Outcomes of Sleeve Gastrectomy in Patients With Organ Transplant-Related Immunosuppression.

INTRODUCTION: Obesity is frequent among organ transplant recipients, increasing the risk of acute graft rejection and overall morbimortality. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) effectively improves graft survival and associated comorbidities. We first compared 30-d outcomes between chronic immunosuppressed (CI) and nonchronic immunosuppressed (non-CI) patients. Then, between organ transplant and non-organ transplant CI patients who underwent LSG. METHODS: Patients who underwent LSG within the metabolic and bariatric surgery accreditation and quality improvement program 2017-2019 were included. Using 1:1 and 1:4 propensity score matching analysis, the cohorts were matched for 30 characteristics. We then compared 30-d outcomes between CI and non-CI (analysis 1) and between organ transplant and non-organ transplant CI patients who underwent LSG (analysis 2). RESULTS: A total of 486,576 patients were included. The matched cohorts in analysis 1 (n = 8978) and analysis 2 (n = 1152, n = 371) had similar preoperative characteristics. Propensity score matching in analysis 1 showed that patients in the CI group had significantly higher rates of renal complications (0.4% versus 0.2%, P = 0.006), unplanned intensive care unit admission (1.1% versus 0.7%, P = 0.003), blood transfusions (1.1% versus 0.7%, P = 0.003), readmissions (4.6% versus 3.5%, P < 0.001), reoperations (1.4% versus 1.0%, P = 0.033), interventions (1.3% versus 1.0%, P = 0.026), and postoperative bleeding (0.6% versus 0.4%, P = 0.013). In analysis 2, patients with organ transplant CI had a higher rate of pulmonary complications (1.1% versus 0.3%, P = 0.043), renal complications (2.4% versus 0.2%, P < 0.001), blood transfusions (6.5% versus 1.3%, P < 0.001), and readmissions (10.0% versus 4.6%, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with transplant-related CI who underwent LSG have higher 30-d postoperative complication rates compared to nontransplant-related CI patients; however, there were no differences in terms of mortality, intensive care unit admissions, staple line leaks, or bleeding. LSG is safe and feasible in this high-risk population.

3D versus 2D laparoscopic distal gastrectomy in patients with gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: While laparoscopic gastrectomy is a prominent therapeutic approach for distal gastric cancer, the clinical benefits of 3D laparoscopy over 2D laparoscopy remain unclear. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of 3D laparoscopy and 2D laparoscopy for distal gastric cancer resection through a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for studies published from inception through January 2023, according to the PRISMA guidelines. The MD or RR was used to compare 3D and 2D distal gastrectomy. Random-effects meta-analysis was estimated using the inverse variance and Mantel-Haenszel method for binary outcomes and the DerSimonian-Laird estimator for continuous outcomes. RESULTS: After reviewing 559 studies, 6 manuscripts met the inclusion criteria. The analysis included 689 patients, with 348 (50.5%) in the 3D group and 341 (49.5%) in the 2D group. 3D laparoscopic gastrectomy reduces the operative time (WMD - 28.57 min, 95% CI - 50.70 to - 6.44, p = 0.011), intraoperative blood loss (WMD - 6.69 mL, 95% CI - 8.09 to - 5.29, p < 0.001), and postoperative hospital stay (WMD - 0.92 days, 95% CI - 1.43 to - 0.42, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in time to first postoperative flatus (WMD - 0.22 days, 95% CI - 0.50 to 0.05, p = 0.110), postoperative complications (Relative Risk 0.56, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.41, p = 0.217), and the number of retrieved lymph nodes (WMD 1.25, 95% CI - 0.54 to 3.03, p = 0.172) between 3 and 2D laparoscopic distal gastrectomy. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the potential advantages of 3D laparoscopy in distal gastrectomy, including shorter operative time, postoperative hospital stay, and decreased intraoperative blood loss.