Does routine upper gastrointestinal swallow study after metabolic and bariatric surgery lead to earlier diagnosis of leak?

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether routine upper gastrointestinal swallow study (SS) in the immediate postoperative period is associated with earlier diagnosis of gastrointestinal leak after bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between routine SS and time to diagnosis of postoperative gastrointestinal leak. SETTING: MBSAQIP-accredited hospitals in the United States and Canada. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of adults who underwent laparoscopic primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (n = 82,510) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) (n = 283,520) using the MBSAQIP 2015-2019 database. Propensity scores were used to match patient cohorts who underwent routine versus no routine SS. Primary outcome was time to diagnosis of leak. Median days to diagnosis of leak were compared. The Nelson-Aalen estimator was used to determine the cumulative hazards of leak. RESULTS: In our study, 36,280 (23%) RYGB and 135,335 (33%) SG patients received routine SS. Routine SS was not associated with earlier diagnosis of leak (RYGB routine SS median 7 [IQR 3-12] days v. no routine SS 6 [2-11] days, P = .9; SG routine SS 15 [9-22] days v. no routine SS 14 [8-21] days, P = .06) or lower risk of developing leak (RYGB HR 1.0, 95%-CI .8-1.2; SG HR 1.1, 95%-CI 1.0-1.4). More routine SS patients had a length of stay 2 days or greater (RYGB 78.3% v. 61.1%; SG 48.6% v. 40.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Routine SS was not associated with earlier diagnosis of leaks compared to the absence of routine SS. Surgeons should consider abandoning the practice of routine SS for the purpose of obtaining earlier diagnosis of postoperative leaks.

Current recommendations for procedure selection in class I and II obesity developed by an expert modified Delphi consensus.

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is widely considered the most effective option for treating obesity, a chronic, relapsing, and progressive disease. Recently, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) issued new guidelines on the indications for MBS, which have superseded the previous 1991 National Institutes of Health guidelines. The aim of this study is to establish the first set of consensus guidelines for selecting procedures in Class I and II obesity, using an Expert Modified Delphi Method. In this study, 78 experienced bariatric surgeons from 32 countries participated in a two-round Modified Delphi consensus voting process. The threshold for consensus was set at an agreement or disagreement of ≥ 70.0% among the experts. The experts reached a consensus on 54 statements. The committee of experts reached a consensus that MBS is a cost-effective treatment option for Class II obesity and for patients with Class I obesity who have not achieved significant weight loss through non-surgical methods. MBS was also considered suitable for patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and a body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m2 or higher. The committee identified intra-gastric balloon (IGB) as a treatment option for patients with class I obesity and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) as an option for patients with class I and II obesity, as well as for patients with T2DM and a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2. Sleeve gastrectomy (1) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) were also recognized as viable treatment options for these patient groups. The committee also agreed that one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a suitable option for patients with Class II obesity and T2DM, regardless of the presence or severity of obesity-related medical problems. The recommendations for selecting procedures in Class I and II obesity, developed through an Expert Modified Delphi Consensus, suggest that the use of standard primary bariatric endoscopic (IGB, ESG) and surgical procedures (SG, RYGB, OAGB) are acceptable in these patient groups, as consensus was reached regarding these procedures. However, randomized controlled trials are still needed in Class I and II Obesity to identify the best treatment approach for these patients in the future.