Complications of the intragastric balloon treatment. Small bowel obstruction caused by migrated intragastric balloon - clinical case report and literature review.

INTRODUCTION: An endoscopic intragastric balloon (IGB) placement is one of the minimally invasive methods of obesity treatment. One of the rare serious complications is mechanical bowel obstruction requiring operative management. We report a case of a male patient with small bowel obstruction due to IGB migration and the literature review of complications during IGB treatment. Detailed Case Description: A patient with a BMI of 28 kg/m2 was admitted to the hospital with spontaneous deflation of an IGB. Due to the suspected location of IGB in the ileum laparoscopy was performed. The enterotomy was performed and the IGB removed. The procedure and the postoperative period were uneventful. DISCUSSION: Spontaneous IGB ruptures are reported in the literature with a frequency ranging from 0.6 to 23%. The majority of deflated devices are spontaneously excreted with the stool with no abdominal symptoms. Only 0.38% of IGBs cause mechanical bowel obstruction of requiring surgical management. Based on our own experience and literature review, we propose the diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm. CONCLUSION: Complications after IGB placement can range from mild to severe, that is why it is so important to make an early diagnosis based on the emerging symptoms and to implement prompt management to reduce or avoid serious complications. Any patient reporting disturbing symptoms occurring over a pro- longed period of time requires hospitalization and careful observation for the occurrence of gastrointestinal obstruction. The ideal option is hospitalization in the center which implemented the IGB and start with the algorithm we proposed.

Timing of Loop Ileostomy Closure Does Not Play a Pivotal Role in Terms of Complications-Results of the Liquidation of iLEOstomy (LILEO) Study.

Loop ileostomy is commonly performed by colorectal and general surgeons to protect newly created large bowel anastomoses. The optimal timing for ileostomy closure remains debatable. Defining the timing associated with the best postoperative outcomes can significantly improve the clinical results for patients undergoing ileostomy closure. The LILEO study was a prospective multicenter cohort study conducted in Poland from October 2022 to December 2023. Full data analysis involved 159 patients from 19 surgical centers. Patients were categorized based on the timing of ileostomy reversal: early (<4 months), standard (4-6 months), and delayed (>6 months). Data on demographics, clinical characteristics, and perioperative outcomes were analyzed for each group separately and compared. No significant differences were observed in length of hospital stay (p = 0.22), overall postoperative complications (p = 0.43), or 30-day reoperation rates (p = 0.28) across the three groups. Additional analysis of Clavien-Dindo complication grades was performed and did not show significant differences in complication severity (p = 0.95), indicating that the timing of ileostomy closure does not significantly impact perioperative complications or hospital stay. Decisions on ileostomy reversal timing should be personalized and should consider individual clinical factors, including the type of adjuvant oncological treatment and the preventive measures performed for common postoperative complications.

Incisional negative pressure wound therapy vs primary wound suturing after intestinal ostomy closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Wound infection after intestinal ostomy closure is common postoperative complication. An alternative to primary suturing (PS) of the wound is incisional negative pressure wound therapy (iNPWT). The aim of the article was to assess and compare clinical outcomes after PS and iNPWT. APPROACH: Strategy was aimed to find relevant data comparing outcomes of iNPWT and PS after ostomy closure. Search was conducted using the MEDLINE/PubMed, ScienceDirect, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials, SciELO, and Web of Science databases. Authors conducted a meta-analysis of parameters: wound healing time, surgical site infections, complications, length of stay. RESULTS: The analysis revealed that iNPWT and control group did not differ significantly in wound healing time (OR = -2.06; 95% CI = -5.99-1.87; p=0.30, I2=4%). Meta-analysis of surgical site infection incidence revealed a significant difference favoring the incisional NPWT group versus observational (OR = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.25-0.72; p=0.002; I2=14%). Patients in iNPWT group had significantly lower incidence of complications than observational group (OR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.35-0.77; p=0.001, I2=71%). Subgroup analysis limited to randomized studies only also presented significant differences favoring the iNPWT group against observational (OR = 0.27; 95% CI = 0.14-0.52; p<0.001, I2=67%). Our analysis revealed that LOS was not significantly different between groups among patients treated with iNPWT (IV=0.19; 95% CI = -0.66 -1,04; p=0.76, I2=0%). Subgroup analysis of randomized studies also did not present a significant difference (IV=0.25; 95% CI = -0.80 -1,30; p=0.33, I2=10%). INNOVATION: Study shows that the use of iNPWT can reduce surgical site infections with other complications (wound hematomas, wound seromas, wound dehiscence, fistulas, ileus) in patients undergoing intestinal ostomy closure without extended hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Use of iNPWT can be considered in postoperative care after elective ostomy closure to decrease the rate of the most common complication after ostomy closure.

