Single Anastomosis Duodenal Switch versus Classic Duodenal Switch: Long-term Outcomes from a Prospective Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: The literature on long-term outcomes of duodenal switch (DS) compared to single anastomosis duodenal switch (SADI-S) procedures is lacking. We evaluated the long-term outcomes of SADI-S compared to those after the classic DS procedure. METHODS: This is a follow-up report from a single-institution prospective cohort study comparing long-term outcomes of SADI-S versus DS both as one- and two-stage procedures (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02792166). Data is depicted as count (percentage) or median (interquartile range). RESULTS: Forty-two patients underwent SADI-S, of whom 11 had it as a second-stage procedure (26%). Of 20 patients who underwent DS, twelve had it as a second-stage procedure (60%). Both groups were similar at baseline. Median follow-up times for one-stage SADI-S and DS were 57 (24) and 57 (9) months, respectively (p = 0.93). Similar BMI reductions were observed after one-stage SADI-S (16.5 kg/m2 [8.5]) and DS (18.9 kg/m2 [7.2]; p = 0.42). At median follow-up of 51 (21) and 60 (15) months after second-stage SADI-S and DS, respectively (p = 0.60), surgical procedures yielded reductions in BMI of 20.5 kg/m2 (14.0) and 24.0 kg/m2 (13.9), respectively (p = 0.52). Follow-up rates were similar for one-stage (≥ 88%; p = 0.29) and second-stage procedures (≥ 83%; p = 0.16). Similar diabetes and hypertension remissions were found (p = 0.77; P = 0.54, respectively). Despite fat-soluble vitamin deficiencies at baseline, after supplementation, they were either eliminated or less prevalent long-term after SADI-S. Daily bowel movements were also less frequent. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term weight and comorbidity outcomes after SADI-S are similar to those of DS both as one- and two-stage surgeries. SADI-S procedure may allow for similar beneficial outcomes with less burden from gastrointestinal symptoms and fat-soluble vitamin deficiencies.

Management of abdominal wall hernias in patients with severe obesity.

Obesity is a risk factor for abdominal wall hernia development and hernia recurrence. The management of these two pathologies is complex and often entwined. Bariatric and ventral hernia surgery require careful consideration of physiologic and technical components for optimal outcomes. In this review, a multidisciplinary group of Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons' bariatric and hernia surgeons present the various weight loss modalities available for the pre-operative optimization of patients with severe obesity and concurrent hernias. The group also details the technical aspects of managing abdominal wall defects during weight loss procedures and suggests the optimal timing of definitive hernia repair after bariatric surgery. Since level one evidence is not available on some of the topics covered by this review, expert opinion was implemented in some instances. Additional high-quality research in this area will allow for better recommendations and therefore treatment strategies for these complex patients.

Prescription and consumption of opioids after bariatric surgery: a multicenter prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: In the current opioid crisis, bariatric surgical patients are at increased risk of harms related to postoperative opioid overprescribing. This study aimed to assess the extent to which opioids prescribed at discharge after bariatric surgery are consumed by patients. METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study included adult patients (≥ 18yo) undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Preoperative assessments included demographics and patient-reported measures. Information regarding surgical and perioperative care interventions (including discharge prescriptions) was obtained from medical records. Self-reported opioid consumption was assessed weekly up to 30 days post-discharge. Number of opioid pills prescribed and consumed was compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Zero-inflated negative binomial regression was used to identify predictors of post-discharge opioid consumption. RESULTS: We analyzed 351 patients (mean age 44 ± 11 years, BMI 45 ± 8.0 kg/m2, 77% female, 71% sleeve gastrectomy, length of stay 1.6 ± 0.6 days). The quantity of opioids prescribed at discharge (median 15 pills [IQR 15-16], 112.5 morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) [IQR 80-112.5]) was significantly higher than patient-reported consumption (median 1 pill [IQR 0-5], 7.5 MMEs [IQR 0-37.5]) (p < 0.001). Overall, 37% of patients did not take any opioids post-discharge and 78.5% of the opioid pills prescribed were unused. Increased post-discharge opioid consumption was associated with male sex (IRR 1.54 [95%CI 1.14 to 2.07]), higher BMI (1.03 [95%CI 1.01 to 1.05]), preoperative opioid use (1.48 [95%CI 1.04 to 2.10]), current smoking (2.32 [95%CI 1.44 to 3.72]), higher PROMIS-29 depression score (1.03 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.04]), anastomotic procedures (1.33 [95%CI 1.01 to 1.75]), and number of pills prescribed (1.04 [95%CI 1.01 to 1.06]). CONCLUSION: This study supports that most opioid pills prescribed to bariatric surgery patients at discharge are not consumed. Patient and procedure-related factors may predict opioid consumption. Individualized post-discharge analgesia strategies with minimal or no opioids may be feasible and should be further investigated in future research.

