EUS-guided Braun-type enteroenterostomy for management of an afferent limb-type obstruction in a patient with prior surgical gastrojejunostomy.

Video 1Case presentation of EUS-guided Braun-type enteroenterostomy for the management of an afferent limb-type obstruction in a patient with prior surgical gastrojejunostomy.

Selection of Robotic Bariatric Surgery Candidates: a Nationwide Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to identify risk factors associated with 30-day major complications, readmission, and delayed discharge for patients undergoing robotic bariatric surgery. METHODS: From the metabolic and bariatric surgery and accreditation quality improvement program (2015-2018) datasets, adult patients who underwent elective robotic bariatric operations were included. Predictors for 30-day major complications, readmission, and delayed discharge (hospital stay ≥ 3 days) were identified using univariable and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: Major complications in patients undergoing robotic bariatric surgery were associated with both pre-operative and intraoperative factors including pre-existing cardiac morbidity (OR = 1.41, CI = [1.09-1.82]), gastroesophageal reflux disease [GERD] (OR = 1.23, CI = [1.11-1.38]), pulmonary embolism (OR = 1.51, CI = [1.02-2.22]), prior bariatric surgery (OR = 1.66, CI = [1.43-1.94]), increased operating time (OR = 1.003, CI = [1.002-1.004]), gastric bypass or duodenal switch (OR = 1.58, CI = [1.40-1.79]), and intraoperative drain placement (OR = 1.28, CI = [1.11-1.47]). With regard to 30-day readmission, non-white race (OR = 1.25, CI = [1.14-1.39]), preoperative hyperlipidemia (OR = 1.16, CI = [1.14-1.38]), DVT (OR = 1.48, CI = [1.10-1.99]), therapeutic anticoagulation (OR = 1.48, CI = [1.16-1.89]), limited ambulation (OR = 1.33, CI = [1.01-1.74]), and dialysis (OR = 2.14, CI = [1.13-4.09]) were significantly associated factors. Age ≥ 65 (OR = 1.18, CI = [1.04-1.34]), female gender (OR = 1.21, CI = [1.10-1.32]), hypertension (OR = 1.08, CI = [1.01-1.15]), renal insufficiency (OR = 2.32, CI = [1.69-3.17]), COPD (OR = 1.49, CI = [1.23-1.82]), sleep apnea (OR = 1.10, CI = [1.03-1.18]), oxygen dependence (OR = 1.47, CI = [1.10-2.0]), steroid use (OR = 1.26, CI = [1.02-1.55]), IVC filter (OR = 1.52, CI = [1.15-2.0]), and BMI ≥ 40 (OR = 1.12, CI = [1.04-1.21]) were risk factors associated with delayed discharge. CONCLUSION: When selecting patients for bariatric surgery, surgeons early in their learning curve for utilizing robotics should avoid individuals with pre-existing cardiac or renal morbidities, venous thromboembolism, and limited functional status. Patients who have had previous bariatric surgery or require technically demanding operations are at higher risk for complications. An evidence-based approach in selecting bariatric candidates may potentially minimize the overall costs associated with adopting the technology.

Quantifying physiologic parameters of the gastroesophageal junction during robotic sleeve gastrectomy and identifying predictors of post-sleeve gastroesophageal reflux disease.

