Technical Variations and Considerations around OAGB in IFSO-APC and IFSO-MENAC Chapters, an Expert Survey.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the technical variations of one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) among IFSO-APC and MENAC experts. BACKGROUND: The multitude of technical variations and patient selection challenges among metabolic and bariatric surgeons worldwide necessitates a heightened awareness of these issues. Understanding different perspectives and viewpoints can empower surgeons performing OAGB to adapt their techniques, leading to improved outcomes and reduced complications. METHODS: The scientific team of IFSO-APC, consisting of skilled bariatric and metabolic surgeons specializing in OAGB, conducted a confidential online survey. The survey aimed to assess technical variations and considerations related to OAGB within the IFSO-APC and IFSO-MENAC chapters. A total of 85 OAGB experts participated in the survey, providing their responses through a 35-question online format. The survey took place from January 1, 2024, to February 15, 2024. RESULTS: Most experts do not perform OAGB for children and adolescents younger than 18 years. Most experts create the gastric pouch over a 36-40-F bougie and prefer to create a gastrojejunostomy, at the posterior wall of the gastric pouch. An anti-reflux suture during OAGB is performed in all patients by 51.8% of experts. Most experts set a common limb length of > 4 m in revisional and conversional OAGBs to prevent nutritional complications. CONCLUSION: The ongoing debate among metabolic and bariatric surgeons regarding the technical variations and patient selection in OAGB remains a significant point of discussion. This survey demonstrated the variations in technical aspects and patient selection for OAGB among MBS surgeons in the IFSO-APC and IFSO-MENAC chapters. Standardizing the OAGB technique is crucial to ensure optimal safety and efficacy in this procedure.

Current recommendations for procedure selection in class I and II obesity developed by an expert modified Delphi consensus.

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is widely considered the most effective option for treating obesity, a chronic, relapsing, and progressive disease. Recently, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) issued new guidelines on the indications for MBS, which have superseded the previous 1991 National Institutes of Health guidelines. The aim of this study is to establish the first set of consensus guidelines for selecting procedures in Class I and II obesity, using an Expert Modified Delphi Method. In this study, 78 experienced bariatric surgeons from 32 countries participated in a two-round Modified Delphi consensus voting process. The threshold for consensus was set at an agreement or disagreement of ≥ 70.0% among the experts. The experts reached a consensus on 54 statements. The committee of experts reached a consensus that MBS is a cost-effective treatment option for Class II obesity and for patients with Class I obesity who have not achieved significant weight loss through non-surgical methods. MBS was also considered suitable for patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and a body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m2 or higher. The committee identified intra-gastric balloon (IGB) as a treatment option for patients with class I obesity and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) as an option for patients with class I and II obesity, as well as for patients with T2DM and a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2. Sleeve gastrectomy (1) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) were also recognized as viable treatment options for these patient groups. The committee also agreed that one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a suitable option for patients with Class II obesity and T2DM, regardless of the presence or severity of obesity-related medical problems. The recommendations for selecting procedures in Class I and II obesity, developed through an Expert Modified Delphi Consensus, suggest that the use of standard primary bariatric endoscopic (IGB, ESG) and surgical procedures (SG, RYGB, OAGB) are acceptable in these patient groups, as consensus was reached regarding these procedures. However, randomized controlled trials are still needed in Class I and II Obesity to identify the best treatment approach for these patients in the future.

Bariatric Evaluation Through AI: a Survey of Expert Opinions Versus ChatGPT-4 (BETA-SEOV).

BACKGROUND: Recent advancements in artificial intelligence, such as OpenAI's ChatGPT-4, are revolutionizing various sectors, including healthcare. This study investigates the use of ChatGPT-4 in identifying suitable candidates for bariatric surgery and providing surgical recommendations to improve decision-making in obesity treatment amid the global obesity epidemic. METHODS: We devised ten patient scenarios, thoughtfully encompassing a spectrum that spans from uncomplicated cases to more complex ones. Our objective was to delve into the decision-making process regarding the recommendation of bariatric surgery. From July 29th to August 10th, 2023, we conducted a voluntary online survey involving thirty prominent bariatric surgeons, ensuring that there was no predetermined bias in the selection of a specific type of bariatric surgery. This survey was designed to collect their insights on these scenarios and gain a deeper understanding of their professional experience and background in the field of bariatric surgery. Additionally, we consulted ChatGPT-4 in two separate conversations to evaluate its alignment with expert opinions on bariatric surgery options. RESULTS: In 40% of the scenarios, disparities were identified between the two conversations with ChatGPT-4. It matched expert opinions in 30% of cases. Differences were noted in cases like gastrointestinal metaplasia and gastric adenocarcinoma, but there was alignment with conditions like endometriosis and GERD. CONCLUSION: The evaluation of ChatGPT-4's role in determining bariatric surgery suitability uncovered both potential and shortcomings. Its alignment with experts was inconsistent, and it often overlooked key factors, emphasizing human expertise's value. Its current use requires caution, and further refinement is needed for clinical application.

