Assessment of guidelines for bariatric and metabolic surgery: a systematic review and evaluation using appraisal of guidelines for research and evaluation II (AGREE II).

BACKGROUND: In recent years, multiple guidelines on bariatric and metabolic surgery were published, however, their quality remains unknown, leaving providers with uncertainty when using them to make perioperative decisions. This study aims to evaluate the quality of existing guidelines for perioperative bariatric surgery care. METHODS: A comprehensive search of MEDLINE and EMBASE were conducted from January 2010 to October 2022 for bariatric clinical practice guidelines. Guideline evaluation was carried out using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) framework. RESULTS: The initial search yielded 1483 citations, of which, 26 were included in final analysis. The overall median domain scores for guidelines were: (1) scope and purpose: 87.5% (IQR: 57-94%), (2) stakeholder involvement: 49% (IQR: 40-64%), (3) rigor of development: 42.5% (IQR: 22-68%), (4) clarity of presentation: 85% (IQR: 81-90%), (5) applicability: 6% (IQR: 3-16%), (6) editorial independence: 50% (IQR: 48-67%), (7) overall impressions: 48% (IQR: 33-67%). Only six guidelines achieved an overall score >70%. CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery guidelines effectively outlined their aim and presented recommendations. However, many did not adequately seek patient input, state search criteria, use evidence rating tools, and consider resource implications. Future guidelines should reference the AGREE II framework in study design.

Recipient microbiome-related features predicting metabolic improvement following fecal microbiota transplantation in adults with severe obesity and metabolic syndrome: a secondary analysis of a phase 2 clinical trial.

Microbial-based therapeutics in clinical practice are of considerable interest, and a recent study demonstrated fecal microbial transplantation (FMT) followed by dietary fiber supplements improved glucose homeostasis. Previous evidence suggests that donor and recipient compatibility and FMT protocol are key determinants, but little is known about the involvement of specific recipient factors. Using data from our recent randomized placebo-control phase 2 clinical trial in adults with obesity and metabolic syndrome, we grouped participants that received FMT from one of 4 donors with either fiber supplement into HOMA-IR responders (n = 21) and HOMA-IR non-responders (n = 8). We further assessed plasma bile acids using targeted metabolomics and performed subgroup analyzes to evaluate the effects of recipient parameters and gastrointestinal factors on microbiota engraftment and homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA2-IR) response. The baseline fecal microbiota composition at genus level of recipients could predict the improvements in HOMA2-IR at week 6 (ROC-AUC = 0.70). Prevotella was identified as an important predictor, with responders having significantly lower relative abundance than non-responders (p = .02). In addition, recipients displayed a highly individualized degree of microbial engraftment from donors. Compared to the non-responders, the responders had significantly increased bacterial richness (Chao1) after FMT and a more consistent engraftment of donor-specific bacteria ASVs (amplicon sequence variants) such as Faecalibacillus intestinalis (ASV44), Roseburia spp. (ASV103), and Christensenellaceae spp. (ASV140) (p < .05). Microbiota engraftment was strongly associated with recipients' factors at baseline including initial gut microbial diversity, fiber and nutrient intakes, inflammatory markers, and bile acid derivative levels. This study identified that responders to FMT therapy had a higher engraftment rate in the transplantation of specific donor-specific microbes, which were strongly correlated with insulin sensitivity improvements. Further, the recipient baseline gut microbiota and related factors were identified as the determinants for responsiveness to FMT and fiber supplementation. The findings provide a basis for the development of precision microbial therapeutics for the treatment of metabolic syndrome.

Characterization of Early Small Bowel Obstructions Following Elective Bariatric Surgery.