Effect of preoperative intragastric balloon treatment on perioperative and postoperative outcomes after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: A retrospective cohort study.

<b><br>Introduction:</b> Intragastric balloon (IGB) insertion is used as a bridging therapy in patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 50 kg/m2 . We arranged a retrospective study to evaluate whether pre-operative IGB treatment influences perioperative and postoperative weight loss outcomes after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG), and especially to evaluate the impact of post - IGB percentage of excessive weight loss (%EWL) on postoperative %EWL.</br> <b><br>Materials and methods:</b> Patients who underwent IGB placement followed by laparoscopic SG were divided into the following groups considering %EWL after IGB: Group 1 <=10.38%; Group 2 >10.38% and <=17.27%; Group 3 >17.27% and <=24.86%; Group 4 >24.86%. 1 year after SG data were collected. The following parameters were compared between groups: operative time, total blood loss, length of stay and weight, BMI, percentage of total weight loss (%TWL), %EWL.</br> <b><br>Results:</b> There were no statistically significant differences between groups in perioperative results. Post-SG %EWL was the highest in intermediate groups: 2 and 3. Post-treatment results were observed: body weight and BMI were the lowest in Group 4 and the highest in Group 1. Post-treatment %EWL was the highest in Group 4, the lowest in Group 1 and grew gradually in subsequent groups.</br> <b><br>Discussion:</b> The study confirmed the impact of weight loss on IGB on postoperative results. The study showed that %EWL after the IGB treatment influences %EWL after SG and most of all affects definitive %EWL after two-stage treatment and it could be a foreshadowing factor of these outcomes.</br> <b><br>Importance:</b> The importance of research for the development of the field %EWL after IGB influences the final BMI and final weight, which means that patients with the greatest %EWL after IGB are more likely to have the greatest postoperative weight loss and overall weight loss.</br>.

Analysis of Changes in Glucose and Lipid Metabolism in Patients with Clinically Severe Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Undergoing Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy-Prospective Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: We still lack studies providing analysis of changes in glucose and lipid metabolism after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2). We aimed to investigate postoperative changes in glucose and lipid metabolism after LSG in patients with DM2. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective, observational study included patients with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 and ≤ 50 kg/m2, DM2 < 10 years of duration, who were qualified for LSG. Perioperative 14-day continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) began after preoperative clinical assessment and OGTT, then reassessment 1 and 12 months after LSG. Thirty-three patients in mean age of 45 ± 10 years were included in study (23 females). RESULTS: EBMIL before LSG was 17 ± 11.7%, after 1 month-36.3 ± 12.8%, while after 12 months-66.1 ± 21.7%. Fifty-two percent of the patients had DM2 remission after 12 months. None required then insulin therapy. 16/33 patients initially on oral antidiabetics still required them after 12 months. Significant decrease in HbA1C was observed: 5.96 ± 0.73%; 5.71 ± 0.80; 5.54 ± 0.52%. Same with HOMA-IR: 5.34 ± 2.84; 4.62 ± 3.78; 3.20 ± 1.99. In OGTT, lower increase in blood glucose with lesser insulin concentrations needed to recover glucose homeostasis was observed during follow-ups. Overtime perioperative average glucose concentration in CGM of 5.03 ± 1.09 mmol/L significantly differed after 12 months, 4.60 ± 0.53 (p = 0.042). Significantly higher percentage of glucose concentrations above targeted compartment (3.9-6.7 mmol/L) was observed in perioperative period (7% ± 4%), than in follow-up (4 ± 6% and 2 ± 1%). HDL significantly rose, while triglyceride levels significantly decreased. CONCLUSIONS: Significant improvement in glucose and lipid metabolism was observed 12 months after LSG and changes began 1 month after procedure.

