The Management of Biliary Disease in Patients with Severe Obesity Undergoing Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery-An International Expert Survey.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to survey international experts in metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) to improve and consolidate the management of biliary disease in patients with severe obesity undergoing MBS. BACKGROUND: Obesity and rapid weight loss after MBS are risk factors for the development of gallstones. Complications, such as cholecystitis, acute cholangitis, and biliary pancreatitis, are potentially life-threatening, and no guidelines for the proper management of gallstone disease exist. METHODS: An international scientific team designed an online confidential questionnaire with 26 multiple-choice questions. The survey was answered by 86 invited experts (from 38 different countries), who participated from August 1, 2023, to September 9, 2023. RESULTS: Two-thirds of experts (67.4%) perform concomitant cholecystectomy in symptomatic gallstones during MBS. Half of experts (50%) would wait 6-12 weeks between both surgeries with an interval approach. Approximately 57% of the experts prescribe ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) prophylactically after MBS, and most recommend a 6-month course. More than the half of the experts (59.3%/53.5%) preferred laparoscopic assisted transgastric ERCP as the approach for treating CBD stones in patients who previously had RYGB/OAGB. CONCLUSION: Concomitant cholecystectomy is preferred by the experts, although evidence in the literature reports an increased complication rate. Prophylactic UDCA should be recommended to every MBS patient, even though the current survey demonstrated that not all experts are recommending it. The preferred approach for treating common bile duct stones is a laparoscopic assisted transgastric ERCP after gastric bypass. The conflicting responses will need more scientific work and clarity in the future.

American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery 2022 estimate of metabolic and bariatric procedures performed in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), despite being the most effective durable treatment for obesity, remains underused as approximately 1% of all qualified patients undergo surgery. The American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery established a Numbers Taskforce to specify the annual rate of obesity treatment interventions utilization and to determine if patients in need are receiving appropriate treatment. OBJECTIVE: To provide the best estimated number of metabolic and bariatric procedures being performed in the United States in 2022. SETTING: United States. METHODS: We reviewed data from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program and National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. In addition, data from industry and state databases were used to estimate activity at non-accredited centers. Data from 2022 were compared mainly with data from the previous 2 years. RESULTS: Compared with 2021, the total number of MBS performed in 2022 increased from approximately 262,893 to 280,000. The sleeve gastrectomy (SG) continues to be the most commonly performed procedure. The gastric bypass procedure trend remained relatively stable. The percentage of revision procedures and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch procedures increased slightly. Intragastric balloon placement increased from the previous year. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty increased in numbers. CONCLUSIONS: There was a 6.5% increase in MBS volume from 2021 to 2022 and a 41% increase from 2020, which demonstrates a recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. SG continues to be the most dominant MBS procedure.

Scientific evidence for the updated guidelines on indications for metabolic and bariatric surgery (IFSO/ASMBS).

The 2022 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) updated the indications for metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), replacing the previous guidelines established by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) over 30 years ago. The evidence supporting these updated guidelines has been strengthened to assist metabolic and bariatric surgeons, nutritionists, and other members of multidisciplinary teams (MDTs), as well as patients. This study aims to assess the level of evidence and the strength of recommendations compared to the previously published criteria.

Scientific Evidence for the Updated Guidelines on Indications for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (IFSO/ASMBS).

The 2022 American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) updated the indications for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (MBS), replacing the previous guidelines established by the NIH over 30 years ago. The evidence supporting these updated guidelines has been strengthened to assist metabolic and bariatric surgeons, nutritionists, and other members of multidisciplinary teams, as well as patients. This study aims to assess the level of evidence and the strength of recommendations compared to the previously published criteria.

Metabolic and Bariatric Surgeon Criteria-An International Experts' Consensus.

PURPOSE: With the global epidemic of obesity, the importance of metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is greater than ever before. Performing these surgeries requires academic training and the completion of a dedicated fellowship training program. This study aimed to develop guidelines based on expert consensus using a modified Delphi method to create the criteria for metabolic and bariatric surgeons that must be mastered before obtaining privileges to perform MBS. METHODS: Eighty-nine recognized MBS surgeons from 42 countries participated in the Modified Delphi consensus to vote on 30 statements in two rounds. An agreement/disagreement among ≥ 70.0% of the experts was regarded to indicate a consensus. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 29 out of 30 statements. Most experts agreed that before getting privileges to perform MBS, surgeons must hold a general surgery degree and complete or have completed a dedicated fellowship training program. The experts agreed that the learning curves for the various operative procedures are approximately 25-50 operations for the LSG, 50-75 for the OAGB, and 75-100 for the RYGB. 93.1% of experts agreed that MBS surgeons should diligently record patients' data in their National or Global database. CONCLUSION: MBS surgeons should have a degree in general surgery and have been enrolled in a dedicated fellowship training program with a structured curriculum. The learning curve of MBS procedures is procedure dependent. MBS surgeons must demonstrate proficiency in managing postoperative complications, collaborate within a multidisciplinary team, commit to a minimum 2-year patient follow-up, and actively engage in national and international MBS societies.

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.

A global survey on the use of the international classification of diseases codes for metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease.

