Weight Nadir and Long-Term Weight Outcomes After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy in a Diverse Cohort of Adolescents and Young Adults.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is currently the most common bariatric procedure performed in adolescents and young adults in the United States (USA), but there are limited data available on long-term postoperative weight outcomes in these patients. This single-institution US study follows longitudinal weight data in a diverse group of patients undergoing LSG at age 25 years or younger. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed records of all patients 25 years or younger who underwent LSG at our institution between 2013 and 2020. All weight data documented in the medical record through January 2023 was included. We calculated weight change postoperatively as percent total weight loss (%TWL) relative to preoperative weight. RESULTS: One hundred forty-one patients underwent LSG, at a mean age of 23.1 years. Within this cohort, 56.1% identified as non-Hispanic Black or Hispanic, and 39.7% had private health insurance. The mean %TWL at weight nadir was 28.5% at a mean of 1.35 years postoperatively. The mean long-term %TWL (in patients with ≥ 4 years of follow-up) was 11.8% at a mean of 5.6 years postoperatively, with 43 of the 84 patients with long-term weight data (51%) within 10% of their preoperative weight at most recent follow-up. CONCLUSION: Adolescents and young adults undergoing LSG at our institution had weight nadir comparable to published results during the first 1 to 2 years postoperatively, but the majority developed significant weight recurrence over the ensuing years. Our findings highlight the need for adjuvant weight loss strategies to improve the durability of weight outcomes after LSG in this population.

Collateral Benefit of Systematic Improvement in Bariatric Surgery Outcomes Following a Single Quality Improvement Project for Bleeding.

The study's aim was not only to use quality improvement system techniques to improve patient care specifically for bleeding but also to track other adverse outcomes. Key drivers were identified and mapped to interventions, namely venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, root cause analysis, indications conference, and operative technique standardization. Bleeding was reduced by 88%, and overall postoperative complications also fell by 63%. A targeted quality improvement project not only was effective in improving outcomes for the specific aim of bleeding but also resulted in improvement for other patient outcomes.

Outcomes of SADI and OAGB Compared to RYGB from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Quality Improvement Program: The North American Experience.

BACKGROUND: Rapid adoption of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in the last decade aptly reflects the desire of patients and surgeons for alternatives to RYGB and DS. While SG provides good outcomes, other options that address specific patient needs are warranted. Recently approved by ASMBS, SADI, and OAGB have garnered increasing interest due to their single anastomosis technique. METHODS: Using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Quality Improvement Program database, we examined laparoscopic and robotic cases from 2018 to 2021 to understand the percentage of primary bariatric surgery cases that are SADI and OAGB. We used coarsened exact matching to match patients who underwent SADI or OAGB to patients who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). We examined outcomes of matched patients using logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 667,979 patients that underwent bariatric-metabolic surgery, 1326 (0.2%) underwent SADI, and 2541 (0.4%) underwent OAGB. SADI was not identified in the database until 2020. In 2020, there were 487 SADI procedures compared to 839 in 2021. From 2018 to 2021, OAGBs went from 149 to 940. Compared with RYGB, SADI was associated with higher rates of anastomotic or staple line leak (OR 2.21 (95% CI 1.08-4.53)) and sepsis (OR 3.62 (95% CI 1.62-8.12)). Compared with RYGB, OAGB was associated with lower rates of gastrointestinal bleeding (OR 0.29 (95% CI 0.12-0.71)) and bowel obstruction (OR 0.10 (95% CI 0.02-0.39)). Of note, there were no differences between these procedures and RYGB for 30-day mortality. CONCLUSION: More SADIs and OAGBs are being performed. However, there were higher complication rates associated with the SADI procedure. Further studies will be needed to better understand the key drivers for these outcomes.