Best practice approach for redo-surgeries after sleeve gastrectomy, an expert's modified Delphi consensus.

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common metabolic and bariatric surgical (MBS) procedure worldwide. Despite the desired effect of SG on weight loss and remission of obesity-associated medical problems, there are some concerns regarding the need to do revisional/conversional surgeries after SG. This study aims to make an algorithmic clinical approach based on an expert-modified Delphi consensus regarding redo-surgeries after SG, to give bariatric and metabolic surgeons a guideline that might help for the best clinical decision. METHODS: Forty-six recognized bariatric and metabolic surgeons from 25 different countries participated in this Delphi consensus study in two rounds to develop a consensus on redo-surgeries after SG. An agreement/disagreement ≥ 70.0% on statements was considered to indicate a consensus. RESULTS: Consensus was reached for 62 of 72 statements and experts did not achieve consensus on 10 statements after two rounds of online voting. Most of the experts believed that multi-disciplinary team evaluation should be done in all redo-procedures after SG and there should be at least 12 months of medical and supportive management before performing redo-surgeries after SG for insufficient weight loss, weight regain, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Also, experts agreed that in case of symptomatic GERD in the presence of adequate weight loss, medical treatment for at least 1 to 2 years is an acceptable option and agreed that Roux-en Y gastric bypass is an appropriate option in this situation. There was disagreement consensus on efficacy of omentopexy in rotation and efficacy of fundoplication in the presence of a dilated fundus and GERD. CONCLUSION: Redo-surgeries after SG is still an important issue among bariatric and metabolic surgeons. The proper time and procedure selection for redo-surgery need careful considerations. Although multi-disciplinary team evaluation plays a key role to evaluate best options in these situations, an algorithmic clinical approach based on the expert's consensus as a guideline can help for the best clinical decision-making.

Religious Fasting of Muslim Patients After Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: a Modified Delphi Consensus.

BACKGROUND: Fasting during Ramadan is one of the five pillars of the Muslim faith. Despite the positive effects of fasting on health, there are no guidelines or clear recommendations regarding fasting after metabolic/bariatric surgery (MBS). The current study reports the result of a modified Delphi consensus among expert metabolic/bariatric surgeons with experience in managing patients who fast after MBS. METHODS: A committee of 61 well-known metabolic and bariatric surgeons from 24 countries was created to participate in the Delphi consensus. The committee voted on 45 statements regarding recommendations and controversies around fasting after MBS. An agreement/disagreement ≥ of 70.0% was regarded as consensus. RESULTS: The experts reached a consensus on 40 out of 45 statements after two rounds of voting. One hundred percent of the experts believed that fasting needs special nutritional support in patients who underwent MBS. The decision regarding fasting must be coordinated among the surgeon, the nutritionist and the patient. At any time after MBS, 96.7% advised stopping fasting in the presence of persistent symptoms of intolerance. Seventy percent of the experts recommended delaying fasting after MBS for 6 to 12 months after combined and malabsorptive procedures according to the patient's situation and surgeon's experience, and 90.1% felt that proton pump inhibitors should be continued in patients who start fasting less than 6 months after MBS. There was consensus that fasting may help in weight loss, improvement/remission of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, dyslipidemia, hypertension and type 2 diabetes mellitus among 88.5%, 90.2%, 88.5%, 85.2% and 85.2% of experts, respectively. CONCLUSION: Experts voted and reached a consensus on 40 statements covering various aspects of fasting after MBS.

The first modified Delphi consensus statement on sleeve gastrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the commonest bariatric procedure worldwide. Yet there is significant variation in practice concerning its various aspects. This paper report results from the first modified Delphi consensus-building exercise on SG. METHODS: We established a committee of 54 globally recognized opinion makers in this field. The committee agreed to vote on several statements concerning SG. An agreement or disagreement amongst ≥ 70.0% experts was construed as a consensus. RESULTS: The committee achieved a consensus of agreement (n = 71) or disagreement (n = 7) for 78 out of 97 proposed statements after two rounds of voting. The committee agreed with 96.3% consensus that the characterization of SG as a purely restrictive procedure was inaccurate and there was 88.7% consensus that SG was not a suitable standalone, primary, surgical weight loss option for patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) without dysplasia. There was an overwhelming consensus of 92.5% that the sleeve should be fashioned over an orogastric tube of 36-40 Fr and a 90.7% consensus that surgeons should stay at least 1 cm away from the angle of His. Remarkably, the committee agreed with 81.1% consensus that SG patients should undergo a screening endoscopy every 5 years after surgery to screen for BE. CONCLUSION: A multinational team of experts achieved consensus on several aspects of SG. The findings of this exercise should help improve the outcomes of SG, the commonest bariatric procedure worldwide, and guide future research on this topic.