PURPOSE: Small bowel obstruction (SBO) after bariatric surgery is an uncommon but important complication. We sought to characterize bariatric surgery patients who developed SBO, to compare 30-day complications, and to determine the influence of patient and procedure factors on the development of SBO. METHODS AND MATERIALS: All data was extracted from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database using the 2020 operative year. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to determine the influence of patient and operative factors on the development of SBO. RESULTS: Of a total of 142 111 patients, 408 (0.3%) were identified as having developed an SBO. SBO patients were older (45.7 ± 11.5 vs. 43.5 ± 11.9 years; p = 0.0002), of reduced BMI (43.6 ± 6.8 vs. 45.1 ± 7.7; p = 0.0001), and more likely to be of female sex (92.2% vs. 81.1%; p < 0.0001). At 30 days post-operation, serious complications were increased in SBO patients. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) was the largest independent predicator of the development of SBO (OR 11.91; 95% CI 8.92-15.90; p < 0.0001). With regard to patient factors, COPD (OR 2.60; 95% CI 1.54-4.38; p < 0.0001) and prior DVT (OR 2.37; 95% CI 1.49-3.77; p < 0.0001) were found to be independently predictive of the development of SBO. Additionally having a lower BMI and being of female sex were found to be independently predictive. CONCLUSION: SBO occurred in approximately 0.3% of MBSAQIP cases. SBO is associated with serious outcome measures and patients of female sex and reduced index BMI, and those undergoing RYGB may be at an increased risk.

Revisional bariatric surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease: characterizing patient and procedural factors and 30-day outcomes for a retrospective cohort of 4412 patients.

INTRODUCTION: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a well-established potential consequence of bariatric surgery and can require revisional surgery. Our understanding of the population requiring revision is limited. In this study, we aim to characterize patients requiring revisional surgery for GERD to understand their perioperative risks and identify strategies to improve their outcomes. METHODS: Using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) registry, a retrospective cohort of patients who required revisional surgery for GERD in 2020 was identified. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to assess correlations between baseline characteristics and morbidity. RESULTS: 4412 patients required revisional surgery for GERD, encompassing 24% of all conversion procedures. In most cases, patients underwent sleeve gastrectomy (SG) as their original surgery (n = 3535, 80.1%). The revisional surgery for most patients was a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (n = 3722, 84.4%). Major complications occurred in 527 patients (11.9%) and 10 patients (0.23%) died within 30 days of revisional surgery. Major complications included anastomotic leak in 31 patients (0.70%) and gastrointestinal bleeding in 38 patients (0.86%). Multivariable analyses revealed that operative length, pre-operative antacid use, and RYGB were predictors of major complications. CONCLUSION: GERD is the second most common indication for revisional surgery in patients who have undergone bariatric surgery. Patients who underwent SG as their initial procedure were the primary group who required revisional surgery for GERD; most underwent revision via RYGB. Further inquiry is needed to tailor operative approaches and pre-operative optimization for revisional surgery patients.

Optimizing management for early-stage esophageal adenocarcinoma: longitudinal results from a multidisciplinary program.

BACKGROUND: The management of early-stage esophageal cancer is nuanced. A multidisciplinary approach may optimize management through selection of candidates for surgical or endoscopic therapies. The objective of this research was to examine long-term outcomes of patients with early-stage esophageal cancer who undergo treatment with endoscopic resection or surgery. METHODS: Data on patient demographics, co-morbidities, pathology results, OS and RFS were obtained for both the endoscopic resection group and esophagectomy group. Univariate analysis of OS and RFS were conducted using the Kaplan-Meier method with calculation of the log-rank test. Multivariate cox-proportional hazards models were created for OS and RFS using a hypothesis-driven approach. A multivariate logistic regression model was created to identify predictors of esophagectomy among patients undergoing initial endoscopic resection. RESULTS: A total of 111 patients were included. The median OS for the surgery group was 67.0 months compared to 74.0 months in the endoscopic resection group (log-rank p = 0.93). The median RFS for the surgery group was 109.4 months compared to 63.3 months in the endoscopic resection group (log-rank p = 0.0127). On multivariable analysis, patients undergoing endoscopic resection had significantly worse RFS (HR 2.55, 95% CI 1.09-6.00; p = 0.032), but equivalent OS (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.46-2.32; p = 0.941), compared to patients undergoing esophagectomy. High-grade disease (OR 5.43, 95% CI 1.13-26.10; p = 0.035) and submucosal involvement (OR 7.75, 95% CI 1.90-31.40; p = 0.004) were identified as significant predictors of proceeding to esophagectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Through a multidisciplinary approach, patients with early-stage esophageal cancer achieve excellent RFS and OS. Submucosal involvement and high-grade disease place patients at increased risk for local disease recurrence; these patients may undergo endoscopic resection safely if treated with a multidisciplinary approach incorporating endoscopic surveillance and surgical consultation. Further risk-stratification models may enable better patient selection and optimization of long-term outcomes.