Predictors of post-discharge pain and satisfaction with pain management after laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pain management after bariatric surgery remains challenging given the risk for analgesia-related adverse events (e.g., opioid use disorder, marginal ulcers). Identifying modifiable factors associated with patient-reported pain outcomes may improve quality of care. We evaluated the extent to which patient and procedural factors predict 7-day post-discharge pain intensity, pain interference, and satisfaction with pain management after bariatric surgery. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included adults undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery at two university-affiliated hospitals and one private clinic. Preoperative assessments included demographics, Pain Catastrophizing Scale (score range 0-52), Patient Activation Measure (low [< 55.1] vs. high [≥ 55.1]), pain expectation (0-10), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 (PROMIS-29) anxiety and depression scales. At 7 days post-discharge, assessments included PROMIS-29 pain intensity (0-10) and pain interference scales (41.6-75.6), and satisfaction with pain management (high [10-9] vs. lower [8-0]). Linear and logistic regression were used to assess the association of pain outcomes with potential predictors. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-one patients were included (mean age = 44 ± 11 years, BMI = 45 ± 8 kg/m2, 77% female, 71% sleeve gastrectomy). At 7 days post-discharge, median (IQR) patient-reported pain intensity was 2.5 (1-5), pain interference was 55.6 (52.0-61.2), and 76% of patients reported high satisfaction with pain management. Pain intensity was predicted by preoperative anxiety (ß + 0.04 [95% CI + 0.01 to + 0.07]) and pain expectation (+ 0.15 [+ 0.05 to + 0.25]). Pain interference was predicted by preoperative anxiety (+ 0.22 [+ 0.11 to + 0.33]), pain expectation (+ 0.47 [+ 0.10 to + 0.84]), and age (- 0.09 [- 0.174 to - 0.003]). Lower satisfaction was predicted by low patient activation (OR 1.94 [1.05-3.58]), higher pain catastrophizing (1.03 [1.003-1.05]), 30-day complications (3.27 [1.14-9.38]), and age (0.97 [0.948-0.998]). CONCLUSION: Patient-related factors are important predictors of post-discharge pain outcomes after bariatric surgery. Our findings highlight the value of addressing educational, psychological, and coping strategies to improve postoperative pain outcomes.

Ambulatory sleeve gastrectomy: a prospective feasibility and comparative study of early postoperative morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Given its short procedure time and low morbidity, there is enthusiasm to perform sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in an outpatient setting. However, most relevant studies include an overnight stay at a medical facility (≤ 24-h). Hence, we investigated the feasibility and safety of a same-day discharge (SDD) protocol for laparoscopic SG. METHODS: In a prospective pilot study (02/01/2021-02/28/2022), all patients planned for SG were screened for eligibility. Patients met the inclusion criteria if they were ≤ 65 years old, without major comorbidity, and lived close to the hospital. Postoperatively, patients who met discharge criteria were sent home directly from the recovery room. Patients were called the same night and the next morning. Feasibility was defined as discharge on the day of surgery without emergency department (ED) visit or readmission within 24-h. Secondary outcomes, including 90-day morbidity, were compared to patients who met inclusion criteria but chose a same-day admission (SDA) approach during the same study period. Descriptive statistics are displayed as count (percentage) and median (interquartile range). RESULTS: A total of 320 patients were planned for SG during the study period, 229 of whom met eligibility criteria and underwent SG with 56 agreeing to SDD-SG while 173 opted for SDA-SG. Baseline characteristics were all similar between both groups except for obstructive sleep apnea being more prevalent in SDA-SG group (38.2% vs. 16.1%; P < 0.001). Operative characteristics including procedure time were similar between both groups. Successful SDD-SG was achieved in 54(96%) of patients with a median of 6.0(1.0) hours of stay in the recovery room. Ninety-day morbidity was similar between SDD-SG and SDA-SG groups (1.8% vs. 6.9%, respectively; P = 0.196). CONCLUSION: A SDD protocol for laparoscopic SG was feasible and safe in selected patients. Larger studies that evaluate patient reported outcomes and include bypass-type procedures may be needed to guide safe use of ambulatory bariatric surgery.

