Revisional Gastric Bypass After Failed Adjustable Gastric Banding-One-Stage or Two-Stage Procedure?

BACKGROUND: Revisional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (R-LRYGB) is the preferred procedure after failed adjustable gastric banding. Little is known about whether a one-stage procedure (one surgery for band removal and R-LRYGB) or a two-stage procedure (first band removal and later R-LRYGB) is superior. Aim of this study is to compare early- and long-term results of both methods at our institution. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 165 (m 26/f 139) consecutive patients (98 one-stage, 67 two-stage) with R-LRYGB. Mean follow-up time was 50.1 ± 38.8 months. Indications for one-stage vs. two-stage procedures, operating time, peri- and postoperative complications, morbidity, mortality, and length of stay (LOS) were analyzed. Data are reported as total numbers (%) and mean ± standard deviation. RESULTS: Mean age at R-LRYGB was 43.9 ± 10.7 vs. 44.3 ± 10.7 years with a BMI of 37.1 ± 6.8 vs. 39.8 ± 7.1 (one-stage vs. two-stage). In the one-stage group, the main indication for revisional surgery was weight regain (57.1%), followed by dilatation of the esophagus or pouch (37.7%) and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) (36.7%), whereas in the two-stage group, it was band erosion (52.2%) and dilatation of the esophagus or pouch (17.9%) and GERD (11.9%). There was no significant difference in operative time (208.5 ± 61.2 vs. 206.3 ± 73.5 min), LOS (8.6 ± 3.4 vs. 9.3 ± 5.7 days) or mortality (0% overall). Major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIa) occurred similarly often in both groups: 15.3% vs. 16.9% (one-stage vs. two-stage). CONCLUSION: Both approaches achieve good results. However, the one-stage R-LRYGB is the preferable procedure because it reduces costs and LOS by doing without an additional surgical procedure.

Incisional hernia rate after open abdomen treatment with negative pressure and delayed primary fascia closure.

PURPOSE: Various techniques for delayed primary fascia closure have been published in patients treated with open abdomen (OA) and application of negative pressure, but to date, no data are available on incisional hernia (IH) rate. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to investigate the long-term outcome of this patient population with special interest in IH development. METHODS: Two hundred and nine consecutive patients, 90(43 %) female, were treated at our institution for various abdominal emergencies involving OA from June 2006 to June 2011. Mean age was 63(16-92) years. The indication was abdominal sepsis in 155(74 %) patients, ischemia in 24(12 %) and other reasons in 30(14 %). Hospital mortality was 21 %(n = 44); and planned ventral hernia was 7 %(n = 15); and mortality until follow-up was 16 %(n = 25), and 9 %(n = 13) patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 112 patients for evaluation of IH development. RESULTS: The rate of IH for patients with OA and delayed primary fascia closure was overall 35 % at a median (range) follow-up time of 26(12-81) months. Mean time for development of a ventral hernia was 11 months; 21(57 %) patients underwent surgery for symptomatic hernia (2 emergency operations for incarceration). Kaplan-Meier estimate for 5 years gave a 66 % IH rate. BMI, small bowel as source of infection and rapid adsorbable interrupted suture were identified risk factors. CONCLUSION: The rate of IH after open abdomen treatment with delayed primary fascia closure is high with a running suture with slow absorbable suture material showing the best results.

Significant weight loss and rapid resolution of diabetes and dyslipidemia during short-term follow-up after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery has been established as the best option of treatment for morbid obesity. Recently, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has become very popular because of good postoperative weight loss and low morbidity. The aim of this study was to report our single-center experience with SG regarding feasibility, morbidity, and outcome. METHODS: From January 2006 to December 2011, 93 patients (68 female) with a median age of 46 years underwent laparoscopic SG at our department. Thirteen patients had a history of gastric banding with insufficient weight loss or band-related complications. Clinical outcome and laboratory findings were analyzed. RESULTS: The mean preoperative and postoperative body mass index (BMI) was 44.1 ± 6.9 and 33.4 ± 6.8 kg/m(2), respectively (p < 0.001). The mean excessive body weight loss after a median follow-up of 11.9 months was 55.7 % ± 24.9 %. Three bleedings, two staple line leakages, and a deep wound infection required conversion to laparotomy (n = 1), reoperation (n = 4), or endoscopic stent implantation (n = 2). Resolution of diabetes and dyslipidemia was seen in 85 and 50 % of patients, respectively. Blood test results of HbA1c, cholesterols, triglycerides, and leptin showed significant postoperative improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic SG represents a feasible bariatric procedure with good short-term weight loss, low morbidity rate, and efficient resolution of diabetes and dyslipidemia, especially in patients with lower BMI. The significant decrease of leptin necessitates further studies to understand the ambiguous role of leptin in bariatric surgery.

