Bariatric Surgery for Patients with Overweight/Obesity. A Comprehensive Grading Methodology and Network Metanalysis of Randomized Controlled Trials on Weight Loss Outcomes and Adverse Events.

This study aims to compare different types of metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) with lifestyle intervention/medical therapy (LSI/MT) for the treatment of overweight/obesity. The present and network meta-analysis (NMA) includes randomized trials. MBS was associated with a reduction of BMI, body weight, and percent weight loss, when compared to LSI/MT, and also with a significant reduction of HbA1c and a higher remission of diabetes. Meta-regression analyses revealed that BMI, a higher proportion of women, and a longer duration of trial were associated with greater effects of MBS. The NMA showed that all surgical procedures included (except greater curvature plication) were associated with a reduction of BMI. MBS is an effective option for the treatment of obesity. The choice of BMI thresholds for eligibility for surgery of patients with different complications should be performed making an evaluation of risks and benefits in each BMI category.

Revisional Surgery After One Anastomosis/Minigastric Bypass: an Italian Multi-institutional Survey.

BACKGROUND: Efficacy and safety of OAGB/MGB (one anastomosis/mini gastric bypass) have been well documented both as primary and as revisional procedures. However, even after OAGB/MGB, revisional surgery is unavoidable in patients with surgical complications or insufficient weight loss. METHODS: A questionnaire asking for the total number and demographics of primary and revisional OAGB/MGBs performed between January 2006 and July 2020 was e-mailed to all S.I.C. OB centres of excellence (annual caseload > 100; 5-year follow-up > 50%). Each bariatric centre was asked to provide gender, age, preoperative body mass index (BMI) and obesity-related comorbidities, previous history of abdominal or bariatric surgery, indication for surgical revision of OAGB/MGB, type of revisional procedure, pre- and post-revisional BMI, peri- and post-operative complications, last follow-up (FU). RESULTS: Twenty-three bariatric centres (54.8%) responded to our survey reporting a total number of 8676 primary OAGB/MGBS and a follow-up of 62.42 ± 52.22 months. A total of 181 (2.08%) patients underwent revisional surgery: 82 (0.94%) were suffering from intractable DGER (duodeno-gastric-esophageal reflux), 42 (0.48%) were reoperated for weight regain, 16 (0.18%) had excessive weight loss and malnutrition, 12 (0.13%) had a marginal ulcer perforation, 10 (0.11%) had a gastro-gastric fistula, 20 (0.23%) had other causes of revision. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) was the most performed revisional procedure (109; 54%), followed by bilio-pancreatic limb elongation (19; 9.4%) and normal anatomy restoration (19; 9.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that there is acceptable revisional rate after OAGB/MGB and conversion to RYGB represents the most frequent choice.

Conversion from laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) to one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB): preliminary data from a multicenter retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is the most commonly performed bariatric procedure, while laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has been for a decade one of the most popular interventions for weight loss. After LSG and LAGB, some patients may require a second surgery due to weight regain or late complications. One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a promising bariatric procedure, which provides effective long-term weight loss and has a favorable effect on type 2 diabetes. OBJECTIVES: To retrospectively analyze data from 10 Italian centers on conversion from LAGB and LSG to OAGB. SETTING: High-volume centers for bariatric surgery. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from 10 high-volume centers were retrospectively reviewed. Body mass index (BMI), percentage of excess BMI loss, reasons for redo, remission from co-morbidities (hypertension, diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux, and dyslipidemia), and major complications were recorded. RESULTS: Three hundred patients were included in the study; 196 patients underwent conversion from LAGB to OAGB and 104 were converted from LSG. BMI was 45.1 ± 7 kg/m2 at the time of first intervention, 41.8 ± 6.3 kg/m2 at redo time, and 30.5 ± 5.5 kg/m2 at last follow-up appointment. Mean percentage of excess BMI loss was 13.2 ± 28.2 at conversion and 73.4 ± 27.5 after OAGB. Remission rates from hypertension, diabetes, gastroesophageal reflux, and dyslipidemia were 40%, 62.5%, 58.7% and 52%, respectively. Mean follow-up was 20.8 (range, 6-156) months and overall complications rate was 8.6%. CONCLUSION: Our data show that OAGB is a safe and effective revisional procedure after failed restrictive bariatric surgery.