Endoscopic plication compared to laparoscopic fundoplication in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic plication offers an alternative to surgical fundoplication for treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluate outcomes following endoscopic plication compared to laparoscopic fundoplication. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted in September 2022. Study followed PRISMA guidelines. Studies comparing endoscopic plication to laparoscopic fundoplication with n > 5 were included. Primary outcome was PPI cessation, with secondary outcomes including complications, procedure duration, length of stay, change in lower esophageal sphincter (LES) tone, and DeMeester score. RESULTS: We reviewed 1544 studies, with five included comparing 105 (46.1%) patients receiving endoscopic plication (ENDO) to 123 (53.9%) undergoing laparoscopic fundoplication (LAP). Average patient age was 47.6 years, with those undergoing plication being younger (46.4 ENDO vs 48.5 LAP). BMI (26.6 kg/m2 ENDO vs 26.2 kg/m2 LAP), and proportion of females (42.9% ENDO vs 37.4% LAP) were similar. Patients undergoing laparoscopic procedures had worse baseline LES pressure (12.8 mmHg ENDO vs 9.0 mmHg LAP) and lower preoperative DeMeester scores (34.6 ENDO vs. 34.1 LAP). The primary outcome demonstrated that 89.2% of patients undergoing laparoscopic fundoplication discontinued PPI compared to 69.4% for those receiving plication. Meta-analysis revealed that plication had significantly reduced odds of PPI discontinuation (OR 0.27, studies = 3, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.64, P = 0.003, I2 = 0%). Secondary outcomes demonstrated that odds of complications (OR 1.46, studies = 4, 95% CI 0.34 to 6.32, P = 0.62, I2 = 0%), length of stay (MD - 1.37, studies = 3, 95% CI - 3.48 to 0.73, P = 0.20, I2 = 94%), and procedure durations were similar (MD 0.78, studies = 3, 95% CI - 39.70 to 41.26, P = 0.97, I2 = 98%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first meta-analysis comparing endoscopic plication to laparoscopic fundoplication. Results demonstrate greater likelihood of PPI discontinuation with laparoscopic fundoplication with similar post-procedural risk.

MBSAQIP risk calculator use in bariatric surgery is associated with a reduction in serious complications: a retrospective analysis of 210,710 patients.

BACKGROUND: The Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Bariatric Surgical Risk/Benefit Calculator was developed to provide patient-specific information to assist surgical decision-making. To date, no study has characterized which patients are being evaluated with this tool. OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize the use and impact of the MBSAQIP calculator. SETTING: MBSAQIP collects data from 955 centers in North America. METHODS: The 2021 MBSAQIP database was evaluated for the use of the calculator on preoperative counseling for patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Patient characteristics, operative techniques, and outcomes were compared with bivariate analysis. Multivariable modeling evaluated factors including use of the calculator independently associated with serious complications and mortality. RESULTS: Our study included 210,710 patients, 35,158 (16.7%) of whom were evaluated using the calculator. Patients with whom the calculator was used preoperatively were older (43.8 ± 11.6 yr versus 43.6 ± 11.7 yr; P < .001) and were more likely to have insulin-dependent diabetes, hypertension, gastroesophageal reflux disease, renal insufficiency, and sleep apnea. More patients underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in the calculator cohort compared with the cohort that did not use the calculator (29.6% versus 28.6%; P < .003). The rate of serious complication was significantly less in the calculator cohort (3.1% versus 3.4%; P < .030). Multivariable modeling evaluating serious complications showed that use of the calculator was independently associated with reduced risk of serious complications (odds ratio .87, CI .82-.93, P < .001) but was not associated with mortality. CONCLUSION: The use of the risk calculator may help to reduce the incidence of complications by opening a dialogue between healthcare professionals and patients, setting realistic expectations, and identifying modifiable risk factors.