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy is among the most commonly-performed procedures for morbid obesity. However, patients occasionally develop post-sleeve gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Identifying patients most at risk for this complication remains difficult. We aimed to correlate intra-operative physiologic measurements of the lower esophageal sphincter (LES) at the gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) during robotic sleeve gastrectomy in an attempt to identify predictors of post-sleeve GERD symptoms. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of a prospectively maintained database identified 28 patients in whom robotic sleeve gastrectomy was performed utilizing EndoFLIP™ technology between January and September 2021. Intraoperative LES measurements at the GEJ including cross-sectional area (CSA), distensibility index (DI), intra-balloon pressure, and high-pressure zone (HPZ length) were correlated with post-operative GERD. RESULTS: GEJ CSA, pressure, and DI increased over the course of the surgery (CSA pre-op: 31 (IQR 19.3-39.5) mm2 vs. post-op: 67 (IQR 40.8-95.8) mm2, p < 0.001; pressure: 25.8 (IQR 20.2-33.1) mmHg vs. 31.5 (IQR 28.9-37.0) mmHg, p = 0.007; DI 1.1 (IQR 0.8-1.8) mm2/mmHg vs. 2.0 (IQR 1.2-3.0) mm2/mmHg, p = < 0.001), whereas HPZ length decreased (2.5 (IQR 2.5-3) cm vs. 2.0 (IQR 1.3-2.5) cm, p = 0.022). Twenty-three patients (82.1%) completed a post-operative GERD questionnaire. Fifteen (65.2%) had no GERD symptoms before or after surgery; 5 (21.7%) reported new post-sleeve GERD symptoms; 3 (13.0%) reported exacerbation of pre-existing GERD symptoms. Patients with new or worsening GERD symptoms had higher post-sleeve DIs (3.2 (IQR 1.9-4.5) mm2/mmHg vs. 1.5 (IQR 1.2-2.4) mm2/mmHg, p = 0.024) and lower post-sleeve LES pressures (29.9 (IQR 26.3-32.9) mmHg vs. 35.2 (IQR 31.0-38.0) mmHg, p = 0.023) than those without. CONCLUSIONS: An increase in GEJ CSA, pressure, and DI, and a decrease in GEJ length can be expected during robotic sleeve gastrectomy. Patients with new or worsening post-sleeve GERD symptoms have higher post-sleeve DI and lower post-sleeve LES pressure than their asymptomatic counterparts.

Implementation of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program and outcomes of bariatric surgery.

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluates the performance of bariatric surgery prior to and after the implementation of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP). METHODS: The eras prior to (2007-2015) and after (2016-2018) the transition to MBSAQIP were compared for patients, operations and outcomes using adjusted logistic regression estimates. RESULTS: Thirty-day surgical (6%vs.2.9%,p < 0.01) and medical (3.4%vs.1.7%,p < 0.01) complications rates were reduced over the period 2007 through 2018. Th use of sleeve gastrectomy has steadily increased from 2010 to 2018 (14%vs.66.6%,p < 0.01). The proportion of patients who were discharged early continued to rise (9.8%vs.46.9%,p < 0.01) from 2007 to 2018. The MBSAQIP period was associated with reduced odds for 30-day surgical (OR = 0.86,CI = [0.81-0.91]) and medical (OR = 0.81,CI = [0.75-0.88]) complications. Implementation of the MBSAQIP was also predictive of early discharge (OR = 1.93,CI = [1.90-2.00]). CONCLUSION: The type of bariatric procedure, in addition to trends in morbidity and hospital stays, gradually changed from 2007 to 2018. Our findings suggest that outcomes of bariatric operations have improved over the past decade. The MBSAQIP era is associated with lower rates of complications and greater likelihood of early discharge, independent of the procedure type.

Minimally invasive versus open duodenal switch: a nationwide retrospective analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to characterize the variability in clinical outcomes between open, laparoscopic, and robotic Duodenal Switch (DS). METHODS: From the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery and Accreditation Quality Improvement Program, patients who underwent DS (2015-2018) were identified. Open DS was compared to laparoscopic and robotic approaches with for patients factors, perioperative characteristics, and 30-day postoperative outcomes. Logistic regression estimates were used to characterize variables associated with surgical site infections, bleeding, reoperation, readmission, and early discharge (hospital stay of ≤ one day). RESULTS: Of 7649 cases, 411 (5.4%) were open, 5722 (74.8%) were laparoscopic, and 1515 (19.8%) were robotic DS. Open DS patients were more often older (≥ 65 years:4.7% vs. 4.3% vs. 2.1%, p < 0.01) and had lower body mass index (< 40 kg/m2:16.3% vs. 10.5% vs. 9.9%, p < 0.01). The co-morbidities were mainly comparable between the three groups. Open DS was more often without skilled assistance (35.3% vs. 12.1% vs. 5.3%, p < 0.01), revisional (41.4% vs. 20.5% vs. 21.3%, p < 0.01), and performed concurrently with other operations. Robotic DS surgery was more often longer (≥ 140 min:64.4% vs. 39.2% vs. 86.9%, p < 0.01). Post-operatively, open DS was associated with higher rates of surgical site infection (7.1% vs. 2% vs. 2.8%, p < 0.01), bleeding (2.4% vs. 0.7% vs. 0.9%, p = 0.001), reoperation (6.6% vs. 3.6% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.01), and readmission (12.4% vs. 6.8% vs. 8.3%, p = < 0.01). Patients undergoing robotic DS were more often discharged early (0.5% vs. 1% vs. 7.8%, p < 0.01). In the regression analyses, minimally invasive DS was associated with lower odds for wound infections (OR = 0.3,CI = [0.2-0.5]), bleeding (OR = 0.4,CI = [0.2-0.8]), and readmission (OR = 0.6,CI = [0.4-0.8]), as well as greater likelihood of early discharge (OR = 5.6 CI = [1.3-23.0]). CONCLUSION: Open DS is associated with greater risk for complications and excessive resource utilization when compared to minimally invasive approaches. Laparoscopic and robotic techniques should be prioritized in performing DS, despite the complexity of the procedure.

