Revision/Conversion Surgeries After One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass-An Experts' Modified Delphi Consensus.

PURPOSE: There is a lack of evidence for treatment of some conditions including complication management, suboptimal initial weight loss, recurrent weight gain, or worsening of a significant obesity complication after one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). This study was designed to respond to the existing lack of agreement and to provide a valuable resource for clinicians by employing an expert-modified Delphi consensus method. METHODS: Forty-eight recognized bariatric surgeons from 28 countries participated in the modified Delphi consensus to vote on 64 statements in two rounds. An agreement/disagreement among ≥ 70.0% of the experts was regarded to indicate a consensus. RESULTS: A consensus was achieved for 46 statements. For recurrent weight gain or worsening of a significant obesity complication after OAGB, more than 85% of experts reached a consensus that elongation of the biliopancreatic limb (BPL) is an acceptable option and the total bowel length measurement is mandatory during BPL elongation to preserve at least 300-400 cm of common channel limb length to avoid nutritional deficiencies. Also, more than 85% of experts reached a consensus on conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) with or without pouch downsizing as an acceptable option for the treatment of persistent bile reflux after OAGB and recommend detecting and repairing any size of hiatal hernia during conversion to RYGB. CONCLUSION: While the experts reached a consensus on several aspects regarding revision/conversion surgeries after OAGB, there are still lingering areas of disagreement. This highlights the importance of conducting further studies in the future to address these unresolved issues.

Current recommendations for procedure selection in class I and II obesity developed by an expert modified Delphi consensus.

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is widely considered the most effective option for treating obesity, a chronic, relapsing, and progressive disease. Recently, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) issued new guidelines on the indications for MBS, which have superseded the previous 1991 National Institutes of Health guidelines. The aim of this study is to establish the first set of consensus guidelines for selecting procedures in Class I and II obesity, using an Expert Modified Delphi Method. In this study, 78 experienced bariatric surgeons from 32 countries participated in a two-round Modified Delphi consensus voting process. The threshold for consensus was set at an agreement or disagreement of ≥ 70.0% among the experts. The experts reached a consensus on 54 statements. The committee of experts reached a consensus that MBS is a cost-effective treatment option for Class II obesity and for patients with Class I obesity who have not achieved significant weight loss through non-surgical methods. MBS was also considered suitable for patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and a body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m2 or higher. The committee identified intra-gastric balloon (IGB) as a treatment option for patients with class I obesity and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) as an option for patients with class I and II obesity, as well as for patients with T2DM and a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2. Sleeve gastrectomy (1) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) were also recognized as viable treatment options for these patient groups. The committee also agreed that one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a suitable option for patients with Class II obesity and T2DM, regardless of the presence or severity of obesity-related medical problems. The recommendations for selecting procedures in Class I and II obesity, developed through an Expert Modified Delphi Consensus, suggest that the use of standard primary bariatric endoscopic (IGB, ESG) and surgical procedures (SG, RYGB, OAGB) are acceptable in these patient groups, as consensus was reached regarding these procedures. However, randomized controlled trials are still needed in Class I and II Obesity to identify the best treatment approach for these patients in the future.