A 5-year characterization of trends and outcomes in elderly patients undergoing elective bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: The North American population with severe obesity is aging and with that so will the number of elderly patients (≥ 65 years) meeting indications for metabolic surgery. Trends in bariatric delivery in this population are poorly characterized and outcomes remain conflicting, limiting potential uptake and delivery. METHODS: The MBSAQIP database was used to identify elderly patients (≥ 65 years) undergoing elective bariatric surgery from 2015 to 2019. Our objectives were to analyze their unique characteristics, surgical operative trends, and outcomes by comparing to a non-elderly cohort. Multivariable logistic regression identified independent predictors of serious complications and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: There was a total of 751,607 patients, 5.3% (n = 39,854) were elderly. Mean ages were 43 ± 11 years (non-elderly) versus 68 ± 3 years (elderly). Elderly patients were less likely to be female (70.7% elderly; 80.1% non-elderly) and had lower BMI (43.17 ± 6.64 kg/m2 elderly; 45.42 ± 7.87 kg/m2 non-elderly). They had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, lower functional status, more insulin dependent diabetes, and hypertension, among other comorbidities. There were no clinically significant differences between the most frequently performed bariatric surgery. Sleeve gastrectomy remained the most common (73.7% non-elderly; 72.3% elderly); however, operative time was longer among the elderly. Functional status was most predictive for both serious complications (OR 1.72; CI 1.53-1.94) and mortality (OR 2.92; CI 1.98-4.31). Surgery among elderly patients was associated with poorer 30-day postoperative outcomes across all categories and was independently associated with serious complications (OR 1.23; CI 1.17-1.30, p < 0.001; AR 4.64%) and 30-day mortality (OR 2.49; CI 2.00-3.11, p < 0.001; AR 0.27%), after adjusting for comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for comorbidities, functional status remains the most predictive factor for poor outcomes; however, elderly patients have increased 30-day odds of serious complications and 30-day mortality, suggesting a need to tailor our approach to these individuals that carry a unique operative risk.

Characteristics and outcomes for patients undergoing revisional bariatric surgery due to persistent obesity: a retrospective cohort study of 10,589 patients.

BACKGROUND: Revisional bariatric surgery in an option for patients who experience weight regain or inadequate weight loss after primary elective bariatric procedures. However, there is conflicting data on safety outcomes of revisional procedures. We aim to characterize patient demographics, procedure type, and safety outcomes for those undergoing revisional compared to initial bariatric interventions to guide management of these patients. METHODS: The 2020 Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) registry was analyzed, comparing primary elective to revisional bariatric procedures for inadequate weight loss. Bivariate analysis was performed to determine between group differences. Multivariable logistic regression determined factors associated with serious complications or mortality. RESULTS: We evaluated 158,424 patients, including 10,589 (6.7%) revisional procedures. Patients undergoing revisional procedures were more like to be female (85.5% revisional vs. 81.0% initial; p < 0.001), had lower body mass index (43.6 ± 7.8 kg/m2 revisional vs. 45.2 ± 7.8 kg/m2 initial; p < 0.001), and less metabolic comorbidities than patients undergoing primary bariatric surgery. The most common revisional procedures were Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (48.4%) and sleeve gastrectomy (32.5%). Revisional procedures had longer operative duration compared to primary procedures. Patients undergoing revisional procedures were more likely to experience readmission to hospital (4.8% revisional vs. 2.9% initial; p < 0.001) and require reoperation (2.4% revisional vs. 1.0% initial; p < 0.001) within 30 days of the procedure. Revisional procedures were independently associated with increased serious complications (OR 1.49, CI 1.36-1.64, p < 0.001) but were not a significant predictor of 30-day mortality (OR 0.74, CI 0.36-1.50, p = 0.409). CONCLUSIONS: In comparison to primary bariatric surgery, patients undergoing revisional procedures have less metabolic comorbidities. Revisional procedures have worse perioperative outcomes and are independently associated with serious complications. These data help to contextualize outcomes for patients undergoing revisional bariatric procedures and to inform decision making in these patients.

Substance abuse screening prior to bariatric surgery: an MBSAQIP cohort study evaluating frequency and factors associated with screening.