Predictive Factors for Developing GERD After Sleeve Gastrectomy: Is Preoperative Endoscopy Necessary?

INTRODUCTION: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common bariatric procedure performed in the USA. There is a concern for new gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and Barrett's esophagus after SG. Endoscopic screening before bariatric surgery is controversial. We sought to identify preoperative endoscopic factors that may predict the development of GERD after SG. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated 217 patients undergoing primary robotic-assisted SG. All patients underwent endoscopy before SG and for-cause postoperatively. Patients were followed for the development of GERD, diagnosed by either biopsy-proven reflux esophagitis or a positive esophageal pH test. Patients were separated into 2 groups: Those who developed GERD after surgery (GERD group) and those who did not (No GERD group). Patients with a positive preoperative pH test, LA Grade B or greater esophagitis, or hiatal hernia > 5 cm on preoperative endoscopy were counseled to undergo gastric bypass and excluded. RESULTS: There were more males in the No GERD group (25.6% vs. 8.1%; p = 0.02). More patients had preoperative heartburn symptoms in the GERD group (40.5% vs. 23.9%; p = 0.04). Endoscopically identified esophagitis was more common in the GERD group (29.7% vs. 13.3%; p = 0.01), as was biopsy-proven esophagitis (24.3% vs. 11.1%; p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in the incidence or size of hiatal hernia or in the rate of H. pylori infection between the groups. On multivariate analysis, the strongest predictors of GERD after SG were endoscopically identified esophagitis (odds ratio [OR] 2.79; 95% confidence interval [CI]1.17-6.69; p = 0.02) and biopsy-proven esophagitis (OR 2.80; 95% CI 1.06-7.37; p = 0.04). Male patients were less likely to develop GERD after SG (OR 0.23; 95% CI 0.06-0.85; p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Our findings strengthen the rationale for routine preoperative endoscopy and highlight critical clinical and endoscopic criteria that should prompt consideration of alternatives to SG for weight loss.

A cost analysis of two- versus three-instrument robotic-assisted inguinal hernia repair with mesh: time is money.

Equipment expenses and operating times can lead to higher costs with robotic surgery. We compared the cost-effectiveness of 2- vs. 3-instrument (2i vs. 3i) approach to robotic transabdominal preperitoneal inguinal hernia repair. We conducted a retrospective study of 172 patients, with 86 patients in each group. Procedure cost, operative time, morbidity, length of stay, readmission rate, and hernia recurrence at 90 days were compared. Statistical significance was assigned to p < 0.05. No significant differences in preoperative variables nor in postoperative outcomes were identified. Mean operative time was 6 min longer in the 2i group and this approach cost $300 less. The 2i approach was cost-effective for operating room (OR) costs of less than $50 per minute. Surgeon efficiency and OR dollar-per-minute value influence the potential for cost savings with fewer instruments in robotic herniorrhaphy. There is no difference in outcomes when fewer instruments are used.

