Is Preoperative Optimization Right for Every Hernia Patient?: It's Time to Optimize the Optimization Process.

This Viewpoint discusses developing a more nuanced preoperative optimization strategy for hernia repair that considers patient and disease factors to determine the right operation for the right patient at the right time.

Variability in surgical approaches to hernias in patients with ascites.

BACKGROUND: Hernias in patients with ascites are common, however we know very little about the surgical repair of hernias within this population. The study of these repairs has largely remained limited to single center and case studies, lacking a population-based study on the topic. STUDY DESIGN: The Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative and its corresponding Core Optimization Hernia Registry (MSQC-COHR) which captures specific patient, hernia, and operative characteristics at a population level within the state was used to conduct a retrospective review of patients with ascites undergoing ventral or inguinal hernia repair between January 1, 2020 and May 3, 2022. The primary outcome observed was incidence and surgical approach for both ventral and inguinal hernia cohorts. Secondary outcomes included 30-day adverse clinical outcomes as listed here: (ED visits, readmission, reoperation and complications) and surgical priority (urgent/emergent vs elective). RESULTS: In a cohort of 176 patients with ascites, surgical repair of hernias in patients with ascites is a rare event (1.4% in ventral hernia cohort, 0.2% in inguinal hernia cohort). The post-operative 30-day adverse clinical outcomes in both cohorts were greatly increased compared to those without ascites (ventral: 32% inguinal: 30%). Readmission was the most common complication in both inguinal (n = 14, 15.9%) and ventral hernia (n = 17, 19.3%) groups. Although open repair was most common for both cohorts (ventral: 86%, open: 77%), minimally invasive (MIS) approaches were utilized. Ventral hernias presented most commonly urgently/emergently (60%), and in contrast many inguinal hernias presented electively (72%). CONCLUSION: A population-level, ventral and incisional hernia database capturing operative details for 176 patients with ascites. There was variation in the surgical approaches performed for this rare event and opportunities for optimization in patient selection and timing of repair.

Use of statewide financial incentives to improve documentation of hernia and mesh characteristics in ventral hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Documentation of intraoperative details is critical for understanding and advancing hernia care, but is inconsistent in practice. Therefore, to improve data capture on a statewide level, we implemented a financial incentive targeting documentation of hernia defect size and mesh use. METHODS: The Abdominal Hernia Care Pathway (AHCP), a voluntary pay for performance (P4P) initiative, was introduced in 2021 within the statewide Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC). This consisted of an organizational-level financial incentive for achieving 80% performance on eight specific process measures for ventral hernia surgery, including complete documentation of hernia defect size and location, as well as mesh characteristics and fixation technique. Comparisons were made between AHCP and non-AHCP sites in 2021. RESULTS: Of 69 eligible sites, 47 participated in the AHCP in 2021. There were N = 5362 operations (4169 at AHCP sites; 1193 at non-AHCP sites). At AHCP sites, 69.8% of operations had complete hernia documentation, compared to 50.5% at non-AHCP sites (p < 0.0001). At AHCP sites, 91.4% of operations had complete mesh documentation, compared to 86.5% at non-AHCP sites (p < 0.0001). The site-level hernia documentation goal of 80% was reached by 14 of 47 sites (range 14-100%). The mesh documentation goal was reached by 41 of 47 sites (range 4-100%). CONCLUSIONS: Addition of an organizational-level financial incentive produced marked gains in documentation of intra-operative details across a statewide surgical collaborative. The relatively large effect size-19.3% for hernia-is remarkable among P4P initiatives. This result may have been facilitated by surgeons' direct role in documenting hernia size and mesh use. These improvements in data capture will foster understanding of current hernia practices on a large scale and may serve as a model for improvement in collaboratives nationally.

Life after "no": barriers to behavior change for persons declined hernia repair due to high-risk features.

INTRODUCTION: Delaying an elective operation to mitigate risk factors improves patient outcomes. Elective ventral hernia repair is one such example. To address this issue, we developed a pre-operative optimization clinic to support high-risk patients seeking elective ventral hernia repair. Unfortunately, few patients progressed to surgery. Within this context, we sought to understand the barriers to behavior change among these patients with the goal of improving care for patients undergoing elective surgery. METHODS: We performed semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 20 patients who were declined ventral hernia repair due to either active tobacco use or obesity. Patients were recruited from a pre-operative optimization clinic at an academic hospital. Interviews sought to characterize patients' perceived barriers to behavior change. Interviews were concluded once thematic saturation was reached. We used an inductive thematic analysis to analyze the data. All data analysis was performed using MAXQDA software. RESULTS: Among 20 patients (mean age 50, 65% female, 65% White), none had yet undergone ventral hernia repair. While most patients had a positive experience in the clinic, among those who did not, we found three dominant themes around behavior change: (1) Patient's role in behavior change: how the patient perceived their role in making behavior changes optimize their health for surgery; (2) Obtainability of offered resources: the need for more support for patients to access the recommended healthcare; and (3) Patient-provider concordance: the extent to which patients and providers agree on the relative importance of different attributes of their care. CONCLUSION: Behavior change prior to elective surgery is complex and multifaceted. While improving access to tobacco cessation resources and obesity management may improve outcomes for some, patients may benefit from increased on-site facilitation to promote access to resources as well as the use of patient-facing decision support tools to promote patient-provider concordance.

