A second chance for a new heart? The role of metabolic and bariatric surgery in patients with end-stage heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is an independent risk factor for heart failure (HF). Substantial weight loss has been shown to reverse obesity-related cardiomyopathy. This study aimed to report our institution's experience with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients with morbid obesity and end-stage HF. METHODS: Between 2018 and 2022, 26 patients with end-stage HF were referred for LSG. Of 26 patients, 16 underwent an operation, and 10 did not. After institutional review board approval, a retrospective electronic medical record review was performed to evaluate (i) age, (ii) preoperative weight, (iii) decrease in body mass index (BMI) score, (iv) whether the patient underwent heart transplantation, and (v) mortality. Data analysis was performed using Stata/SE (version 17.0; StataCorp). The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare continuous variables between the cohorts, and the Pearson chi-square test was used for binary variables with Bonferroni correction applied. RESULTS: The LSG and non-LSG cohorts had comparable ages (P = .088) and starting BMI score (P = .918), and a proportion of patients had a ventricular assist device (P = .191). Patients who underwent LSG lost significantly more weight than the patients who did not, with an average decrease in BMI score of 8.9 kg/m2 (SD, ±6.13) and 1.1 kg/m2 (SD, ±4.10), respectively (P = .040). Of note, 6 patients (37.5%) who underwent LSG eventually underwent transplantation, compared with 2 patients (20.0%) from the matched cohort (P = .884). Of the 26 patients, there were 6 deaths: 2 (12.5%) in the LSG cohort and 4 (40.0%) in the non-LSG cohort (P = .525). CONCLUSION: LSG may be safe and effective for weight loss in patients with HF. This operation may provide patients affected by obesity with end-stage HF the lifesaving opportunity to achieve transplant candidacy.

Safety and cost of performing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with same day discharge at a large academic hospital.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is the most common surgical treatment for morbid obesity. While certain specialized ambulatory surgery centers offer LSG on an outpatient basis, patients undergoing LSG at most academic centers are admitted to hospital for initial postoperative convalescence and monitoring. Our institution has begun to offer LSG with same-day discharge (SDD) in select patients. We aimed to compare the perioperative outcomes and costs for patients undergoing LSG with inpatient admission versus SDD. METHODS: All patients enrolled in the SDD program from December 2020 through July 2022 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Patients enrolled in this pathway were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis even if ultimately admitted postoperatively. Propensity scoring was used to match these patients 1:1 to those with planned inpatient recovery based on age, BMI, and ASA classification. RESULTS: Seventy-five patients were enrolled in the LSG with SDD program during the study period. Among these, 62 patients (82.7%) had successful immediate postoperative discharge. Reasons for cancelation of planned SDD included anxiety (n = 5), pain (n = 3), nausea (n = 2), and one patient each with hypotension, urinary retention, and bleeding. After matching, there were no differences in age, BMI, or ASA classification in a comparison group of patients with planned inpatient recovery. There were no differences in perioperative complications. There were no readmissions or requirements for outpatient intravenous fluids among patients with SDD, compared to n = 3 (4.0%) and n = 2 (2.7%) in the inpatient cohort, respectively. The total perioperative cost for patients undergoing LSG with planned SDD was 6.8% less than those with inpatient recovery. CONCLUSION: With appropriate protocols, LSG with same-day discharge can safely be performed at large academic surgery centers without increased morbidity or need for additional services in the perioperative period. SDD may be associated with decreased costs and allows for more efficient hospital bed allocation.

Load-to-strength ratio at the radius is higher in adolescent and young adult females with obesity compared to normal-weight controls.

BACKGROUND: Among adolescents with extremity fractures, individuals with obesity have greater representation compared with individuals of normal-weight, despite having higher areal and volumetric bone mineral density (aBMD, vBMD) than their normal-weight counterparts. The relative increase in BMD in individuals with obesity may thus be insufficient to support the greater force generated upon falling. The load-to-strength ratio is a biomechanical approach for assessing the risk of fracture by comparing applied force to bone strength, with higher load-to-strength ratios indicating higher fracture risk. OBJECTIVE: To assess the load-to-strength ratio at the distal radius in adolescent and young adult females with severe obesity (OB) compared with normal-weight healthy controls (HC). We hypothesized that OB have a higher load-to-strength ratio compared to HC. METHODS: We examined bone parameters in 65 girls 14-21 years old: 33 OB and 32 HC. We used dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) to assess body composition, high resolution peripheral quantitative CT (HR-pQCT) to estimate vBMD, and microfinite element analysis (µFEA) to assess bone strength at the distal radius. To quantify fracture risk, we computed the load-to-strength ratio, where the numerator is defined as the load applied to the outstretched hand during a forward fall and the denominator is the bone strength, as estimated by µFEA. RESULTS: Although OB had higher total vBMD than HC (368.3 vs. 319.9 mgHA/cm3, p = 0.002), load-to-strength ratio at the radius was greater in OB than HC after controlling for age and race (0.66 vs. 0.54, p < 0.0001). In OB, impact force and load-to-strength ratio were associated negatively with % lean mass (r = -0.49; p = 0.003 and r = -0.65; p < 0.0001 respectively) and positively with visceral fat (r = 0.65; p < 0.0001 and r = 0.36; p = 0.04 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Adolescent and young adult females with obesity have higher load-to-strength ratio at the distal radius due to higher forces applied to bone in a fall combined with incomplete adaptation of bone to increasing body weight. This is differentially affected by lean mass, fat mass, and visceral fat mass.