Bupivacaine liposome use reduces length of post-anesthesia care unit stay and postoperative narcotic use following robotic inguinal herniorrhaphy.

In the current opioid crisis, multimodal analgesic protocols should be considered to reduce or eliminate narcotic usage in the postoperative period. We assess the impact of bupivacaine liposome used along with a standard analgesia protocol following robotic inguinal hernia repair. A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained data including robotic inguinal hernia repairs (IHR) by two surgeons in the United States was performed. Within a multimodal analgesic protocol, local anesthetic was administered intraoperatively. One group received a mix of bupivacaine and bupivacaine liposome (BL), and one received standard bupivacaine (SB). Recovery room and home opiate doses were recorded. Primary outcomes included length of stay (LOS) and postoperative medication requirements. Statistical analysis was performed using Chi-square or Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U test as appropriate. 122 robotic IHRs were included; 55 received BL and 67 received SB. Hospital LOS (hours) was reduced in the BL group (2.8 ± 1.1 vs 3.5 ± 1.2; p = 0.0003). There was no significant difference in recovery room parenteral MME requirements between the groups; however, BL group had less oral MME requirements (5.0 ± 6.5 MME vs. 8.1 ± 6.9 MME, p = 0.02). The BL group had a higher rate of zero opiate doses at home (44% vs 5%, p = 0.0005). Of those that did require opiates at home, there was a significant reduction in number of narcotic pills used by the BL compared to the SB group (median 1 vs 5, respectively; p < 0.0001). Intraoperative administration of BL as part of a pain management protocol may decrease length of hospital stay, and reduce or eliminate the need for narcotic analgesic use at home.

Robotic-assisted surgery enhances the learning curve while maintaining quality outcomes in sleeve gastrectomy: a preliminary, multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of robotic-assisted bariatric surgery has been on the rise. An increasing number of fellowship programs have adopted robotic surgery as part of the curriculum. Our aim was to compare technical efficiency of a surgeon during the first year of practice after completing an advanced minimally invasive fellowship with a mentor surgeon. METHODS: A systematic review of a prospectively maintained database was performed of consecutive patients undergoing robotic-assisted sleeve gastrectomy between 2015 and 2019 at a tertiary-care bariatric center (mentor group) and between 2018 and 2019 at a semi-academic community-based bariatric program (mentee 1 group) and 2019-2020 at a tertiary-care academic center (mentee 2 group). RESULTS: 257 patients in the mentor group, 45 patients in the mentee 1 group, and 11 patients in the mentee 2 group were included. The mentee operative times during the first year in practice were significantly faster than the mentor's times in the first three (mentee 1 group) and two (mentee 2 group) years (P < 0.05) but remained significantly longer than the mentor's times in the last two (mentee 1 group) and one (mentee 2 group) years (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in venothromboembolic events (P = 0.89) or readmission rates (P = 0.93). The mean length of stay was 1.8 ± 0.5 days, 1.3 ± 0.5 days, and 1.5 ± 0.5 days in the mentor, mentee 1, and mentee 2 groups, respectively (P < 0.0001). There were no reoperations, conversion to laparoscopy or open, no staple line leaks, strictures, or deaths in any group. CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the first series to show that the robotic platform can safely be taught and may translate into outcomes consistent with surgeons with more experience while mitigating the learning curve as early as the first year in practice. Long-term follow-up of mentees will be necessary to assess the evolution of fellowship training and outcomes.

Robotic Duodenal Switch Is Associated with Outcomes Comparable to those of Laparoscopic Approach.

INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE: This study evaluates the outcomes of robotic duodenal switch (RDS) when compared to conventional laparoscopy (LDS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP), patients who underwent RDS were compared to those of LDS (2015-2018) for perioperative characteristics and thirty-day postoperative outcomes. Operative complexity, complications, and resource utilization trends were plotted over the included years for the two approaches. Multivariable analysis was conducted to characterize the impact of each approach on these outcomes. RESULTS: Of 7235 minimally invasive operations, 5720 (79.1%) were LDS while 1515 (20.9%) were RDS. Intraoperative endoscopy, anastomosis testing, and shorter operative duration were associated with LDS. RDS group had more concomitant procedures with less attending assistance. The odds ratios of organ space infection and sepsis were equivalent. RDS increased the odds ratios for venous thromboembolism [VTE] (odds ratio [OR] = 2.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.1-4.8, p = 0.02) and early discharge (OR = 7.3, CI = 4.9-10.9, p < 0.01). The difference in wound infection between LDS and RDS has been decreasing (1.5% and 1.5% in 2018 from 2.3% and 4.1% in 2015, respectively) over the years. Similarly, the decreasing trends were noted for systemic infections. CONCLUSION: While the development of VTE after RDS was higher, most of the other complications were comparable between LDS and RDS in this study. RDS may reduce the need for advanced intraoperative assistance and minimize hospital stay in select cases, without increasing morbidity. The recent trends suggest a gradual decrease in the variations between LDS and RDS outcomes over time.

Robotic-assisted approaches to GERD following sleeve gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common bariatric operation in the United States but increases the incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The aim of our study was to describe our experience with robotic-assisted management of intractable GERD after SG. METHODS: A systematic review of a prospectively maintained database was performed of consecutive patients undergoing robotic-assisted magnetic sphincter augmentation placement after sleeve gastrectomy (MSA-S group) or conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB group) for GERD from 2015 to 2019 at our tertiary- care bariatric center. These were compared to a consecutive group of patients undergoing robotic-assisted magnetic sphincter augmentation placement (MSA group) for GERD without a history of bariatric surgery from 2016 to 2019. The primary outcome was perioperative morbidity. Secondary outcomes were operative time (OT), 90-day re-intervention rate, length of stay, symptom resolution and weight change. RESULTS: There were 51 patients included in this study; 18 patients in the MSA group, 13 patients in the MSA-S group, and 20 patients in the RYGB group. There was no significant difference in age, gender, ASA score, preoperative endoscopic findings, or DeMeester scores (P > 0.05). BMI was significantly higher in patients undergoing RYGB compared to MSA or MSA-S (P < 0.0001). There were significant differences in OT between the MSA and RYGB groups (P < 0.0001) and MSA-S and RYGB groups (P = 0.009), but not MSA group to MSA-S group (P = 0.51). There was no significant difference in intraoperative and postoperative morbidity (P = 1.0 and P = 0.60, respectively). 30-day morbidity: 5.6% (MSA), 15.4% (MSA-S) and 15% (RYGB). There was no difference on PPI discontinuation among groups, with more than 80% success rate in all. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the robotic platform in the different approaches available for treatment of GERD after SG appears to be a feasible option with low morbidity and high success rate. Further data is needed to support our findings.

Stratification of Readmission after Bariatric Surgery by Day of Post-Discharge Presentation.

INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE: Reasons of postoperative readmissions may vary based on the timing of rehospitalization. This study characterizes predictors and causes for readmission after bariatric surgery on day-to-day basis after discharge. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program data, patients who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy were identified. Perioperative factors of early readmissions (post-discharge days 0-9) were compared to those of late readmissions (post-discharge days 10-30). Multivariable analysis was conducted to identify predictors of early versus late readmissions. Reasons for readmissions were characterized on day-to-day basis. RESULTS: Of 509,631 operations, 19,061 (3.7%) cases were readmitted. Of these, 9666 (50.7%) were early, while 9395 (49.3%) were late readmissions. White race (OR = 1.2, CI = [1.1-1.3]), revisional surgery (OR = 1.2, CI = [1.1-1.4]), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (OR = 1.2, CI = [1.1-1.3]), pulmonary complication (OR = 1.8, CI = [1.5-2.3]), bleeding (OR = 2, CI = [1.6-2.6]), and post-acute care (OR = 1.8, CI = [1.2-2.6]) were predictors of early readmission. Late readmission was associated with body mass index ≥ 40 (CI = 0.83, OR = [0.77-0.89]), renal/urological complication (OR = 0.6, CI = [0.5-0.8]), and deep vein thrombosis (OR = 0.5, CI = [0.4-0.6]). PO intolerance or dehydration/electrolyte imbalance was the most common readmission reason, peaking on post-discharge days 19-30. Pain, medical complications, obstruction, and bleeding were causes of early readmissions. However, venous thromboembolism readmissions peaked after post-discharge day 9. CONCLUSION: Complex bariatric operations and patients who require post-discharge extended care are associated with early readmissions. Such readmissions are due to early post-discharge complications. However, late readmissions are driven by interrelated risk factors and complications. These findings suggest that targeting patients at risk for delayed rehospitalization is the most efficient approach to minimize readmissions after bariatric surgery.