The Degree of Preoperative Hypoalbuminemia Is Associated with Risk of Postoperative Complications in Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND: The incidence and impact of hypoalbuminemia in bariatric surgery patients is poorly characterized. We describe its distribution in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (VSG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) patients undergoing primary or revision surgeries and assess its impact on postoperative complications. METHODS: The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Quality Improvement Program Database (2015 to 2021) was analyzed. Hypoalbuminemia was defined as Severe (< 3 g/dL), Moderate (3 ≤ 3.5 g/dL), Mild (3.5 ≤ 4 g/dL), or Normal (≥ 4 g/dL). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to calculate odds ratios of postoperative complications compared to those with Normal albumin after controlling for procedure, age, gender, race, body mass index, functional status, American Society of Anesthesia class, and operative length. RESULTS: A total of 817,310 patients undergoing Primary surgery and 69,938 patients undergoing Revision/Conversion ("Revision") surgery were analyzed. The prevalence of hypoalbuminemia was as follows (Primary, Revision): Severe, 0.3%, 0.6%; Moderate, 5.2%, 6.5%; Mild, 28.3%, 31.4%; Normal, 66.2%, 61.4%. Primary and Revision patients with hypoalbuminemia had a significantly higher prevalence (p < 0.01) of several co-morbidities, including hypertension and insulin-dependent diabetes. Any degree of hypoalbuminemia increased the odds ratio of several complications in Primary and Revision patients, including readmission, intervention, and reoperation. In Primary patients, all levels of hypoalbuminemia also increased the odds ratio of unplanned intubation, intensive care unit admission, and venous thromboembolism requiring therapy. CONCLUSION: Over 30% of patients present with hypoalbuminemia. Even mild hypoalbuminemia was associated with an increased rate of several complications including readmission, intervention, and reoperation. Ensuring nutritional optimization, especially prior to revision surgery, may improve outcomes in this challenging population.

A qualitative analysis describing attrition from bariatric surgery to identify strategies for improving retention in patients who desire treatment.

BACKGROUND: Among patients who express interest in bariatric surgery, dropout rates from bariatric surgery programs are reported as high as 60%. There is a lack of understanding how we can better support patients to obtain treatment of this serious chronic disease. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with individuals who dropped out of bariatric surgery programs from three clinical sites were conducted. Transcripts were iteratively analyzed to understand patterns clustering around codes. We mapped these codes to domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) which will serve as the basis of future theory-based interventions. RESULTS: Twenty patients who self-identified as 60% female and 85% as non-Hispanic White were included. The results clustered around codes of "perceptions of bariatric surgery," "reasons for not undergoing surgery," and "factors for re-considering surgery." Major drivers of attrition were burden of pre-operative workup requirements, stigma against bariatric surgery, fear of surgery, and anticipated regret. The number and time for requirements led patients to lose their initial optimism about improving health. Perceptions regarding being seen as weak for choosing bariatric surgery, fear of surgery itself, and possible regret over surgery grew as time passed. These drivers mapped to four TDF domains: environmental context and resources, social role and identity, emotion, and beliefs about consequences, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study uses the TDF to identify areas of greatest concern for patients to be used for intervention design. This is the first step in understanding how we best support patients who express interest in bariatric surgery achieve their goals and live healthier lives.

Financial Incentives to Improve Patient Follow-up and Weight Loss After Bariatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To examine effects of a financial incentives program on follow-up and weight loss after bariatric surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Consistent follow-up may improve weight loss and other health outcomes after bariatric surgery. Yet, rates of follow-up after surgery are often low. METHODS: Patients from 3 practices within a statewide collaborative were invited to participate in a 6-month financial incentives program. Participants received incentives for attending postoperative appointments at 1, 3, and 6 months which doubled when participants weighed less than their prior visit. Participants were matched with contemporary patients from control practices by demographics, starting body mass index and weight, surgery date, and procedure. Preintervention estimates used matched historic patients from the same program and control practices with the criteria listed above. Patients between the 2 historic groups were additionally matched on surgery date to ensure balance on matched variables. We conducted differ-ence-in-differences analyses to examine incentives program effects. Follow-up attendance and percent excess weight loss were measured postoperative months 1, 3, 6, and 12. RESULTS: One hundred ten program participants from January 1, 2018 to July 31, 2019 were matched to 203 historic program practice patients (November 20 to December 27, 2017). The control group had 273 preinter-vention patients and 327 postintervention patients. In difference-in-differ-ences analyses, the intervention increased follow-up rates at 1 month (+14.8%, P <0.0001), 3months (+29.4%, P <0.0001), and 6 months (+16.4%, P <0.0001), but not at 12 months. There were no statistically significant differences in excess weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: A financial incentives program significantly increased follow-up after bariatric surgery for up to 6 months, but did not increase weight loss. Our study supports use of incentivized approaches as one way to improve postoperative follow-up, but may not translate into greater weight loss without additional supports.

Out-of-pocket Costs for Commercially-insured Patients in the Years Following Bariatric Surgery: Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.

