RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: No robust data are available on the safety of primary bariatric and metabolic surgery (BMS) alone compared to primary BMS combined with other procedures. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study is to collect a 30-day mortality and morbidity of primary BMS combined with cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair, or hiatal hernia repair. SETTING: This is as an international, multicenter, prospective, and observational audit of patients undergoing primary BMS combined with one or more additional procedures. METHODS: The audit took place from January 1 to June 30, 2022. A descriptive analysis was conducted. A propensity score matching analysis compared the BLEND study patients with those from the GENEVA cohort to obtain objective evaluation between combined procedures and primary BMS alone. RESULTS: A total of 75 centers submitted data on 1036 patients. Sleeve gastrectomy was the most commonly primary BMS (N = 653, 63%), and hiatal hernia repair was the most commonly concomitant procedure (N = 447, 43.1%). RYGB accounted for the highest percentage (20.6%) of a 30-day morbidity, followed by SG (10.5%). More than one combined procedures had the highest morbidities among all combinations (17.1%). Out of overall 134 complications, 129 (96.2%) were Clavien-Dindo I-III, and 4 were CD V. Patients who underwent a primary bariatric surgery combined with another procedure had a pronounced increase in a 30-day complication rate compared with patients who underwent only BMS (12.7% vs. 7.1%). CONCLUSION: Combining BMS with another procedure increases the risk of complications, but most are minor and require no further treatment. Combined procedures with primary BMS is a viable option to consider in selected patients following multi-disciplinary discussion.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The incidence of urinary complications in transplantation is 2% to 20%, which can be decreased with the use of a double-J catheter. The objective of this study was to determine the association between the use of the catheter and the probability of urinary tract infection (UTI). METHODS: We studied a retrospective cohort of 1038 patients divided into 2 groups: those treated with vs without a double-J catheter. Perioperative factors related to catheter use were analyzed. Second, whether the use of the catheter was associated with fewer other urinary complications was analyzed. RESULTS: Of the whole sample, 72 patients were eliminated from the study, and 358 (37%) received a double-J catheter. UTIs occurred in 190 patients (19.6%), of whom a greater proportion received a catheter: 88 of 358 (24.6%) vs 102 of 608 (16.8%) (odds ratio, 1.61; 95% confidence interval, 1.17-2.22; P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: The placement of a double-J catheter during transplant is associated with a higher proportion of UTIs, increasing their severity and the cost of care, without having a clear effect on other types of urinary complications.