Comparison of safety and healthcare utilization following sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass among medicare beneficiaries using sex as a biologic variable.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery is a common operation, but differences in outcomes between males and females are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To compare the risk of mortality, complications, reintervention, and healthcare utilization after sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass using sex as a biologic variable. SETTING: United States. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of adults undergoing sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2018 using Medicare claims data. We performed a heterogeneity of treatment effect analysis to determine the impact of sleeve gastrectomy versus gastric bypass comparing males to females. The primary outcome was safety (mortality, complications, and reinterventions) up to 5 years after surgery. The secondary outcome was healthcare utilization (hospitalization and emergency department use). RESULTS: Among 95,405 patients the majority (n = 71,348; 74.8%) were female and most (n = 57,008; 59.8%) underwent sleeve gastrectomy. For all patients, compared to gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a lower risk of complications and reintervention but a higher risk of revision. Compared to gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy was associated with a lower risk of mortality for females (adjusted hazard ratio .86, 95% CI .75-.96) but not males. We found no difference in procedure treatment effect by sex for mortality, hospitalization, emergency department use, or overall reintervention when comparing sleeve to gastric bypass. CONCLUSIONS: Females and males have similar outcomes following bariatric surgery. Females have a lower risk of complications but a higher risk of reintervention. Decisions surrounding treatment for this common procedure should be tailored to include a discussion of sex-specific differences in treatment outcome.

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.

Comparative Outcomes of Groin Hernia Repair by Sex Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the rates of operative recurrence between male and female patients undergoing groin hernia repair. BACKGROUND DATA: Groin hernia repair is common but understudied in females. Limited prior work demonstrates worse outcomes among females. METHODS: Using Medicare claims, we performed a retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent elective groin hernia repair between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2017. We used a Cox proportional hazards model to evaluate the risk of operative recurrence up to 5 years following the index operation. Secondary outcomes included 30-day complications following surgery. RESULTS: Among 118,119 patients, females comprised the minority of patients (n=16,056, 13.6%). Compared with males, female patients were older (74.8 vs. 71.9 y, P <0.01), more often white (89.5% vs. 86.7%, P <0.01), and had a higher prevalence of nearly all measured comorbidities. In the multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, we found that female patients had a significantly lower risk of operative recurrence at 5-year follow-up compared with males (aHR 0.70, 95% CI 0.60-0.82). The estimated cumulative incidence of recurrence was lower among females at all time points: 1 year [0.68% (0.67-0.68) vs. 0.88% (0.88-0.89)], 3 years [1.91% (1.89-1.92) vs. 2.49% (2.47-2.5)], and 5 years [2.85% (2.82-2.88) vs. 3.7% (3.68-3.75)]. We found no significant difference in the 30-day risk of complications. CONCLUSIONS: We found that female patients experienced a lower risk of operative hernia recurrence following elective groin hernia repair, which is contrary to what is often reported in the literature. However, the risk of operative recurrence was low overall, indicating excellent surgical outcomes among older adults for this common surgical condition.

Contemporary Outcomes of Elective Parastomal Hernia Repair in Older Adults.