Complications Following the Mini/One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (MGB/OAGB): a Multi-institutional Survey on 2678 Patients with a Mid-term (5 Years) Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, several articles have reported considerable results with the Mini/One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (MGB/OAGB) in terms of both weight loss and resolution of comorbidities. Despite those positive reports, some controversies still limit the widespread acceptance of this procedure. Therefore, a multicenter retrospective study, with the aim to investigate complications following this procedure, has been designed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To report the complications rate following the MGB/OAGB and their management, and to assess the role of this approach in determining eventual complications related especially to the loop reconstruction, in the early and late postoperative periods, the clinical records of 2678 patients who underwent MGB/OAGB between 2006 and 2015 have been studied. RESULTS: Intraoperative and early complications rates were 0.5 and 3.1%, respectively. Follow-up at 5 years was 62.6%. Late complications rate was 10.1%. A statistical correlation was found for perioperative bleeding both with operative time (p < 0.001) or a learning curve of less than 50 cases (p < 0.001). A statistical correlation was found for postoperative duodenal-gastro-esophageal reflux (DGER) with a preexisting gastro-esophageal-reflux disease (GERD) or with a gastric pouch shorter than 9 cm, (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001), respectively. An excessive weight loss correlated with a biliopancreatic limb longer than 250 cm (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm MGB/OAGB to be a reliable bariatric procedure. According to other large and long-term published series, MGB/OAGB seems to compare very favorably, in terms of complication rate, with two mainstream procedures as standard Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGBP) and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG).

Efficacy of Bariatric Surgery in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Remission: the Role of Mini Gastric Bypass/One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy at 1 Year of Follow-up. A European survey.

BACKGROUND: A retrospective study was undertaken to define the efficacy of both mini gastric bypass or one anastomosis gastric bypass (MGB/OAGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) remission in morbidly obese patients (pts). METHODS: Eight European centers were involved in this survey. T2DM was preoperatively diagnosed in 313/3252 pts (9.62%). In 175/313 patients, 55.9% underwent MGB/OAGB, while in 138/313 patients, 44.1% received SG between January 2006 and December 2014. RESULTS: Two hundred six out of 313 (63.7 %) pts reached 1 year of follow-up. The mean body mass index (BMI) for MGB/OAGB pts was 33.1 ± 6.6, and the mean BMI for SG pts was 35.9 ± 5.9 (p < 0.001). Eighty-two out of 96 (85.4%) MGB/OAGB pts vs. 67/110 (60.9%) SG pts are in remission (p < 0.001). No correlation was found in the % change vs. baseline values for hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) in relation to BMI reduction, for both MGB/OAGB or SG (ΔFPG 0.7 and ΔHbA1c 0.4 for MGB/OAGB; ΔFPG 0.7 and ΔHbA1c 0.1 for SG). At multivariate analysis, high baseline HbA1c [odds ratio (OR) = 0.623, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.419-0.925, p = 0.01], preoperative consumption of insulin or oral antidiabetic agents (OR = 0.256, 95% CI 0.137-0.478, p = <0.001), and T2DM duration >10 years (OR = 0.752, 95% CI 0.512-0.976, p = 0.01) were negative predictors whereas MGB/OAGB resulted as a positive predictor (OR = 3.888, 95% CI 1.654-9.143, p = 0.002) of diabetes remission. CONCLUSIONS: A significant BMI decrease and T2DM remission unrelated from weight loss were recorded for both procedures if compared to baseline values. At univariate and multivariate analyses, MGB/OAGB seems to outperform significantly SG. Four independent variables able to influence T2DM remission at 12 months have been identified.