OBJECTIVE: To compare out-of-pocket (OOP) costs for patients up to 3 years after bariatric surgery in a large, commercially-insured population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: More information on OOP costs following bariatric surgery may affect patients' procedure choice. METHODS: Retrospective study using the IBM MarketScan commercial claims database, representing patients nationally who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2017. We compared total OOP costs after the surgical episode between the 2 procedures using difference-in-differences analysis adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, operative year, and insurance type. RESULTS: Of 63,674 patients, 64% underwent SG and 36% underwent RYGB. Adjusted OOP costs after SG were $1083, $1236, and $1266 postoperative years 1, 2, and 3. For RYGB, adjusted OOP costs were $1228, $1377, and $1369. In our primary analysis, SG OOP costs were $122 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -$155 to -$90) less than RYGB year 1. This difference remained consistent at -$119 (95%CI: -$158 to -$79) year 2 and -$80 (95%CI: -$127 to -$35) year 3. These amounts were equivalent to relative differences of -7%, -7%, and -5% years 1, 2, and 3. Plan features contributing the most to differences were co-insurance years 1, 2, and 3.The largest clinical contributors to differences were endoscopy and outpatient care year 1, outpatient care year 2, and emergency department use year 3. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first to examine the association between bariatric surgery procedure and OOP costs. Differences between procedures were approximately $100 per year which may be an important factor for some patients deciding whether to pursue SG or gastric bypass.

Births After Bariatric Surgery in the United States: Incidence, Obstetric Outcomes, and Reinterventions.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize incidence and outcomes for bariatric surgery patients who give birth. BACKGROUND: Patients of childbearing age comprise 65% of bariatric surgery patients in the United States, yet data on how often patients conceive and obstetric outcomes are limited. METHODS: Using the IBM MarketScan database, we performed a retrospective cohort study of female patients ages 18 to 52 undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass from 2011 to 2017. We determined the incidence of births in the first 2 years after bariatric surgery using Kaplan-Meier estimates. We then restricted the cohort to those with a full 2-year follow-up to examine obstetric outcomes and bariatric-related reinterventions. We reported event rates of adverse obstetric outcomes and delivery type. Adverse obstetric outcomes include pregnancy complications, severe maternal morbidity, and delivery complications. We performed multivariable logistic regression to examine associations between birth and risk of reinterventions. RESULTS: Of 69,503 patients who underwent bariatric surgery, 1464 gave birth. The incidence rate was 2.5 births per 100 patients in the 2 years after surgery. Overall, 85% of births occurred within 21 months after surgery. For 38,922 patients with full 2-year follow-up, adverse obstetric event rates were 4.5% for gestational diabetes and 14.2% for hypertensive disorders. In all, 48.5% were first-time cesarean deliveries. Almost all reinterventions during pregnancy were biliary. Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed no association between postbariatric birth and reintervention rate (odds ratio: 0.93, 95% confidence interval: 0.78-1.12). CONCLUSIONS: In this first national US cohort, we find giving birth was common in the first 2 years after bariatric surgery and was not associated with an increased risk of reinterventions. Clinicians should consider shifting the dialogue surrounding pregnancy after surgery to shared decision-making with maternal safety as one component.

The role of preoperative toxicology screening in patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Some programs and insurers may require patients to undergo toxicology screening despite lack of evidence that this practice affects postoperative outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To understand the prevalence of screening positive on toxicology testing in the bariatric surgical population and to examine the association between testing positive and important surgical outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass from an academic health system from 2017-2020. We described the rate of preoperative toxicology positivity as determined by serum and urine testing. We examined the association between toxicology positivity and outcomes of preoperative length, 30-day complications (bleeding, venous thromboembolism, leak, wound infection, pneumonia, urinary tract infection, and myocardial infarction), readmissions, and 1-year weight loss using chi-square and t-test analysis. RESULTS: Of 1057 patients, there were 134 patients (12.7%) who had positive toxicology testing. Of these, 37 (28%) were positive for opiates and 21 (16%) were positive for cotinine. Mean preoperative length was 381.8 days (standard deviation [SD], 222.5) for patients with positive testing versus 287.8 days (SD, 151.5; P = 1.00) for negative testing. Toxicology positivity was not associated with readmissions (5.2% versus 4.3%, X2 = 0.22; P = .64). The loss to follow-up at 1 year was 32.5%. There was no association with 1-year mean change in body mass index (mean of loss 12.23kg/m2 [SD, 5.61]) versus mean of loss 12.74 (SD, 6.44; P = .20)]. CONCLUSIONS: Our study is the first to describe preoperative toxicology positivity rates. We found no association between toxicology positivity and preoperative length, readmissions, or weight loss. Given its lack of impact on outcomes, toxicology testing prior to bariatric surgery may be an unnecessary burden on patients and healthcare, with regard to cost and wait times.