Importance: Parastomal hernia is a challenging complication following ostomy creation; however, the incidence and long-term outcomes after elective parastomal hernia repair are poorly characterized. Objective: To describe the incidence and long-term outcomes after elective parastomal hernia repair. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using 100% Medicare claims, a retrospective cohort study of adult patients who underwent elective parastomal hernia repair between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2015, was performed. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate mortality, complications, readmission, and reoperation after surgery. Analysis took place between February and May 2022. Exposures: Parastomal hernia repair without ostomy resiting, parastomal hernia repair with ostomy resiting, and parastomal hernia repair with ostomy reversal. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality, complications, and readmission within 30 days of surgery and reoperation for recurrence (parastomal or incisional hernia repair) up to 5 years after surgery. Results: A total of 17 625 patients underwent elective parastomal hernia repair (mean [SD] age, 73.3 [9.1] years; 10 059 female individuals [57.1%]). Overall, 7315 patients (41.5%) underwent parastomal hernia repair without ostomy resiting, 2744 (15.6%) underwent parastomal hernia repair with ostomy resiting, and 7566 (42.9%) underwent parastomal hernia repair with ostomy reversal. In the 30 days after surgery, 676 patients (3.8%) died, 7088 (40.2%) had a complication, and 1740 (9.9%) were readmitted. The overall adjusted 5-year cumulative incidence of reoperation was 21.1% and was highest for patients who underwent parastomal hernia repair with ostomy resiting (25.3% [95% CI, 25.2%-25.4%]) compared with patients who underwent parastomal hernia repair with ostomy reversal (18.8% [95% CI, 18.7%-18.8%]). Among patients whose ostomy was not reversed, the hazard of repeat parastomal hernia repair was the same for patients whose ostomy was resited vs those whose ostomy was not resited (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.81-1.06]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, more than 1 in 5 patients underwent another parastomal or incisional hernia repair within 5 years of surgery. Although this was lowest for patients who underwent ostomy reversal at their index operation, ostomy resiting was not superior to local repair. Understanding the long-term outcomes of this common elective operation may help inform decision-making between patients and surgeons regarding appropriate operative approach and timing of surgery.

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.

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.

Postacute Care Utilization and Episode of Care Payments Following Common Elective Operations.

OBJECTIVE: To describe PAC utilization and associated payments for patients undergoing common elective procedures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Utilization and costs of PAC are well described for benchmarked conditions and operations but remain understudied for common elective procedures. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of adult patients in a statewide administrative claims database undergoing elective cholecystectomy, ventral or incisional hernia repair (VIHR), and groin hernia repair from 2012 to 2019. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the odds of PAC utilization, and multivariable linear regression to determine the association of 90-day episode of care payments and PAC utilization. RESULTS: Among 34,717 patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy, 0.7% utilized PAC resulting in significantly higher payments ($19,047 vs $7830, P < 0.001). Among 29,826 patients undergoing VIHR, 1.7% utilized PAC resulting in significantly higher payments ($19,766 vs $9439, P < 0.001). Among 37,006 patients undergoing groin hernia repair, 0.3% utilized PAC services resulting in significantly higher payments ($14,886 vs $8062, P < 0.001). We found both modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors associated with PAC utilization. Morbid obesity was associated with PAC utilization following VIHR [odds ratio (OR) 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29-2.02, P < 0.001]. Male sex was associated with lower odds of PAC utilization for VIHR (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.35-0.51, P < 0.001) and groin hernia repair (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39-0.98, P = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: We found both modifiable (eg, obesity) and nonmodifiable (eg, female sex) patient factors that were associated with PAC. Optimizing patients to reduce PAC utilization requires an understanding of patient risk factors and systems and processes to address these factors.

Five year trends in surgical technique and outcomes of groin hernia repair in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Despite being one of the most commonly performed operations in the US, there is a paucity of data on practice patterns and resultant long-term outcomes of groin hernia repair. In this context, we performed a contemporary assessment of operative approach with 5 year follow-up to inform care for the 800000 persons undergoing groin hernia repair annually. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of adult patients undergoing elective groin hernia repair in a 20% representative Medicare sample from 2010-17. Surgical approach [minimally invasive (MIS) vs open] was defined using appropriate CPT codes. The primary outcome was operative recurrence at up to 5 years following surgery. We estimated the overall risk of operative recurrence using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Among 118119 patients, the majority (76.4%) underwent an open repair. Compared to patients who underwent MIS repair, patients in the open surgery cohort were older (mean age 72.7 vs 71.0, p < 0.001), more often female (14.4 vs 10.9%, p < 0.001), less often white (86.9 vs 87.7%, p < 0.001), and had a higher prevalence of nearly all measured comorbidities Patients in the open cohort had a lower incidence of operative recurrence at 1-year (1.0 vs 1.5%, p < 0.001), 3-years, (2.5 vs 3.5%, p < 0.001), and 5-years (3.7 vs 4.7%, p < 0.001). In the Cox proportional hazards model, we found that patients who underwent an open groin hernia repair were significantly less likely to experience operative recurrence (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.79-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that open groin hernia repair was associated with a lower risk of operative recurrence over time. While this may be related to patient comorbidity and age at the index operation, future work should focus on the impact of surgeon volume on outcomes in the modern era.

Variation in approach for small (< 2 cm) ventral hernias across a statewide quality improvement collaborative.