INTRODUCTION: Patients undergoing bariatric surgery experience substantial risk of pre- and postoperative substance use. Identifying patients at risk for substance use using validated screening tools remains crucial to risk mitigation and operative planning. We aimed to evaluate proportion of bariatric surgery patients undergoing specific substance abuse screening, factors associated with screening and the relationship between screening and postoperative complications. METHODS: The 2021 MBSAQIP database was analyzed. Bivariate analysis was performed to compare factors between groups who were screened for substance abuse versus non-screened, and to compare frequency of outcomes. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the independent effect of substance screening on serious complications and mortality, and to assess factors associated with substance abuse screening. RESULTS: A total of 210, 804 patients were included, with 133,313 (63.2%) undergoing screening and 77,491 (36.8%) who did not. Those who underwent screening were more likely to be white, non-smoker, and have more comorbidities. The frequency of complications was not significant (e.g., reintervention, reoperation, leak) or similar (readmission rates 3.3% vs. 3.5%) between screened and not screened groups. On multivariate analysis, lower substance abuse screening was not associated with 30-day death or 30-day serious complication. Factors that significantly affected likelihood of being screened for substance abuse included being black (aOR 0.87, p < 0.001) or other race (aOR 0.82, p < 0.001) compared to white, being a smoker (aOR 0.93, p < 0.001), having a conversion or revision procedure (aOR 0.78, p < 0.001; aOR 0.64, p < 0.001, respectively), having more comorbidities and undergoing Roux-en-y gastric bypass (aOR 1.13, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There remains significant inequities in substance abuse screening in bariatric surgery patients regarding demographic, clinical, and operative factors. These factors include race, smoking status, presence of preoperative comorbidities, and procedure type. Further awareness and initiatives highlighting the importance of identifying at risk patients is critical for ongoing outcome improvement.

Conversion of Sleeve Gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Indications, Prevalence, and Safety.

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) frequently requires conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) due to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or weight recurrence. Current evidence evaluating the safety of conversion from SG to RYGB and its indications is limited to single centers. METHODS: The objective was to determine the rate of serious complications and mortality of conversion of SG to RYGB (SG-RYGB) compared to primary RYGB (P-RYGB). This was a retrospective analysis of the MBSAQIP database which includes 30-day outcomes. Individuals undergoing P-RYGB or SG-RYGB were included. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine if revisional surgery was an independent predictor of serious complications or mortality. RESULTS: In 2020 and 2021, 84,543 (86.3%) patients underwent P-RYGB and 13,432 (13.7%) underwent SG-RYGB. SG-RYGB cohort had lower body mass index, lower rates of diabetes and hypertension, and higher rates of GERD. GERD was the most common indication for revision (55.3%) followed by weight regain (24.4%) and inadequate weight loss (12.7%). SG-RYGB had longer operative times (145 vs. 125 min, p < 0.001) and a higher rate of serious complications (7.2 vs. 5.0%, p < 0.001). This included higher rates of anastomotic leak (0.5 vs. 0.4%, p = 0.002), bleeding (2.0 vs. 1.6%, p < 0.001), and reoperation (3.0 vs. 1.9%, p < 0.001) but not death (0.1 vs. 0.1%, p = 0.385). On multivariable analysis, SG-RYGB was independently predictive of serious complications (OR 1.21, 95%CI 1.12 to 1.32, p < 0.001) but not mortality (p = 0.316). CONCLUSIONS: While SG-RYGB is safe with a low complication rate, SG-RYGB was associated with a higher rate of serious complications compared to P-RYGB.

Does ASA classification effectively risk stratify patients undergoing bariatric surgery: a MBSAQIP retrospective cohort of 138,612 of patients.