Variation in pre-operative insurance requirements for bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: For patients who wish to undergo bariatric surgery, variation in pre-operative insurance requirements may represent inequity across insurance plan types. We conducted a cross-sectional assessment of the variation in pre-operative insurance requirements. METHODS: Original insurance policy documents for pre-operative requirements were obtained from bariatric surgery programs across the entire USA and online insurance portals. Insurance programs analyzed include commercial, Medicaid, and Medicare/TriCare plans. Poisson regression adjusting for U.S. Census region was used to evaluate variation in pre-operative requirements. Analyses were done at the insurance plan level. Our primary outcome was number of requirements required by each plan by insurance type. Our secondary outcome was number of months required to participate in medically supervised weight loss (MSWL). RESULTS: Among 43 insurance plans reviewed, representing commercial (60.5%), Medicaid (25.6%), and Medicare/TriCare (14.0%) plans, the number of pre-operative requirements ranged from 1 to 8. Adjusted Poisson regression showed significant variation in pre-operative requirements across plan types with Medicaid-insured patients required to fulfill the greatest number (4.1, 95%CI 2.7 to 5.4) compared to 2.7 (95%CI 2.2 to 3.2, P = 0.028) for commercially insured patients and 2.1 (95%CI 1.1 to 3.1, P = 0.047) for Medicare/TriCare-insured patients. Medicaid-insured patients were also required to complete a greater number of months in MSWL (6.6, 95%CI 5.5 to 7.6) compared to commercially (3.8, 95%CI 2.9 to 4.8, P < .001) and Medicare/TriCare-insured patients (1.7, 95%CI 0.3 to 3.0, P = .001). CONCLUSION: The greater frequency of pre-operative requirements in Medicaid plans compared to Medicare/TriCare and commercial plans demonstrates inequity across insurance types which may negatively impact access to bariatric surgery. Pre-operative insurance requirements must be reevaluated and standardized using established evidence to ensure all individuals have access to this life-saving intervention.

Female Patient Perceptions on Financial Incentives to Promote Follow-Up After Bariatric Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Financial incentives to promote recommended behaviors have been applied in many healthcare settings, but to our knowledge, have never been tested as a strategy to improve patient follow-up after bariatric surgery. Given that females make up majority of bariatric surgery patients, our goal was to explore female patient perceptions on the effects of a financial incentive program designed to increase follow-up after bariatric surgery. METHODS: This was an exploratory qualitative study of patient participants in a pilot program investigating financial incentives. We performed qualitative interviews with female patients to include personal experiences with bariatric surgery, progress toward goals, and concerns related to post-surgical behaviors. The data was analyzed iteratively through inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-one female patients who had undergone bariatric surgery and enrolled in the financial incentive program participated in this study. Participants had generally positive impressions of the financial incentive program. Participants described the utility of the program in helping to pay for expenses associated with bariatric surgery; feeling that participation was their way of demonstrating that they were compliant with post-surgical recommendations; and that it provided additional motivation. All patients stated that even without the financial incentive they would have continued to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: While financial incentives can provide additional motivation for patients following bariatric surgery, they are not the primary reason that patients choose to follow-up. Understanding the motivation of patients who choose to follow-up (or not) may better inform investigations intended to improve follow-up rates after bariatric surgery.