American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery consensus statement on laparoscopic adjustable gastric band management.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) management continues to be an important part of many metabolic and bariatric surgery practices. OBJECTIVES: To replace the existing American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) LAGB adjustment credentialing guidelines for physician extenders with consensus statements that reflect the current state of LAGB management. SETTING: ASMBS Integrated Health Clinical Issues Committee. METHODS: A modified Delphi process using a 2-stage consensus approach was conducted on LAGB management. Thirty-four consensus statements were developed following a literature search on a wide range of LAGB topics. A 5-point Likert scale was implemented to measure consensus agreement with a Delphi panel of 39 expert participants who were invited and agreed to participate in 2 rounds of Delphi questionnaires. Consensus was set a priori at 75% agreement, defined as the proportion of participants responding with agreement (i.e., 4 or 5) or disagreement (i.e., 1 or 2) on the Likert scale. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 74% (25 of 34) of the LAGB management statements. In Delphi round 1, 95% (37 of 39) of the participants responded to 34 consensus statements; 21 of the statements (62%) met the 75% criteria for consensus. Thirty-one participants (80%) responded in round 2, shifting the agreement on 4 more statements to the 75% threshold. CONCLUSION: The ASMBS consensus statement on LAGB management is intended to guide practice with current evidence-based knowledge and professional experience. The ASMBS is not a credentialing body and does not seek to guide credentialing with this document.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Perioperative Nutrition, Metabolic, and Nonsurgical Support of Patients Undergoing Bariatric Procedures - 2019 Update: Cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists.

OBJECTIVE: The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists. METHODS: Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts. RESULTS: New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

Clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative nutrition, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of patients undergoing bariatric procedures - 2019 update: cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists.

OBJECTIVE: The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPG) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The Obesity Society, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the Obesity Medicine Association, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists boards of directors in adherence to the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPG, algorithms, and checklists. METHODS: Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts. RESULTS: New or updated topics in this CPG include contextualization in an adiposity-based, chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based, and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current healthcare arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence-based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR THE PERIOPERATIVE NUTRITION, METABOLIC, AND NONSURGICAL SUPPORT OF PATIENTS UNDERGOING BARIATRIC PROCEDURES - 2019 UPDATE: COSPONSORED BY AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS/AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY, THE OBESITY SOCIETY, AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR METABOLIC & BARIATRIC SURGERY, OBESITY MEDICINE ASSOCIATION, AND AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ANESTHESIOLOGISTS - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.

Objective: The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society, American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists. Methods: Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts. Results: New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health-care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest). Conclusion: Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues. A1C = hemoglobin A1c; AACE = American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists; ABCD = adiposity-based chronic disease; ACE = American College of Endocrinology; ADA = American Diabetes Association; AHI = Apnea-Hypopnea Index; ASA = American Society of Anesthesiologists; ASMBS = American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery; BMI = body mass index; BPD = biliopancreatic diversion; BPD/DS = biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch; CI = confidence interval; CPAP = continuous positive airway pressure; CPG = clinical practice guideline; CRP = C-reactive protein; CT = computed tomography; CVD = cardiovascular disease; DBCD = dysglycemia-based chronic disease; DS = duodenal switch; DVT = deep venous thrombosis; DXA = dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; EFA = essential fatty acid; EL = evidence level; EN = enteral nutrition; ERABS = enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery; FDA = U.S. Food and Drug Administration; G4G = Guidelines for Guidelines; GERD = gastroesophageal reflux disease; GI = gastrointestinal; HCP = health-care professional(s); HTN = hypertension; ICU = intensive care unit; IGB = intragastric balloon(s); IV = intravenous; LAGB = laparoscopic adjustable gastric band; LAGBP = laparoscopic adjustable gastric banded plication; LGP = laparoscopic greater curvature (gastric) plication; LRYGB = laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; LSG = laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy; MetS = metabolic syndrome; NAFLD = nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; NASH = nonalcoholic steatohepatitis; NSAID = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug; OA = osteoarthritis; OAGB = one-anastomosis gastric bypass; OMA = Obesity Medicine Association; OR = odds ratio; ORC = obesity-related complication(s); OSA = obstructive sleep apnea; PE = pulmonary embolism; PN = parenteral nutrition; PRM = pulmonary recruitment maneuver; RCT = randomized controlled trial; RD = registered dietician; RDA = recommended daily allowance; RYGB = Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; SG = sleeve gastrectomy; SIBO = small intestinal bacterial overgrowth; TOS = The Obesity Society; TSH = thyroid-stimulating hormone; T1D = type 1 diabetes; T2D = type 2 diabetes; VTE = venous thromboembolism; WE = Wernicke encephalopathy; WHO = World Health Organization.