The impact of perioperative fluid therapy on the short-term outcomes after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery with ERAS protocol: a prospective observational study.

The main goals of the Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol are focused on shortening the length of hospital stay (LOS), expediting convalescence, and reducing morbidity. A balanced perioperative fluid therapy is among the significant interventions incorporated by the ERAS protocol. The article contains extensive discussion surrounding the impact of this individual intervention on short-term outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of perioperative fluid therapy on short-term outcomes in patients after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery. The analysis included consecutive patients, who had undergone laparoscopic colorectal cancer operations between 2013 and 2020. Patients were divided into two groups: restricted (≤ 2500 ml) or excessive (> 2500 ml) perioperative fluid therapy. A standardized ERAS protocol was implemented in all patients. The study outcomes included recovery parameters and the morbidity rate, LOS and 30 days readmission rate. There were 361 and 80 patients in groups 1 and 2, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in terms of demographic parameters and factors related to the surgical procedure. Logistic regression showed that restricted fluid therapy as a single intervention was associated with improvement in tolerance of diet on 1st postoperative day (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.31-3.62, p = 0.003), accelerated mobilization on 1st postoperative day (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.29-4.61, p = 0.006), lower risk of postoperative morbidity (OR 0.58, 95%CI 0.36-0.98, p = 0.046), shorter LOS (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.29-0.81, p = 0.005) and reduced readmission rate (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.23-0.98, p = 0.045). A balanced perioperative fluid therapy on the day of surgery may be associated with faster convalescence, lower morbidity rate, shorter LOS and lower 30 days readmission rate.

Initial experience with laparoscopic revisional single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI-S) after failed sleeve gastrectomy.

Introduction: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is currently the most commonly performed bariatric operation, but re-do surgery may be necessary in up to half of the patients. Single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI-S) is quickly gaining recognition as a revisional procedure after failed SG. Aim: To discuss the surgical technique and analyze initial outcomes after introduction of SADI-S after SG with 1-year follow-up. Material and methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent re-do bariatric surgery - revisional SADI-S - in 2021 at a secondary referral public hospital. All patients' follow-up was completed 1 year after. Results: 14 consecutive patients, 6 (43%) males and 8 females, were included. Median maximal body mass index (BMI) was 52.29 (47.96-77.16) kg/m2, BMI before SADI-S was 43.09 (41.64-48.99) kg/m2. No perioperative morbidity was recorded. Four (28%) patients reported recurrent abdominal crampy pain and diarrhea that required dietary advisement and pharmacological therapy in the postoperative period. No reoperations, mortality or readmissions were recorded during 1-year follow-up. SADI-S was associated with further weight loss, resulting in median BMI of 37.55 (36.29-39.43) kg/m2 1 year after SADI-S. Observed additional percentage total weight loss (%TWL) 1 year after SADI-S was 18.65% (17.25-21.89%), while additional percentage excess body mass index loss (%EBMIL) was 35.88% (29.18-41.92%). There was 1 case of diabetes mellitus type 2 remission and improvement in glycemic control in 1 patient. 4/6 patients (66.67%) had improvement in control of hypertension. Conclusions: SADI-S is promising re-do surgery after SG with low postoperative morbidity. Additional %TWL 1 year after SADI-S is ~19%, while additional %EBMIL is ~36%, with significant improvement of obesity-related comorbidities.