Comparative effectiveness of sleeve gastrectomy vs Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in patients giving birth after bariatric surgery: reinterventions and obstetric outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Women of childbearing age comprise approximately 65% of all patients who undergo bariatric surgery in the USA. Despite this, data on maternal reintervention and obstetric outcomes after surgery are limited especially with regard to comparative effectiveness between sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, the most common procedures today. METHODS: Using IBM MarketScan claims data, we performed a retrospective cohort study of women ages 18-52 who gave birth after undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with 2-year continuous follow-up. We balanced the cohort on observable characteristics using inverse probability weighting. We utilized multivariable logistic regression to examine the association between procedure selection and outcomes, including risk of reinterventions (revisions, enteral access, vascular access, reoperations, other) or adverse obstetric outcomes (pregnancy complications, severe maternal morbidity, and delivery complications). In all analyses, we controlled for age, U.S. state, and Elixhauser or Bateman comorbidities. RESULTS: From 2011 to 2016, 1,079 women gave birth within the first two years after undergoing bariatric surgery. Among these women, we found no significant difference in reintervention rates among those who had gastric bypass compared to sleeve gastrectomy (OR 1.41, 95% CI 0.91-2.21, P = 0.13). We then examined obstetric outcomes in the patients who gave birth after bariatric surgery. Compared to patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy, those who had Roux-en-Y gastric bypass were not significantly more likely to experience any adverse obstetric outcomes. CONCLUSION: In this first national cohort of females giving birth following bariatric surgery, no significant difference was observed in persons who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy with respect to either reinterventions or obstetric outcomes. This suggests possible equipoise between these two procedures with regards to safety within the first two years following a bariatric procedure among women who may become pregnant, but more research is needed to confirm these findings in larger samples.

Medication Use for Obesity-Related Comorbidities After Sleeve Gastrectomy or Gastric Bypass.

IMPORTANCE: Sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass are the most common bariatric surgical procedures in the world; however, their long-term medication discontinuation and comorbidity resolution remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of medication discontinuation and restart of diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia medications up to 5 years after sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This comparative effectiveness research study of adult Medicare beneficiaries who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass between January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2018, and had a claim for diabetes, hypertension, or hyperlipidemia medication in the 6 months before surgery with a corresponding diagnosis used instrumental-variable survival analysis to estimate the cumulative incidence of medication discontinuation and restart. Data analyses were performed from February to June 2021. EXPOSURES: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was discontinuation of diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia medication for any reason. Among patients who discontinued medication, the adjusted cumulative incidence of restarting medication was calculated up to 5 years after discontinuation. RESULTS: Of the 95 405 patients included, 71 348 (74.8%) were women and the mean (SD) age was 56.6 (11.8) years. Gastric bypass compared with sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a slightly higher 5-year cumulative incidence of medication discontinuation among 30 588 patients with diabetes medication use and diagnosis at the time of surgery (74.7% [95% CI, 74.6%-74.9%] vs 72.0% [95% CI, 71.8%-72.2%]), 52 081 patients with antihypertensive medication use and diagnosis at the time of surgery (53.3% [95% CI, 53.2%-53.4%] vs 49.4% [95% CI, 49.3%-49.5%]), and 35 055 patients with lipid-lowering medication use and diagnosis at the time of surgery (64.6% [95% CI, 64.5%-64.8%] vs 61.2% [95% CI, 61.1%-61.3%]). Among the subset of patients who discontinued medication, gastric bypass was also associated with a slightly lower incidence of medication restart up to 5 years after discontinuation. Specifically, the 5-year cumulative incidence of medication restart was lower after gastric bypass compared with sleeve gastrectomy among 19 599 patients who discontinued their diabetes medication after surgery (30.4% [95% CI, 30.2%-30.5%] vs 35.6% [95% CI, 35.4%-35.9%]), 21 611 patients who discontinued their antihypertensive medication after surgery (67.2% [95% CI, 66.9%-67.4%] vs 70.6% [95% CI, 70.3%-70.9%]), and 18 546 patients who discontinued their lipid-lowering medication after surgery (46.2% [95% CI, 46.2%-46.3%] vs 52.5% [95% CI, 52.2%-52.7%]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Findings of this study suggest that, compared with sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass was associated with a slightly higher incidence of medication discontinuation and a slightly lower incidence of medication restart among patients who discontinued medication. Long-term trials are needed to explain the mechanisms and factors associated with differences in medication discontinuation and comorbidity resolution after bariatric surgery.