Reconsideration of the Gastroparetic Syndrome.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Gastroparesis is a chronic disorder characterized by a constellation of foregut symptoms, including postprandial nausea, vomiting, distension, epigastric pain, and regurgitation in the absence of gastric outlet obstruction. Despite considerable research over the past decades, there remains to be only nominal understanding of disease classification, diagnostic criteria, pathogenesis, and preferred therapy. RECENT FINDINGS: We critically reassess current approaches for disease identification and stratification, theories of causation, and treatment for gastroparesis. Gastric scintigraphy, long considered a diagnostic standard, has been re-evaluated in light of evidence showing low sensitivity, whereas newer testing modalities are incompletely validated. Present concepts of pathogenesis do not provide a unified model linking biological impairments with clinical manifestations, whereas available pharmacological and anatomical treatments lack explicit selection criteria or evidence for sustained effectiveness. We propose a disease model that embodies the re-programming of distributed neuro-immune interactions in the gastric wall by inflammatory perturbants. These interactions, combined with effects on the foregut hormonal milieu and brain-gut axis, are postulated to generate the syndromic attributes characteristically linked with gastroparesis. Research linking models of immunopathogenesis with diagnostic and therapeutic paradigms will lead to reclassifications of gastroparesis that guide future trials and technological developments. KEY POINTS: • The term gastroparesis embodies a heterogenous array of symptoms and clinical findings based on a complex assimilation of afferent and efferent mechanisms, gastrointestinal locations, and pathologies. • There currently exists no single test or group of tests with sufficient capacity to be termed a definitional standard for gastroparesis. • Present research regarding pathogenesis suggests the importance of immune regulation of intrinsic oscillatory activity involving myenteric nerves, interstitial cells of Cajal, and smooth muscle cells. • Prokinetic pharmaceuticals remain the mainstay of management, although novel treatments are being studied that are directed to alternative muscle/nerve receptors, electromodulation of the brain-gut axis, and anatomical (endoscopic, surgical) interventions.

2022 American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) Indications for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.

MAJOR UPDATES TO 1991 NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH GUIDELINES FOR BARIATRIC SURGERY: Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is recommended for individuals with a body mass index (BMI) >35 kg/m2, regardless of presence, absence, or severity of co-morbidities.MBS should be considered for individuals with metabolic disease and BMI of 30-34.9 kg/m2.BMI thresholds should be adjusted in the Asian population such that a BMI >25 kg/m2 suggests clinical obesity, and individuals with BMI >27.5 kg/m2 should be offered MBS.Long-term results of MBS consistently demonstrate safety and efficacy.Appropriately selected children and adolescents should be considered for MBS.(Surg Obes Relat Dis 2022; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2022.08.013 ) © 2022 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. All rights reserved.

The impact of procedure type on 30-day readmissions following metabolic and bariatric surgery: postoperative complications of bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmission (HR) rates following metabolic/bariatric surgery (MBS) are used as a surrogate for quality outcomes and are increasingly tied to reimbursement rates. There are limited data concerning predictors of HR rates with regard to type of bariatric procedure. METHODS: This study is a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from patients who underwent MBS from January 2014 to December 2019 at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts. The causes of all HRs and reoperations within 30 days of the original discharge were analyzed. Statistical significance was determined using Chi Squared test and T test. RESULTS: 2815 patients underwent MBS. 2373 patients (84.3%) had primary procedures, while 442 patients (15.7%) had secondary or revisional procedures. The overall 30-day readmission rate was 5.7%, with no significant difference for patients who underwent primary vs. secondary MBS. Among primary procedures, the readmission rate was higher for Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) than laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) (10.32% vs. 4.77%). Readmissions were most often due to nontechnical causes. The overall reoperation rate was 1.14% and was higher for patients undergoing secondary vs. primary procedures (2.94% vs 0.80%). CONCLUSIONS: Readmission rate was similar to that in existing literature. Revisional/secondary surgery did not lead to increased readmissions, although was associated with a higher reoperation rate. Most HRs were due to nontechnical causes. Optimization of postoperative care, such as fluid status, may reduce the incidence of postoperative complications.

2022 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO): Indications for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.

Major updates to 1991 National Institutes of Health guidelines for bariatric surgery.