Safety and Efficacy of Bedside Peritoneal Dialysis Catheter Placement in the COVID-19 Era: Initial Experience at a New York City Hospital.

INTRODUCTION: Acute kidney injury (AKI) requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT) is common in critically ill patients with COVID-19. Unparalleled numbers of patients with AKI and shortage of dialysis machines and operative resources prompted consideration of expanded use of urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (PD) and evaluation of the safety and efficacy of bedside surgical placement of PD catheters. STUDY DESIGN: Bedside, open PD catheter insertions were performed in early April 2020, at a large academic center in New York City. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and AKI and ambulatory patients with chronic kidney disease and impending need for RRT were included. Detailed surgical technique is described. RESULTS: Fourteen catheters were placed at the bedside over 2 weeks, 11 in critically ill COVID-19 patients and three in ambulatory patients. Mean patient age was 61.9 years (43-83), and mean body mass index was 27.1 (20-37.6); four patients had prior abdominal surgery. All catheters were placed successfully without routine radiographic studies or intraoperative complications. One patient (7%) experienced primary nonfunction of the catheter requiring HD. One patient had limited intraperitoneal bleeding while anticoagulated, which was managed by mechanical compression of the abdominal wall and temporarily holding anticoagulation. All other catheters had an adequate function at 3-18 days of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Bedside placement of PD catheters is safe and effective in ICU and outpatient clinic settings. Our surgical protocols allowed for optimization of critical hospital resources, minimization of hazardous exposure to healthcare providers and a broader application of urgent-start PD in selected patients. Long-term follow-up is warranted.

Treatment Utilization and Socioeconomic Disparities in the Surgical Management of Gastroparesis.

BACKGROUND: Gastroparesis is an end-organ sequela of diabetes. We evaluated the roles of race and socioeconomic status in hospitalization rates and utilization of surgical treatments in these patients. METHODS: Data was extracted from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) between the years 2012 and 2014, and any discharge diagnosis of gastroparesis (536.3) was included. Gastrostomy, jejunostomy, and total parenteral nutrition were considered nutritional support procedures, and procedures aimed at improving motility were considered definitive disease-specific procedures: pyloroplasty, endoscopic pyloric dilation, gastric pacemaker placement, and gastrectomy. RESULTS: There were 747,500 hospitalizations reporting a discharge diagnosis of gastroparesis. On multivariable analysis, black race (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.89-1.98; p < 0.001) and Medicaid insurance (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.42-1.50; p < 0.001) were the strongest socioeconomic risk factors for hospitalization due to gastroparesis. Patients in urban teaching institutions were most likely to undergo a surgical intervention for gastroparesis (5.53% of patients versus 3.94% of patients treated in urban non-teaching hospitals and 2.38% of patients in rural hospitals; p < 0.001). Uninsured patients were less than half as likely to receive treatment compared to those with private insurance (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.34-0.48; p < 0.001), and black patients had an OR 0.75 (95% CI 0.69-0.81; p < 0.001) for receiving treatment. Urban teaching hospitals had a twofold higher likelihood of intervention (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.84-2.44; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Marked racial and economic disparities exist in surgical distribution of care for gastroparesis, potentially driven by differences in utilization of care.