Questioning the legitimacy of bariatric surgery: a qualitative analysis of individuals from the community who qualify for bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how individuals in the community who qualify for bariatric surgery perceive it and how this affects their likelihood to consider it for themselves. This study is the first qualitative study of a racially and ethnically diverse cohort to understand perceptions of bariatric surgery. METHODS: We designed a descriptive study to understand attitudes about bariatric surgery. We interviewed 32 individuals who met NIH criteria for bariatric surgery but have never considered bariatric surgery. We purposively sampled to ensure the majority of participants were non-white. Using an Interpretive Description framework, an exploratory, iterative method was used to code interviews and arrive at final themes. RESULTS: Participants self-identified as 88% female, 75% Black, 3% Hispanic, 3% Pacific Islander, and 19% white. Three major themes emerged from our data regarding legitimacy of bariatric surgery. First, participants perceived bariatric surgery to be something commercialized rather than needed treatment. They equated bariatric surgery with "botulism of the lips" or "cool sculpting." Second, an important contributor to the lack of legitimacy as a medical treatment was that many had not heard about bariatric surgery before from their doctors. Doctors were trusted sources for legitimate information about health. Lastly, conflicting information over bariatric surgery-related diet and weight loss further diminished the legitimacy of bariatric surgery. As one participant reflected about pre-operative weight loss requirements, "[If] I'm going to do that, I might as well just keep losing the weight. Why even go do the surgery?". CONCLUSION: Though bariatric surgery is a safe, effective, and durable therapy for patients with obesity, the majority of individuals we interviewed had concerns over the legitimacy of bariatric surgery as a medical treatment. Moving forward in reaching out to communities about bariatric surgery, healthcare providers and systems should consider the presentation of information to attenuate these concerns.

Understanding Racially Diverse Community Member Views of Obesity Stigma and Bariatric Surgery.

PURPOSE: The obesity epidemic poses serious challenges to health equity. Despite bariatric surgery being one of the most effective obesity treatments, utilization remains low. In this context, we explored public perceptions of bariatric surgery, centering voices of Black individuals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with individuals who have never considered bariatric surgery with purposive sampling to ensure the majority of participants were Black. Transcripts were iteratively analyzed. We employed an Interpretive Description framework to arrive at a collective description of perceptions of bariatric surgery. RESULTS: Thirty-two participants self-identified as 88% female, 72% Black, 3% Hispanic, 3% Pacific Islander, 3% Mixed Race, and 19% White. Participants reported a complex interplay of deeply held, stigmatized beliefs about identity. According to the stigma, persons with obesity lacked willpower and thus were considered devalued. Participants internalized this stigma, describing themselves with words like "glutton," "lazy," and "slack off." Because stigma caused participants to view obesity as resulting from personal failings alone, socially acceptable ways to lose weight were discipline through diet and exercise. Working for weight loss was "self-love, self-discipline, and determination." Thus, bariatric surgery was illegitimate, a "shortcut to weight loss" or "easy way out," since it was outside acceptable methods of effort. CONCLUSION: This qualitative study of community members who qualify for bariatric surgery shows obesity stigma was the main reason individuals rejected bariatric surgery. Obesity was stigmatizing, but undergoing bariatric surgery would further stigmatize individuals. Thus, healthcare providers may be instrumental in increasing bariatric surgery uptake by shifting social discourse from stigmatized notions of obesity towards one focusing on health.

Comparative Safety of Sleeve Gastrectomy and Gastric Bypass: An Instrumental Variables Approach.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety of sleeve gastrectomy and gastric bypass in a large cohort of commercially insured bariatric surgery patients from the IBM MarketScan claims database, while accounting for measurable and unmeasurable sources of selection bias in who is chosen for each operation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Sleeve gastrectomy has rapidly become the most common bariatric operation performed in the United States, but its longer-term safety is poorly described, and the risk of worsening gastroesophageal reflux requiring revision may be higher than previously thought. Prior studies comparing sleeve gastrectomy to gastric bypass are limited by low sample size (in randomized trials) and selection bias (in observational studies). METHODS: Instrumental variables analysis of commercially insured patients in the IBM MarketScan claims database from 2011 to 2018. We studied patients undergoing bariatric surgery from 2012 to 2016. We identified re-interventions and complications at 30 days and 2 years from surgery using Comprehensive Procedural Terminology and International Classification of Disease (ICD)-9/10 codes. To overcome unmeasured confounding, we use the prior year's sleeve gastrectomy utilization within each state as an instrumental variable-exploiting variation in the timing of payers' decisions to cover sleeve gastrectomy as a natural experiment. RESULTS: Among 38,153 patients who underwent bariatric surgery between 2012 and 2016, the share of sleeve gastrectomy rose from 52.6% (2012) to 75% (2016). At 2 years from surgery, patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy had fewer re-interventions (sleeve 9.9%, bypass 15.6%, P < 0.001) and complications (sleeve 6.6%, bypass 9.6%, P = 0.001), and lower overall healthcare spending ($47,891 vs $55,213, P = 0.003), than patients undergoing gastric bypass. However, at the 2-year mark, revisions were slightly more common in sleeve gastrectomy than in gastric bypass (sleeve 0.6%, bypass 0.4%, P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a large cohort of commercially insured patients, sleeve gastrectomy had a superior safety profile to gastric bypass up to 2 years from surgery, even when accounting for selection bias. However, the higher risk of revisions in sleeve gastrectomy merits further exploration.