INTRODUCTION: It is important to appropriately risk stratify bariatric surgery patients, as these patients often have obesity-related comorbidities which can increase postoperative complication risk but also benefit the most from bariatric surgery. We aimed to evaluate the utility of risk stratification using ASA class for bariatric surgery patients and assessed predictive factors of postoperative complications. METHODS: The 2020 MBSAQIP database was analyzed, and an ASA-deemed high-risk cohort (class IV) and normal-risk (ASA class II and III) cohort were compared. Univariate analysis was performed to characterize differences between cohorts and to compare complication rates. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine factors associated with increased odds of postoperative complications. RESULTS: We evaluated 138 612 patients with 5380 (3.9%) considered high-risk and 133 232 (96.1%) normal-risk. High-risk patients were more likely to be older (46.2 ± 12.0vs.43.4 ± 11.9, p < 0.001), male (30.9%vs.18.4%, p < 0.001), have higher BMI (51.4 ± 10.2vs.44.9 ± 7.4, p < 0.001), and have more comorbidities. High-risk patients were more likely to have increased 30-day serious complications (4.5%vs.2.8%, p < 0.001) and death (0.2%vs.0.1%, p = 0.001) but not anastomotic leak (0.2%vs.0.2%, p = 0.983). Multivariate models showed ASA class IV patients were at higher odds for any serious complication by 30 days (aOR 1.36, 95%CI 1.18-1.56, p < 0.001) but not for death (aOR 1.04, 95%CI 0.49-2.21, p = 0.921). The factor independently associated with the highest odds of complication in both models was functional status preoperatively (partially dependent aOR 2.06, 95%CI 1.56-2.72, p < 0.001; fully dependent aOR 3.19, 95%CI 1.10-9.28, p = 0.033 for any serious complication; partially dependent aOR 5.08, 95%CI 2.16-12.00, p < 0.001 for death). CONCLUSIONS: While elevated ASA class correlates with increased serious complications, pre-operative functional status appears to have a much greater contribution to odds of serious complications and mortality. These findings question the utility of using ASA to risk stratify patients peri-operatively and provides evidence for using a simpler and more practical functional status approach.

Role of Tranexamic Acid (TXA) in Preventing Bleeding Following Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tranexamic acid (TXA) has drawn growing interest over the last decade for its benefit in optimizing post-operative bleeding, yet its role in bariatric surgery is poorly understood. METHODS: The medical librarian developed and executed comprehensive searches on September 28, 2022. The population of interest included adults who underwent elective bariatric surgery. The intervention was tranexamic acid administration while the comparison was placebo or standard peri-operative therapy. The primary outcome of interest was post-operative bleeding which was defined a priori. RESULTS: A total of four studies were identified comprising of 475 patients. Of those, 207 (50%) received TXA at induction and all underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). The majority of patients were female (n = 343, 80.7%) with ages ranging from 17 to 70 years of age and mean BMIs ranging from 37 to 56 kg/m2. Post-operative bleeding after LSG ranged from 0 to 28% depending on bleed definition and TXA administration with no differences in venous thromboembolic events or mortality between groups. Meta-analysis of post-operative bleeding demonstrated a statistically significant benefit with TXA administration (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.23-0.70; p = 0.001) for patients undergoing elective LSG. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous tranexamic acid at the time of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is associated with a significant reduction of post-operative bleeding with no observed differences in thromboembolic events or mortality. Further high-quality studies are needed to better delineate the ideal bariatric population to receives TXA in addition to the optimal timing, dose, and duration of TXA therapy.

Post-Operative but Not Pre-Operative COVID-19 Predicts Serious Complications and Mortality Following Elective Bariatric Surgery.

PURPOSE: We sought to characterize the prevalence and subsequent impact of pre- and post-operative COVID-19 diagnosis on bariatric surgery outcomes. COVID-19 has transformed surgical delivery, yet little is known regarding its implications for bariatric surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Metabolic and Bariatric Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database was evaluated with three cohorts described: those diagnosed with COVID-19 pre-operatively (PRE), post-operatively (POST), and those without a peri-operative COVID-19 (NO) diagnosis. Pre-operative COVID-19 was defined as COVID-19 within 14 days prior to the primary procedure while post-operative COVID-19 infection was defined as COVID-19 within 30 days after the primary procedure. RESULTS: A total of 176,738 patients were identified, of which 174,122 (98.5%) had no perioperative COVID-19, 1364 (0.8%) had pre-operative COVID-19, and 1252 (0.7%) had post-operative COVID-19. Patients who were diagnosed with COVID-19 post-operatively were younger than other groups (43.0 ± 11.6 years NO vs 43.1 ± 11.6 years PRE vs 41.5 ± 10.7 years POST; p < 0.001). Pre-operative COVID-19 was not associated with serious complications or mortality after adjusting for comorbidities. Post-operative COVID-19, however, was among the greatest independent predictors of serious complications (OR 3.5; 95% CI 2.8-4.2; p < 0.0001) and mortality (OR 5.1; 95% CI 1.8-14.1; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Pre-operative COVID-19 within 14 days of surgery was not significantly associated with either serious complications or mortality. This work provides evidence that a more liberal strategy which employs early surgery after COVID-19 infection is safe as we aim to reduce the current bariatric surgery case backlog.