Vagal nerve dissection during pouch formation in laparoscopic Roux-Y-gastric bypass for technical simplification: does it matter?

BACKGROUND: In Roux-Y gastric bypass surgery pouch formation is the most demanding part of the operation. The vagal nerve is usually tempted to be preserved although results reporting beneficial effects are lacking. Dividing the perigastric tissue including the anterior vagal trunk may technically alleviate gastric pouch formation. We evaluated the clinical outcome in patients with and without vagal nerve dissection in patients after Roux-Y gastric bypass (RY-BP). METHODS: In this study 40 morbidly obese patients undergoing RY-BP have been included. Patients were divided into two groups according to vagal nerve preservation (Group 1, n = 25) or vagal nerve dissection (Group 2, n = 22). Clinical parameters (weight loss, complications, gastrointestinal symptoms), esophageal endoscopy, and motility data (manometry, pH-metry) and a satiety score were assessed. Serum values of ghrelin and gastrin were measured. RESULTS: All procedures were performed by laparoscopy with a 0% mortality rate. One patient of each groups necessitated redo-laparoscopy (bleeding and a lost drainage). All patients significantly reduced body weight (p < 0.01 compared to preoperative) during a median follow-up of 36.1 months. Two patients of Group 2 showed acid reflux demonstrated by pathologic postoperative DeMeester scores. Esophageal body peristalsis and barium swallows did not reveal statistically significant differences between the two groups. Parameters of satiety assessment did not differ between the two groups as did serum values of gastrin and ghrelin. CONCLUSION: Pouch formation during RY-BP may be alleviated by simply dissecting the perigastric fatty tissue. In this way the anterior vagal trunk is dissected, however, no influence on clinical, functional and laboratory results occur.

Is a pouch compulsory in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass after failed adjustable gastric banding?

BACKGROUND: Pouch formation after failed gastric banding bears a risk of anastomotic leakage, bleeding or ischemic damage due to an impaired vascular supply or demanding preparation in the scarry tissue. We evaluated the clinical outcome in patients following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYBP) with and without gastric pouch reconstruction after removal of adjustable gastric bands. METHODS: This study comprised 24 morbidly obese patients undergoing RYBP as their final bariatric procedure. Group 1 consisted of eight patients after band migration or pouch dilatation. An esophago-jejunal anastomosis was performed. Group 2 comprised 16 patients with esophageal motility disorders or pouch dilation after banding. A regular-sized pouch was created. Clinical parameters, such as weight loss, complications and a satiety score were assessed. Serum values of ghrelin and gastrin were measured. RESULTS: All but one procedure (Group 2) could be performed by laparoscopy. Mortality rate was 0%. One patient of Group 1 developed a liver abscess that required percutaneous drainage and one patient of Group 2 developed stenosis at the gastrojejunostomy that necessitated endoscopic balloon-dilation. All patients significantly reduced body weight (p<0.01 compared to preoperative values) during a median follow-up of 37.5 and 31.5 months, respectively. Two out of 16 (12.5%) patients of Group 2 showed pathologic postoperative DeMeester scores. Esophageal body peristalsis did not reveal statistically significant differences between the two groups. Parameters of satiety assessment did not differ between the two groups as did serum values of gastrin and ghrelin. CONCLUSION: RYBP in patients experiencing adjustable gastric band failure is technically demanding. Esophago-jejunostomy avoids preparation in scarred tissue whereas routine pouch formation may increase the risk for complications. Adapted procedural strategy is recommended based on intraoperative decision making.