Bariatric Surgery in Medicare Patients: Examining Safety and Healthcare Utilization in the Disabled and Elderly.

OBJECTIVE: To compare safety and healthcare utilization after sleeve gastrectomy versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in a national Medicare cohort. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Though bariatric surgery is increasing among Medicare beneficiaries, no long-term, national studies examining comparative effectiveness between procedures exist. Bariatric outcomes are needed for shared decision-making and coverage policy concerns identified by the cMS Medicare Evidence Development and Coverage Advisory Committee. METHODS: Retrospective instrumental variable analysis of Medicare claims (2012-2017) for 30,105 bariatric surgery patients entitled due to disability or age. We examined clinical safety outcomes (mortality, complications, and reinterventions), healthcare utilization [Emergency Department (ED) visits, rehospitalizations, and expenditures], and heterogeneity of treatment effect. We compared all outcomes between sleeve and bypass for each entitlement group at 30 days, 1 year, and 3 years. RESULTS: Among the disabled (n = 21,595), sleeve was associated with lower 3-year mortality [2.1% vs 3.2%, absolute risk reduction (ARR) 95% confidence interval (CI): -2.2% to -0.03%], complications (22.2% vs 27.7%, ARR 95%CI: -8.5% to -2.6%), reinterventions (20.1% vs 27.7%, ARR 95%CI: -10.7% to -4.6%), ED utilization (71.6% vs 77.1%, ARR 95%CI: -8.5% to -2.4%), and rehospitalizations (47.4% vs 52.3%, ARR 95%Ci: -8.0% to -1.7%). Cumulative expenditures were $46,277 after sleeve and $48,211 after bypass (P = 0.22). Among the elderly (n = 8510), sleeve was associated with lower 3-year complications (20.1% vs 24.7%, ARR 95%CI: -7.6% to -1.7%), reinterventions (14.0% vs 21.9%, ARR 95%CI: -10.7% to -5.2%), ED utilization (51.7% vs 57.2%, ARR 95%CI: -9.1% to -1.9%), and rehospitalizations (41.8% vs 45.8%, ARR 95%Ci: -7.5% to -0.5%). Expenditures were $38,632 after sleeve and $39,270 after bypass (P = 0.60). Procedure treatment effect significantly differed by entitlement for mortality, revision, and paraesophageal hernia repair. CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery is safe, and healthcare utilization benefits of sleeve over bypass are preserved across both Medicare elderly and disabled subpopulations.

Patient-reported Comorbidity Assessment After Bariatric Surgery: A Potential Tool to Improve Longitudinal Follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of postoperative patient-reported comorbidity assessment, as it may be an important mechanism for long-term follow-up in surgical patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Less than 1% of patients who qualify actually undergo bariatric surgery which may be due to concerns surrounding long-term efficacy. Longitudinal follow-up of patients' comorbidities remains a challenge. METHODS: Retrospective, cross-sectional study of bariatric surgery patients from 38 sites within a state-wide collaborative from 2017 to 2018. A minimum of 10 and maximum of 20 responses to a 1-year postoperative questionnaire from each site were randomly sampled. We examined percent agreement between patient-reported and medical chart audit comorbidity assessment and further evaluated agreement by intraclass correlation or κ statistic. Postoperative comorbidities assessed include weight, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, diabetes, depression, obstructive sleep apnea, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), anxiety, and pain. RESULTS: Five hundred eighty-five patients completed postoperative questionnaires after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The response rate was 64% during the study period. Patients reported weight with a mean difference of 2.7 lbs from chart weight (intraclass correlation = 0.964). Agreement between patient report and audit for all comorbidities was above 80% except for GERD (71%). κ statistics were greater than 0.6 (good agreement) for hyperlipidemia, hypertension, diabetes, and depression. Anxiety ( κ = 0.45) and obstructive sleep apnea ( κ = 0.53) had moderate agreement. Concordance for GERD and pain were fair (both κ = 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported comorbidity assessment has high levels of agreement with medical chart audit for many comorbidities and can improve understanding of long-term outcomes. This will better inform patients and providers with hopes of 1 day moving beyond the 1%.