Lessons Learned From Developing a Mobile App to Assist in Patient Recovery After Weight Loss Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Weight loss surgery is safe and effective, but fluid and electrolyte balance remains problematic postoperatively. We developed a mobile app to help patients recover after weight loss surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Single-center prospective, mixed-methods, participatory research design study of eligible English-speaking adults undergoing weight loss surgery was used. Patients used the app for 30 d after surgery. We developed and refined the app from July 2017 to October 2018. The principal component of the app is a daily survey designed to assess patients' recovery. The app was revised based on patient feedback, and we compared app utilization between initial and updated versions of the app. Primary outcome was successful patient engagement, which we defined as 80% of patients completing at least 70% of the surveys. RESULTS: Ten patients completed the trial period, four with the initial version of the app, and six with the updated version. All patients expressed satisfaction with the app and most frequently reported that push notifications were helpful. We found that one (25%) patient completed at least 70% of the surveys in the initial version of the app. In the updated version, five (83.3%) of patients completed at least 70% of the surveys, passing our criteria for successful engagement. CONCLUSIONS: Participatory research design in app development requires continuous evaluation and refinement to patient and clinician needs. This effort is essential as we observed significant improvement in app utilization. Our next step is to pilot the app in a larger set of patients to assess utility and feasibility.

Nasal positive pressure with the SuperNO2VA™ device decreases sedation-related hypoxemia during pre-bariatric surgery EGD.

INTRODUCTION: Pre-operative esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) is becoming routine practice in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Many patients with morbid obesity have obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), which can worsen hypoxia during an EGD. In this study, we report our outcomes using the SuperNO2VA™ device, a sealed nasal positive airway pressure mask designed to deliver high-fraction inhaled oxygen and titratable positive pressure compared to conventional nasal cannula. METHODS: Between June 2016 and August 2017, we conducted a prospective observational study that included 56 consecutive patients who presented for EGD prior to bariatric surgery. Airway management was done using either the SuperNO2VA™ (N = 26) device or conventional nasal cannula (N = 30). Patient demographics, procedure details, and outcomes were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The SuperNO2VA™ group had a lower median age compared to the control group (38.5 vs. 48.5 years, p = 0.04). These patients had a higher body mass index (BMI) (47.4 vs. 40.5, IQR, p < 0.0001), higher ASA class (p = 0.03), and were more likely to have OSA (53.9% vs. 26.7%, p = 0.04). Desaturation events were significantly lower in the SuperNO2VA™ group (11.5% vs. 46.7%, p = 0.004) and the median lowest oxygen saturation was higher in the SuperNO2VA™ group (100% vs. 90.5%, p < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: This is the first study to report on the use of the SuperNO2VA™ device in bariatric patients undergoing pre-operative screening EGD. The use of the SuperNO2VA™ device offers a clinical advantage compared to the current standard of care. Our data demonstrate that patients with higher BMI, higher ASA classification, and OSA were more likely to have the SuperNO2VA™ device used; yet, paradoxically, these patients were less likely to have issues with desaturation events. Use of this device can optimize care in this challenging patient population by minimizing the risks of hypoventilation.

Successful Cholecystectomy After Endoscopic Ultrasound Gallbladder Drainage Compared With Percutaneous Cholecystostomy, Can it Be Done?

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EGBD) with a lumen apposing metal stent is becoming a widely accepted alternative to percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PTGD) for patients who are not candidates for cholecystectomy (CCY). In some patients, medical comorbidites can improve, allowing them to undergo CCY. We compare feasibility and outcomes of interval CCY after EGBD versus PTGD. METHODS: We conducted a multicentered international cohort study of patients who underwent EGBD or PTGD and then underwent interval CCY. Baseline patient demographics, procedural details, and follow-up data were recorded and compared. RESULTS: In total, 34 patients were included. Thirteen patients underwent EGBD followed by CCY (mean age, 53.77±17.27, 46.15% male), and 21 patients underwent PTGD followed by CCY (mean age, 62.14±13.06, 61.9% male). There was no statistically significant difference in mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (P=0.12) or etiology of cholecystitis (P=0.85) between the 2 groups. All patients had a technically successful CCY. There was no difference between rates of open versus laparoscopic CCY (P=1). In addition, there was no difference in postsurgical adverse events (P=0.23). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical CCY after EGBD with lumen apposing metal stent is safe and feasible for the management of cholecystitis. If patient's underlying medical conditions improve, previous EUS-GLB drainage should not preclude patients from undergoing CCY as part of standard of care.