BACKGROUND: With the implementation of the 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) and the publication of the metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) nomenclature in 2020, it is important to establish consensus for the coding of MAFLD in ICD-11. This will inform subsequent revisions of ICD-11. METHODS: Using the Qualtrics XM and WJX platforms, questionnaires were sent online to MAFLD-ICD-11 coding collaborators, authors of papers, and relevant association members. RESULTS: A total of 890 international experts in various fields from 61 countries responded to the survey. We also achieved full coverage of provincial-level administrative regions in China. 77.1% of respondents agreed that MAFLD should be represented in ICD-11 by updating NAFLD, with no significant regional differences (77.3% in Asia and 76.6% in non-Asia, p = 0.819). Over 80% of respondents agreed or somewhat agreed with the need to assign specific codes for progressive stages of MAFLD (i.e. steatohepatitis) (92.2%), MAFLD combined with comorbidities (84.1%), or MAFLD subtypes (i.e., lean, overweight/obese, and diabetic) (86.1%). CONCLUSIONS: This global survey by a collaborative panel of clinical, coding, health management and policy experts, indicates agreement that MAFLD should be coded in ICD-11. The data serves as a foundation for corresponding adjustments in the ICD-11 revision.

Perioperative Interventions to Prevent Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Marginal Ulcers After Bariatric Surgery - an International Experts' Survey.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to survey international experts in metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) to improve and consolidate perioperative interventions to prevent gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and marginal ulcers (MU) after MBS. BACKGROUND: Very important long-term complications after MBS include GERD, Barrett's esophagus, and MU. Prevention might be fundamental to reduce the incidence, severe complications, and the increasing number of revisional bariatric surgeries. METHODS: An international scientific team designed an online confidential questionnaire with 45 multiple-choice questions. The survey was sent to 110 invited experts and 96 of them (from 41 different countries) participated from 21 July 2022 to 4 September 2022. RESULTS: Most experts (≥ 90%) prescribe postoperative acid suppression agents after MBS. Life-long proton pump inhibitors prophylaxis in smokers with avoidance of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are recommended by most of the experts (66%, 73%) after any type of gastric bypass. Two-thirds of experts (69%) perform Helicobacter pylori eradication prior to MBS. Two-thirds of experts (68%) routinely perform EGD and biopsy before MBS. Follow-up esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) and timing threshold for revisional and conversional MBS were variable among experts. CONCLUSION: This expert survey underlines important perioperative interventions that reached a two-thirds consensus among MBS international experts. Variability in follow-up EGD, approach to complication management, and thresholds for revisional and conversional MBS emphasize the need for further researches and consensus guidelines.

American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery 2020 estimate of metabolic and bariatric procedures performed in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), despite being the only effective durable treatment for obesity, remains underused as approximately 1% of all patients who qualify undergo surgery. The American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery created a Numbers Taskforce to specify annual rate of utilization for obesity treatment interventions and to determine if patients in need are receiving appropriate treatment. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to provide the best estimated number of metabolic and bariatric procedures performed in the United States in 2020. SETTING: United States. METHODS: We reviewed data from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP), National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database, and Nationwide Inpatient Sample. In addition, data from industry and state databases were used to estimate activity at nonaccredited centers. Data from 2020 were compared mainly with data from the previous 2 years. RESULTS: Compared with 2019, the total number of MBS performed in 2020 decreased from approximately 256,000 to 199,000. Sleeve gastrectomy continues to be the most common procedure. The gastric bypass procedure trend remained relatively stable, and the gastric band procedure trend continued to decline. The percentage of revision procedures and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch procedures increased slightly. Single-anastomosis duodeno-ileostomy was listed for the first time in 2020. Intragastric balloons placement declined from the previous year. CONCLUSION: There was a 22.5% decrease in MBS volume from 2019 to 2020, which coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic. Sleeve gastrectomy continues to be the dominant procedure, and for the first time, single-anastomosis duodeno-ileostomy is reported in the MBSAQIP database.

Literature review on antiobesity medication use for metabolic and bariatric surgery patients from the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Clinical Issues Committee.

The following literature search is in response to inquiries made to the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) regarding antiobesity medication (AOM) use in patients who are having or have already had metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS). These recommendations are based on current clinical knowledge, expert opinion, and published peer-reviewed scientific evidence available at this time. This paper is not intended to establish a local, regional, or national standard of care. The paper will be revised in the future as additional evidence becomes available.

Periappendicitis: is it a clinical entity?

The aim of this study was to identify clinical parameters that may help distinguish periappendicitis from the more common clinical entity of acute appendicitis. Serosal inflammation of the appendix without mucosal involvement constitutes the condition known as periappendicitis. In most situations this is a sequel of extra-appendicular sepsis and is likely to benefit from treatment targeted to the underlying pathology. But the majority of these cases are initially treated for acute appendicitis as clinical distinction between the two conditions is difficult. In this study some commonly used clinical yardsticks have been analyzed with respect to their value in this subtle diagnosis. We reviewed 231 successive cases clinically diagnosed as acute appendicitis; of these 18 had histologically demonstrated periappendicitis. Eight parameters were studied: age, gender, temperature, white blood cell count, location and duration of pain, associated symptoms, and peritoneal signs. Significant statistical differences were found between the two groups with regard to pain location, pain duration, and the presence of peritoneal signs. It may be possible to suspect periappendicitis preoperatively with meticulous clinical assessment. This may be of value in avoiding missed nonappendicular pathologies.