The analysis of factors increasing the odds for type 2 diabetes mellitus remission following re-do bariatric surgery after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy- cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Metabolic/bariatric surgery is the only proven treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) with curative intent. However, in a number of patients, the surgery is not effective or they may experience a relapse. Those patients can be offered re-do bariatric surgery (RBS). PURPOSE: The study aimed to determine factors increasing the odds for T2D remission one year after RBS following primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted between January 2010 and January 2020, which included 12 bariatric centers in Poland. The study population was divided into groups: Group 1- patients with T2D remission after RBS (n = 28) and Group 2- patients without T2D remission after RBS (n = 49). T2D remission was defined as HBA1c < 6.0% without glucose-lowering pharmacotherapy and glycemia within normal range at time of follow-up that was completed 12 months after RBS. RESULTS: Fifty seven females and 20 males were included in the study. Patients who achieved BMI < 33 kg/m2 after RBS and those with %EBMIL > 60.7% had an increased chance of T2D remission (OR = 3.39, 95%CI = 1.28-8.95, p = 0.014 and OR = 12.48, 95%CI 2.67-58.42, p = 0.001, respectively). Time interval between primary LSG and RBS was significantly shorter in Group 1 than in Group 2 [1 (1-4) vs. 3 (2-4) years, p = 0.023]. CONCLUSIONS: Shorter time interval between LSG and RBS may ease remission of T2D in case of lack of remission after primary procedure. Significant excess weight loss seems to be the most crucial factor for T2D remission.

Is triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cell 1 (TREM-1) protein a new marker of serious infectious complications in colorectal surgery?: case-matched pilot study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the usefulness of the triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cell 1 (TREM-1) protein as a marker for serious infectious complications during laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: Sixty-four patients with colon or rectal cancer, who underwent an elective laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery from November 2018 to February 2020, were included in the analysis. Blood samples of the TREM-1 protein testing were collected four times from each patient: before and on three following postoperative days (PODs). Patients were divided into two groups according to the presence of infectious complications. Subsequently, patients with infectious complications (group 1) were matched 1:1 with patients without complications (group 2). The case-matched analysis was done by selecting patients from the control group by age, ASA scale, cancer stage, and type of surgery. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in demographic and operative characteristics between the two groups. The median length of hospital stay was longer in group 1 than in group 2 (11 days vs. 5 days, p < 0.001). Preoperative measurements of TREM-1 protein did not differ between the two groups. There were no significant differences in the measurements on the first and third postoperative days. However, the median TREM-1 measurement was higher in group 1 on the second postoperative day (542 pg/ml vs. 399 pg/ml; p = 0.040). The difference was more apparent when only severe postoperative complications were considered. When compared to the group without any complications, the median TREM-1 level was significantly higher in the group with severe infection complications in POD 1, POD 2, and POD 3 (p < 0.05). The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve demonstrated that TREM-1 readings in POD 2 had a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 84% for the presence of severe infection complications at a value of 579.3 pg/ml (AUC 0.8, 95%CI 0.65-0.96). CONCLUSION: TREM-1 measurements might become a helpful predictive marker in the early diagnosis of serious infectious complications in patients following laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Differences in Technical Aspects of Primary Sleeve Gastrectomy Prior to Redo Bariatric Surgery-A Multicenter Cohort Study (PROSS Study).

Background and Objectives: Although the technical simplicity of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is relatively well understood, many parts of the procedure differ according to bariatric surgeons. These technical variations may impact postoperative weight loss or the treatment of comorbidities and lead to qualification for redo procedures. Materials and Methods: A multicenter, observational, retrospective study was conducted among patients undergoing revision procedures. Patients were divided into three groups based on the indications for revisional surgery (insufficient weight loss or obesity-related comorbidities treatment, weight regain and development of complications). Results: The median bougie size was 36 (32-40) with significant difference (p = 0.04). In 246 (51.57%) patients, the resection part of sleeve gastrectomy was started 4 cm from the pylorus without significant difference (p = 0.065). The number of stapler cartridges used during the SG procedure was six staplers in group C (p = 0.529). The number of procedures in which the staple line was reinforced was the highest in group A (29.63%) with a significant difference (0.002). Cruroplasty was performed in 13 patients (p = 0.549). Conclusions: There were no differences between indications to redo surgery in terms of primary surgery parameters such as the number of staplers used or the length from the pylorus to begin resection. The bougie size was smaller in the group of patients with weight regain. Patients who had revision for insufficient weight loss were significantly more likely to have had their staple line oversewn. A potential cause could be a difference in the size of the removed portion of the stomach, but it is difficult to draw unequivocal conclusions within the limitations of our study.