparoscopic (RAL) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). METHODS: Data of all patients who underwent RAL primary and revisional RYGB between 2009 and 2019 at two accredited, high-volume bariatric surgery centers-the Memorial Hermann - Texas Medical Center, Houston, TX, and the Tower Health, Reading Hospital, Reading, PA, were analyzed. Primary outcomes were early (< 30 days) and overall postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative complications, operative times, conversions to laparotomy, length of hospital stay, early (< 30 days) postoperative readmissions and deaths. RESULTS: Data of 1072 patients were analyzed, including 806 primary and 266 revisional RAL RYGB procedures. Longer operative times (203 versus 154 min, P < 0.001), increased number of readmissions for oral intolerance (10.5% versus 6.7%, P = 0.046) and higher rate of gastrojejunal stricture (6.4% versus 2.7%, P = 0.013) were found in the revisional group. Gastrointestinal leak rates were 0.2% for the primary versus 1.1% for the revisional group (P = 0.101). Early (< 30 days) reoperations rates were 2.2% for the primary versus 1.1% for the revisional group (P = 0.318). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in overall and severe complication rates. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing RAL primary and revisional RYGB had comparable overall outcomes, with a non-significant higher early complication rate in the revisional group. Despite the study being underpowered to detect differences in specific complication rates, the morbidity seen in the revisional RYGB group remains markedly below literature reports of revisional laparoscopic RYGB and might suggest a benefit of robotic assistance. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these results.

Metabolic and bariatric surgery for obesity in Prader Willi syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Obesity is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with Prader-Willi Syndrome (PWS). Our objective was to compare changes in body mass index (BMI) after metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) for the treatment of obesity (BMI ≥35 kg/m2) in PWS. A systematic review of MBS in PWS was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central, identifying 254 citations. Sixty-seven patients from 22 articles met criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Patients were organized into 3 groups: laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), gastric bypass (GB), and biliopancreatic diversion (BPD). No mortality within 1 year was reported in any of the 3 groups after a primary MBS operation. All groups experienced a significant decrease in BMI at 1 year with a mean reduction in BMI of 14.7 kg/m2 (P < .001). The LSG groups (n = 26) showed significant change from baseline in years 1, 2, and 3 (P value at year 3 = .002) but did not show significance in years 5, 7, and 10. The GB group (n = 10) showed a significant reduction in BMI of 12.1 kg/m2 in the first 2 years (P = .001). The BPD group (n = 28) had a significant reduction in BMI through 7 years with an average reduction of 10.7 kg/m2 (P = .02) at year 7. Individuals with PWS who underwent MBS had significant BMI reduction sustained in the LSG, GB, and BPD groups for 3, 2, and 7 years, respectively. No deaths within 1 year of these primary MBS operations were reported in this study or any other publication.

ASMBS statement on metabolic and bariatric surgery for beneficiaries of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services with a review of the literature.

This position statement is issued by the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric. Surgery in response to inquiries made to the Society by patients, physicians, Society members, hospitals, health insurance payors, the media, and others regarding the access and outcomes of metabolic and bariatric surgery for beneficiaries of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. This position statement is based on current clinical knowledge, expert opinion, and published peer-reviewed scientific evidence available at this time. The statement is not intended to be and should not be construed as stating or establishing a local, regional, or national standard of care. This statement will be revised in the future as additional evidence becomes available.

The Use of Transient Elastography Technology in the Bariatric Patient: a Review of the Literature.

Transient elastography (TE) is a non-invasive technology that demonstrates promise in assessing liver steatosis and fibrosis without the risks of traditional percutaneous liver biopsy. Many studies have examined its reliability in respect to liver biopsy, but fewer have examined using TE in obese and bariatric surgery patients. With evidence showing that bariatric surgery can lead to improvement of liver steatosis and fibrosis, TE has the potential to provide a simple avenue of hepatic assessment in patients before and after procedures. This review article investigates what is known about the reliability of TE and its implementation in obese and bariatric surgery patients.

Stapled versus hand-sewn: A prospective emergency surgery study. An American Association for the Surgery of Trauma multi-institutional study.

BACKGROUND: Data from the trauma patient population suggests handsewn (HS) anastomoses are superior to stapled (ST). A recent retrospective study in emergency general surgery (EGS) patients had similar findings. The aim of the current study was to evaluate HS and ST anastomoses in EGS patients undergoing urgent/emergent operations. METHODS: The study was sponsored by the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Multi-Institutional Studies Committee. Patients undergoing urgent/emergent bowel resection for EGS pathology were prospectively enrolled from July 22, 2013 to December 31, 2015. Patients were grouped by HS/ST anastomoses, and variables were collected. The primary outcome was anastomotic failure. Similar to other studies, anastomotic failure was evaluated at the anastomosis level. Multivariable logistic regression was performed controlling for age and risk factors for anastomotic failure. RESULTS: Fifteen institutions enrolled a total of 595 patients with 649 anastomoses (253 HS and 396 ST). Mean age was 61 years, 51% were men, 7% overall mortality. Age and sex were the same between groups. The overall anastomotic failure rate was 12.5%. The HS group had higher lactate, lower albumin, and were more likely to be on vasopressors. Hospital and intensive care unit days, as well as mortality, were greater in the HS group. Anastomotic failure rates and operative time were equivalent for HS and ST. On multivariate regression, the presence of contamination at initial resection (odds ratio, 1.965; 95% confidence interval, 1.183-3.264) and the patient being managed with open abdomen (odds ratio, 2.529; 95% confidence interval, 1.492-4.286) were independently associated with anastomotic failure, while the type of anastomosis was not. CONCLUSION: EGS patients requiring bowel resection and anastomosis are at high risk for anastomotic failure. The current study illustrates an apparent bias among acute care surgeons to perform HS techniques in higher-risk patients. Despite the individualized application of technique for differing patient populations, the risk of anastomotic failure was equivalent when comparing HS and ST anastomoses. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, level II.