Large Bariatric-Specific Stents and Over-the-Scope Clips in the Management of Post-Bariatric Surgery Leaks.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic stents are successful in the management of surgical leaks; however, stent migration remains a significant problem. In this study, we present our approach depending on a large bariatrics-specific stent (Mega stent) and over-the-scope clips in the management of post-bariatric surgery leaks. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all patients with post-bariatric surgery leaks treated at our institution using an approach reliant on Mega stents and over-the-scope clips was conducted. Potential factors associated with procedure success and occurrence of complications were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 81 stents were inserted in 62 patients with post-bariatric surgery leaks, 46 sleeve gastrectomies (73%) and 16 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (27%). Over-the-scope clips were applied in 29 patients (46%). Leak closure was achieved in 51 patients (82%). Median number of procedures per patient was 3 (range 2-8). Complications included the following: stent migration (11/62, 18%), intolerance necessitating premature removal (7/62, 11%), esophageal stricture (8/62, 13%), bleeding (4/62, 6%), perforation (4/62, 6%). One stent-induced mortality was encountered (bleeding). The presence of open surgery (vs laparoscopic) was significantly associated with the occurrence of stent-induced complications (p 0.002). CONCLUSION: The approach combining Mega stents and over-the-scope clips is highly effective in the management of post-bariatric surgery leaks and is associated with a low rate of stent migration and a low number of procedures and stents per patient. Mega stents, however, should be used with great caution due to the significant morbidity associated with their use.

Endoscopic Management of Eroded Bands Following Banded-Gastric Bypass (with Video).

BACKGROUND: Banded-gastric bypass is a highly effective bariatric procedure, yet the possibility of band erosion remains a significant drawback. Surgical removal of eroded bands may be associated with significant morbidity. In this study, we assess the efficacy and safety of a solely peroral endoscopic approach for the management of eroded bands in patients with a banded-gastric bypass. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Starting January 2012, all patients with banded-gastric bypass and an eroded band were subjected to an attempt at peroral endoscopic removal using endoscopic scissors and/or argon plasma coagulation (APC), regardless of the circumference of band eroding inside the lumen. RESULTS: Sixteen patients presented with eroded bands, 2 were deemed not amenable to endoscopic removal as only part of the thickness was eroded. Of the 14 patients where endoscopic attempts were performed, 12 (86%) were completely removed successfully, while 2 (14%) were cut but could not be extracted and only the intraluminal portion was trimmed. Complete resolution of symptoms occurred in 13 (93%) while in 1 patient (7%) there was partial improvement. Only one endoscopic session was performed per patient with a median time of 37.5 min per session (22-55 min). No complications were encountered. CONCLUSION: Endoscopic removal of eroded gastric bands in patients with banded-gastric bypass is effective and safe in the majority of patients. When bands are adherent to the gastric wall, removal of the intraluminal portion of the band may lead to full or partial improvement of symptoms. Endoscopic band removal can be attempted even when a small part of band circumference has eroded.

An Endoscopic Strategy Combining Mega Stents and Over-The-Scope Clips for the Management of Post-Bariatric Surgery Leaks and Fistulas (with video).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic stenting has proved effective in the management of post-surgical leaks but is strongly hampered by the high rate of stent migration. In this study, we evaluate our experience with a new approach involving the use of novel ultra-large expandable stents tailored for bariatric surgery leaks (Mega stents), combined with the use of the innovative over-the-scope clips (OTSC). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of patients with post-bariatric surgery leaks managed at our institution by an approach combining Mega stents and over-the-scope clips. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were treated for post-bariatric surgery leaks; 13 (59%) had a sleeve gastrectomy while nine (41%) had a RYGB. A total of 30 stents were inserted. Successful endoscopic insertion and removal were achieved in all patients. OTSC clips were applied in 12 patients (55%); five simultaneously with stents and seven after stent removal. Primary closure (after one endoscopic procedure) was achieved in 13 patients (59%) and in a total of 18 patients after multiple endoscopic procedures (82%). An average of 1.4 stents and 2.8 endoscopic procedures were required per patient. Stent migration occurred in four patients (18%), and all were retrievable endoscopically. Other complications included retrosternal pain and vomiting in 20 patients (91%) including one necessitating early removal, bleeding in two patients (9%), and perforation and esophageal stricture in one patient each (5%). Two mortalities were encountered, and one of them was stent-related (bleeding). CONCLUSION: Mega stents are effective in the management of post-bariatric surgery leaks. The combined use of Mega stents and OTSC clips is associated with a low incidence of migration and a low number of stents and procedures required per patient.