INTRODUCTION: Operative technique for hernias < 2 cm is highly controversial. Limited data exist about this practice at a population level. Within this context we sought to describe practice patterns and use of mesh among patients undergoing repair of small hernias within the setting of a statewide quality improvement collaborative. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing hernia repair in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry was conducted. Patients who underwent repair of a hernia < 2 cm from January 1, 2020 to July 8, 2021 were included. Descriptive statistics were performed to describe cohort characteristics and compare patients who did and did not receive mesh. Logistic regression was performed to estimate the odds of receiving mesh after accounting for patient and hernia characteristics. RESULTS: Among 570 patients, 56.1% (n = 320) had mesh placed. Most repairs were conducted via open approach (n = 437, 76.5%). Patients who received mesh were older (51.8 vs 48.6, p < 0.01), had higher BMI (31.7 vs 30.0, p < 0.01), were more often ASA Class III (35.9% vs 24.4%, p < 0.01), more often had diabetes (15.9% vs 10.0%, 0.04) and hypertension (44.7% vs 30.4%, p < 0.01), and had higher hernia width (1.2 cm vs 1.0 cm, p < 0.0001). After adjustment, ASA Class III (aOR 3.41, 95% CI 1.31-8.89), current smoking status (aOR 1.81, 95% CI 1.04-3.18), higher mean hernia width (aOR 5.68, 95% CI 2.97-10.85), and laparoscopic (aOR 12.9, 95% CI 5.02-32.96) or robotic (aOR 24.3, 95% CI 6.96-84.96) were associated with mesh use, while COPD (aOR 0.36, 95% CI 0.07-0.96) was associated with less mesh use. CONCLUSIONS: Use of mesh for small hernias remains controversial. We found that patients who had mesh placed at the time of surgery were potentially patients at higher risk for complications. The decision to use mesh may be driven by patient-related factors that predispose to complications and operative recurrence rather than evidence indicating that it is superior in this population.

Surgeon Variation in the Application of Robotic Technique for Abdominal Hernia Repair: A Mixed-Methods Study.

INTRODUCTION: Although the utilization of robotic technique for abdominal hernia repair has increased rapidly, there is no consensus as to when it should be applied for optimal outcomes. High variability exists within surgeon practices regarding how they use this technology, and the factors that drive robotic utilization remain largely unknown. This study aims to explore the motivating factors associated with surgeons' decisions to utilize a robotic approach for abdominal hernia repair. METHODS: An exploratory mixed-methods approach was utilized. Surgeons who performed abdominal hernia repairs were interviewed to identify impactful themes motivating surgical approach. This informed a retrospective analysis of ventral hernia repairs performed in 2020 within the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. Surgeon robotic utilization rates were calculated. Among selective robotic users, multivariable regression evaluated the patient and hernia factors associated with robotic utilization. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis of 21 interviews revealed three dominant themes in the decision to utilize robotic technology: access and resources, surgeon comfort, and market factors. Among 71 surgeons caring for 1174 hernia patients, robotic utilization rates ranged from 0% to 98% of cases. There were 27 surgeons identified as selective robotic users, who cared for 423 patients. Multivariable regression revealed that hernia location was the only factor associated with robotic technique, with non-midline hernias associated with a 4.47 (95% confidence interval 1.34-14.88) higher odds of robotic repair than epigastric hernias. CONCLUSIONS: Major drivers of robotic technique for hernia repair were found to be perceived benefits and availability, rather than patient or hernia characteristics. These data will contribute to an understanding of surgeon decision-making and help develop improvements to patient care.

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.

Adopt or Abandon? Surgeon-Specific Trends in Robotic Bariatric Surgery Utilization Between 2010 and 2019.

Background: It is unknown if surgeons are more likely to adopt or abandon robotic techniques given that bariatric procedures are already performed by surgeons with advanced laparoscopic skills. Methods: We used a statewide bariatric-specific data registry to evaluate surgeon-specific volumes of robotic bariatric cases between 2010 and 2019. Operative volume, procedure type, and patient characteristics were compared between the highest utilizers of robotic bariatric procedures (adopters) and surgeons who stopped performing robotic cases, despite demonstrating prior use (abandoners). Results: A total of 44 surgeons performed 3149 robotic bariatric procedures in Michigan between 2010 and 2019. Robotic utilization peaked in 2019, representing 7.24% of all bariatric cases. We identified 7 surgeons (16%) who performed 95% of the total number of robotic cases (adopters) and 12 surgeons (27%) who stopped performing bariatric cases during the study period (abandoners). Adopters performed a higher proportion of gastric bypass both robotically (22.9% versus 3.1%, P < .001) and laparoscopically (27.5% versus 15.1%, P < .001), when compared with abandoners. Surgeon experience (no. of years in practice), type of practice (teaching versus nonteaching hospital), and patient populations were similar between groups. Conclusions: Robotic bariatric utilization increased during the study period. The majority of robotic cases were performed by a small number of surgeons who were more likely to perform more complex cases such as gastric bypass in their own practice. Robotic adoption may be influenced by surgeon-specific preferences based upon procedure-specific volumes and may play a greater role in performing more complex surgical procedures in the future.

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.