Efficacy and safety of one anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for type 2 diabetes remission (ORDER): protocol of a multicentre, randomised controlled, open-label, superiority trial.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have demonstrated that one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is not inferior to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in treating obesity. However, high level evidence comparing the efficacy and safety of both procedures in type 2 diabetes (T2D) treatment is still lacking, which is another main aim of bariatric surgery. The presented trial has been designed to aim at investigating the superiority of OAGB over the reference procedure RYGB in treating T2D as primary endpoint. And diabetes-related microvascular and macrovascular complications, cardiovascular comorbidities, weight loss, postoperative nutritional status, quality of life and overall complications will be followed up for 5 years as secondary endpoints. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This prospective, multicentre, randomised superiority open-label trial will be conducted in patients of Asian descent. A total of 248 patients (BMI≥27.5 kg/m2) who are diagnosed with T2D will be randomly assigned (1:1) to OAGB or RYGB with blocks of four. The primary endpoint is the complete diabetes remission rate defined as HbA1c≤6.0% and fasting plasma glucose≤5.6 mmol/L without any antidiabetic medications at 1 year after surgery. All secondary endpoints will be measured at different follow-up visit points, which will start at least 3 months after enrolment, with a continuous annual follow-up for five postoperative years in order to provide solid evidence on the efficacy and safety of OAGB in patients with T2D. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by the ethics committee of leading centre (Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, no. 2021-P2-037-03). The results generated from this work will be disseminated to academic audiences and the public via publications in international peer-reviewed journals and conferences. The data presented will be imported into a national data registry. Findings are expected to be available in 2025, which will facilitate clinical decision-making in the field. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05015283.

Concomitant Cholecystectomy for Asymptomatic Gallstones in Bariatric Surgery-Safety Profile and Feasibility in a Large Tertiary Referral Bariatric Center.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a risk factor for gallstone formation, which can be exacerbated by bariatric surgery-induced rapid weight loss. Current guidelines do not recommend concomitant cholecystectomy (CC) for asymptomatic gallstones during the bariatric surgery procedure. However, long-term follow-up studies have shown that the incidence of post-bariatric surgery symptomatic gallstones necessitating therapeutic cholecystectomy increases to 40%. Therefore, some surgeons advocate simultaneous cholecystectomy during the bariatric surgery for asymptomatic individuals. This study aims to evaluate the safety of performing cholecystectomy for asymptomatic gallstones during the bariatric procedure. METHODS: Data from a consecutive series of patients that underwent primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or conversion of LSG to a LRYGB with or without concomitant cholecystectomy for asymptomatic gallstones between Jan 2010 and Dec 2017 were retrieved from the database. The primary endpoint was the complication rate. Secondary endpoints were the surgical operating room time (ORT) and the length of hospital stay (LOS). RESULTS: Out of the 2828 patients who were included, 120 patients underwent a concomitant cholecystectomy during their bariatric procedure (LSG or LRYGB) for asymptomatic gallbladder stones and were compared to the 2708 remaining patients who only had bariatric surgery. None of the concomitant cholecystectomy patients developed a gallbladder-related complication. There was no significant increase in the rate of minor or major complications between the CC groups and the non-CC groups (LSG: 6.7% vs. 3.2%, p=0.132; LRYGB: 0% vs. 2.3%, p =0.55; and conversion of LSG to LRYGB: 20% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.125, respectively). In addition, there was no significant increase in the length of hospital stay (1.85 ±4.19 days vs. 2.24 ±1.82, p=0.404) for LSG group and (1.75 ±2.0 vs. 2.3 ±2.1, p=0.179) for LRYGB group. Adding the cholecystectomy to the bariatric procedure only added an average of 23 min (min) (27 min when added to LSG and 18 min when added to LRYGB). CONCLUSION: As one of the largest series reviewing concomitant cholecystectomy in bariatric surgery, this study showed that in skilled laparoscopic bariatric surgical hands, concomitant cholecystectomy during bariatric surgery is safe and prevents potential future gallstone-related complications. Long-term large prospective randomized trials are needed to further clarify the recommendation of prophylactic concomitant cholecystectomy during bariatric surgery.

The first modified Delphi consensus statement on sleeve gastrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the commonest bariatric procedure worldwide. Yet there is significant variation in practice concerning its various aspects. This paper report results from the first modified Delphi consensus-building exercise on SG. METHODS: We established a committee of 54 globally recognized opinion makers in this field. The committee agreed to vote on several statements concerning SG. An agreement or disagreement amongst ≥ 70.0% experts was construed as a consensus. RESULTS: The committee achieved a consensus of agreement (n = 71) or disagreement (n = 7) for 78 out of 97 proposed statements after two rounds of voting. The committee agreed with 96.3% consensus that the characterization of SG as a purely restrictive procedure was inaccurate and there was 88.7% consensus that SG was not a suitable standalone, primary, surgical weight loss option for patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) without dysplasia. There was an overwhelming consensus of 92.5% that the sleeve should be fashioned over an orogastric tube of 36-40 Fr and a 90.7% consensus that surgeons should stay at least 1 cm away from the angle of His. Remarkably, the committee agreed with 81.1% consensus that SG patients should undergo a screening endoscopy every 5 years after surgery to screen for BE. CONCLUSION: A multinational team of experts achieved consensus on several aspects of SG. The findings of this exercise should help improve the outcomes of SG, the commonest bariatric procedure worldwide, and guide future research on this topic.