Asian race is not associated with increased 30-day serious complications or mortality: a MBSAQIP analysis of 594,837 patients.

INTRODUCTION: With expansion of bariatric surgery indications to include Asian patients with diabetes and body mass index (BMI) ≥ 27.5, or BMI ≥ 32.5, it is important to characterize Asian patient population undergoing bariatric surgery and assess their postoperative outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed the 2015-2019 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. All patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) who self-reported as Asian or White race were included. The primary outcomes were to characterize the Asian race population in North American and to identify if Asian race was associated with serious complications or mortality at 30 days. RESULTS: Overall, 594,837 patients met inclusion, with 4229 self-reporting Asian racial status. Patients of Asian race were younger (41.8 vs 45.5 years, p < 0.001) and had a lower BMI (42.8 vs 44.7 kg/m2 p < 0.001) than White patients. They were also more likely to have insulin dependent diabetes (10.9% vs 8.2%, p < 0.001), have received prior cardiac surgery (10.0% vs 1.2% p < 0.001), and suffer from renal insufficiency (1.0% vs 0.5%, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences between rates of RYGB (28.3% vs 28.9%, p = 0.4) and mean operative duration (87.7 vs 87.5 min, p = 0.7). Additionally, there were no differences in 30 day outcomes including leak (0.5% vs 0.5%, p = 0.625), bleeding (1.2% vs 1.0%, p = 0.1), serious complications (3.4% vs 3.5%, p = 0.6), or mortality (0.1% vs 0.1%, p = 0.7) and after confounder control, Asian race was not independently associated with serious complications (OR 1.0, CI 0.9-1.2, p = 0.7), or mortality (OR 1.1, CI 0.3-3.3, p = 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the increased metabolic burden of Asian patients, no differences in 30-day outcomes compared to White patients occurs. This data supports evidence suggesting these patients may safely undergo bariatric surgery independent of their increased metabolic burden.

New persistent opioid use after bariatric surgery: a systematic review and pooled proportion meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Increasing evidence suggests surgical patients are at risk for developing new, persistent opioid use (NPOU) following surgery. This risk may be heightened for patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Few studies have evaluated this important long-term outcome and little is known about the rate of NPOU, or factors associated with NPOU for bariatric surgery patients. METHODS AND PROCEDURE: We conducted a systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases in August 2021. Studies were reviewed and data extracted independently by two reviewers following MOOSE guidelines. Studies evaluating bariatric surgery patients reporting NPOU, defined as new opioid use > 90 days after surgery, were included. Abstracts, non-English, animal, n < 5, and pediatric studies were excluded. Primary outcome was NPOU prevalence, and secondary outcomes were patient and surgical factors associated with NPOU. Factors associated with NPOU are reported from findings of individual studies; meta-analysis could not be completed due to heterogeneity of reporting. RESULTS: We retrieved a total of 2113 studies with 8 meeting inclusion criteria. In studies reporting NPOU rates (n = 4 studies), pooled prevalence was 6.0% (95% CI 4.0-7.0%). Patient characteristics reported by studies to be associated with NPOU included prior substance use (tobacco, alcohol, other prescription analgesics), preoperative mental health disorder (anxiety, mood disorders, eating disorders), and public health insurance. Surgical factors associated with NPOU included severe post-operative complications and in-hospital opioid use (peri- or post operatively). CONCLUSIONS: NPOU is an uncommon but important complication following bariatric surgery, with patient factors including prior substance abuse, mental health disorders, and use of public health insurance placing patients at increased risk, and surgical factors being complications and peri-operative opioid use. Studies evaluating techniques to reduce NPOU in these high-risk populations are needed.