The First Modified Delphi Consensus Statement for Resuming Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery in the COVID-19 Times.

The purpose of this study was to achieve consensus amongst a global panel of expert bariatric surgeons on various aspects of resuming Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery (BMS) during the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. A modified Delphi consensus-building protocol was used to build consensus amongst 44 globally recognised bariatric surgeons. The experts were asked to either agree or disagree with 111 statements they collectively proposed over two separate rounds. An agreement amongst ≥ 70.0% of experts was construed as consensus as per the predetermined methodology. We present here 38 of our key recommendations. This first global consensus statement on the resumption of BMS can provide a framework for multidisciplinary BMS teams planning to resume local services as well as guide future research in this area.

The first consensus statement on revisional bariatric surgery using a modified Delphi approach.

BACKGROUND: Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) constitutes a possible solution for patients who experience an inadequate response following bariatric surgery or significant weight regain following an initial satisfactory response. This paper reports results from the first modified Delphi consensus-building exercise on RBS. METHODS: We created a committee of 22 recognised opinion-makers with a special interest in RBS. The committee invited 70 RBS experts from 27 countries to vote on 39 statements concerning RBS. An agreement amongst ≥ 70.0% experts was regarded as a consensus. RESULTS: Seventy experts from twenty-seven countries took part. There was a consensus that the decision for RBS should be individualised (100.0%) and multi-disciplinary (92.8%). Experts recommended a preoperative nutritional (95.7%) and psychological evaluation (85.7%), endoscopy (97.1%), and a contrast series (94.3%). Experts agreed that Roux-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (94.3%), One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) (82.8%), and single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) (71.4%) were acceptable RBS options after gastric banding (84.3%). OAGB (84.3%), bilio-pancreatic diversion/duodenal switch (BPD/DS) (81.4%), and SADI-S (88.5%) were agreed as consensus RBS options after sleeve gastrectomy. lengthening of bilio-pancreatic limb was the only consensus RBS option after RYGB (94.3%) and OAGB (72.8%). CONCLUSION: Experts achieved consensus on a number of aspects of RBS. Though expert opinion can only be regarded as low-quality evidence, the findings of this exercise should help improve the outcomes of RBS while we develop robust evidence to inform future practice.

Low Incidence of Postoperative Leaks When Using Small-Diameter Calibrated Bougies During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is a well-established bariatric procedure. A staple line leak is a recognized complication of LSG. Bougie size has been suggested to impact leak rates. In this study, we evaluate the impact of using 32-34F bougie sizes with LSG on early postoperative outcomes including staple line leaks within our practice. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort analysis of a prospectively maintained database of all LSG procedures performed between January 2012 and December 2018 at a single medical center. Data collected and analyzed included bougie size, postoperative leak rate, need for re-operation, 12-month excess weight loss, and 30-day morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: During the study period, 3153 patients underwent LSG, of whom 1977 (62.7%) were female. Mean age and body mass index (BMI) were 42.9 ± 12.2 years (range 15-76 years) and 42.4 ± 5.2 kg/m2 (range 27-73), respectively. No intraoperative complications or mortality occurred. There was one case of perioperative mortality due to bleeding (0.03%). Early postoperative adverse events occurred in 131 patients (4.1%): 17 leaks (0.5%), 75 bleeds (2.4%), and 39 (1.2%) other. CONCLUSION: The use of smaller-sized (32-34F) bougies had no impact on staple line leaks in the hands of experienced bariatric surgeons at a high-volume center.