Approaches to addressing the rise in obesity levels.

Levels of obesity and overweight are increasing globally, with affected individuals often experiencing health issues and reduced quality of life. The pathogenesis of obesity is complex and multifactorial, and effective solutions have been elusive. In this Viewpoint, experts in the fields of medical therapy, adipocyte biology, exercise and muscle, bariatric surgery, genetics, and public health give their perspectives on current and future progress in addressing the rising prevalence of obesity.

Characterization of Pre- and Postpandemic 30-Day Follow-Up After Elective Bariatric Surgery: a Retrospective MBSAQIP Analysis of 834,646 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on rates of early postoperative follow-up after bariatric surgery are poorly understood. Our study characterizes 30-day follow-up after bariatric surgery prior to COVID-19 (years 2015-2019) and during the pandemic of COVID-19 (year 2020) and evaluates general predictive factors of short-term follow-up. METHODS: Data was extracted from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) data registry from 2015 to 2020. Cohorts were divided into pre-pandemic and pandemic years and patients with and without 30-day follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify general factors independently predictive of 30-day follow-up. The primary aim was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on short-term 30-day follow-up adherence. A secondary outcome was to characterize general short-term postoperative 30-day follow-up associated with elective bariatric surgery and identify independent predictors of 30-day follow-up among bariatric surgery patients using multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 834,646 patients were identified. Follow-up rates significantly increased in the COVID era in 2020 (p < 0.0001). Patients who achieved 30-day follow-up were older and had an increased burden of medical comorbidities, including non-insulin and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, hypertension, dyslipidemia, as well as increased BMI compared to patients lacking follow-up. The cohort with successful 30-day follow-up was more likely to receive gastric bypass and had increased rates of metabolic comorbidities. After adjusting for comorbidities, the greatest independent predictors of follow-up were the 2020 COVID-19 era year, Asian race, black race, and gastroesophageal reflux disease. CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for comorbidities, the 2020 COVID-19 era year was one of the greatest predictors of follow-up after bariatric surgery. Postoperative follow-up rates after elective bariatric surgery are excellent at > 95% and increased during the 2020 COVID-19 era year. Several independent predictors of follow-up were identified which may help in development of strategies aimed to mitigate lack of postoperative follow-up.

Predicting serious complications following bariatric surgery in geriatric patients: development of the GeriBari scoring tool using the MBSAQIP database.

BACKGROUND: Geriatric patients have a greater risk of complications after bariatric surgery. The objective of this study was to develop a tool to predict serious complications in geriatric patients after minimally invasive bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVES: To develop a predictive model, GeriBari, for serious complications in geriatric patients after bariatric surgery. SETTING: Multiple accredited bariatric surgery centers in the United States and Canada. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database, which collects 30-day bariatric surgery outcomes from 868 accredited centers. Geriatric patients defined as those ≥65 years old who underwent primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) were included. Characteristics associated with serious complications were identified using univariate and multivariable analyses. A predictive model, GeriBari, was derived using a forward selection algorithm from operative years 2015, 2017, and 2019. GeriBari's robustness was tested against a validation cohort of subjects from operative years 2016 and 2018. RESULTS: A total of 40,199 geriatric patients underwent LRYGB (27.7%) or LSG (72.3%). Overall, 1866 (4.6%) experienced a complication, which included bleeding (1.6%), reoperation (1.6%), reintervention (1.3%), unplanned intubation (.4%), and pneumonia (.4%). Mortality was higher in the geriatric patients than that in younger patients (.27% versus .08%). GeriBari consists of 12 factors that predicted serious complications and stratified individuals into high- (>6%) and low-risk (<6%) groups. This tool accurately predicted events in the validation cohort with sensitivity of 46.0% and specificity of 100%. CONCLUSIONS: GeriBari enables preoperative risk stratification for 30-day serious complications in geriatric patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Stratifying low- and high-risk geriatric patients for adverse events allows for informed clinical decision-making prior to bariatric surgery.