Outcomes of kidney transplant recipients who underwent pre-transplant bariatric surgery for severe obesity: a long-term follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Kidney transplantation (KT) is the preferred therapy for end-stage renal disease (ESRD). While a major cause for ESRD, obesity is also a key obstacle to candidacy for KT. Bariatric surgery, particularly sleeve gastrectomy (SG), is increasingly used to improve access to KT in patients with obesity, but the literature especially on outcomes post-KT remains lacking. We aimed to provide a long-term follow-up analysis of efficacy and outcomes of a previously described cohort of patients with obesity, who had SG as a means for access to KT. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective follow-up study of 32 patients with advanced chronic kidney disease or ESRD, who were referred and underwent SG between 2013 and 2018 as an access strategy to KT. The primary outcome was successful KT. Ninety-day outcomes, long-term graft function, and changes in weight and obesity-related comorbidities after KT were assessed. Descriptive statistics are presented as count (percentage) or median (interquartile range). RESULTS: At baseline, 18 (56%) were male with a median age and BMI of 51 (11) years and 42.3 (5.2) kg/m2, respectively. Median follow-up time post-SG was 53 (58) months. At last follow-up, 23 (72%) patients received KT. Median time to KT was 16 (20) months and BMI was 34.0 (5.1) kg/m2 at time of transplant. At KT, 13 (57%) and 20 (87%) had diabetes and hypertension, respectively. Median follow-up post-KT was 16 (47) months. There was one graft loss requiring return to dialysis. At 5-year post-KT, median serum creatinine was 136 (66) µmol/l. At last follow-up post-KT, median BMI remained at 33.7 (7.6) kg/m2. Among patients with diabetes and hypertension, 7/13 (54%) and 5/20 (25%) had either improvement or remission of their comorbidities, respectively. CONCLUSION: SG is an effective strategy to improve access to KT in patients with severe obesity. Transplant recipients also continue to benefit from sustained weight loss and improved related comorbidities that may positively impact their graft function after KT.

Lumbar Fixation Using the Cortical Bone Trajectory Fixation: A Single Surgeon's Experience With 3-Year Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Pedicle screw fixation with a cortical bone trajectory (CBT) has emerged as an effective alternative to traditional techniques of lumbar fusion, especially in osteoporotic patients. The proposed benefits of CBT screws include a stronger grip in the elderly and osteoporotic population and low surgical morbidity. We present a prospective study with a 3-yr follow-up of 80 patients operated on by the same surgeon. OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcomes of the CBT technique in patients with at least 3-yr follow-up. METHODS: Eighty patients who underwent lumbar fusion using the CBT fixation by the same surgeon were included in the study. The outcomes, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), back pain visual analog scale (VAS), leg pain VAS, walking distance, opioid use, nonopioid analgesia use, and EuroQol 5D-5L index were measured preoperatively and during the 1- and 3-yr postoperative follow-up visits. Time from surgery, indication for surgery, intervertebral cage insertion, body mass index (BMI), and their interactions were analyzed as predictors in a separate mixed-effects model for each outcome. We assessed all outcomes as 1 group of patients, but we also elaborated on a classification scheme based on a combination of radiological and dynamical assessment of microinstability, macroinstability, and spondylolisthesis. RESULTS: The relationship between the outcomes and time showed considerable interpatient heterogeneity because all intercepts (all P < .001) and the linear trend temporal slopes for walking distance (P = .019) and nonopioid analgesics use (P < .001) varied across patients. The intercepts and the linear trend slopes for nonopioid use were significantly correlated (P = .039). Time from surgery significantly predicted all outcomes (P < .001). Intervertebral cage insertion was associated with significantly less opioid use (P = .017). The indication for surgery significantly modified the effect of time on the ODI (P = .042) and the VAS for leg pain (P = .025). Moreover, higher BMI was also associated with a significantly steeper linear trend in the VAS for leg pain (P = .028). Among patients with microinstability, the linear trend for the EuroQol 5D-5L index was significantly steeper with, rather than without, spondylolisthesis (P = .024). CONCLUSION: In all patients who underwent CBT-based lumbar fusion, there was a steep trend toward improvement in ODI, VAS score for leg pain, and opioid use at 1 yr after surgery. Patients with normal BMI and microinstability alone had a decline in the rate of improvement at 3 yr, whereas the rest continued to show improvement at 3 yr postprocedure. Spinal fixation and fusion using CBT shows satisfactory outcomes. Larger series and a double-blind randomized trial would be helpful for further identifying the pros and cons of this technique.

Long-term Impact of Bariatric Surgery on Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Obesity, Diabetes and Hypertension: a Population-level Study.

BACKGROUND: The literature on long-term impact of bariatric/metabolic surgery on incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in patients with obesity and metabolic syndrome is still lacking. We aimed to evaluate the long-term relationship between metabolic surgery and MACE in such patients. METHODS: In a population-based cohort study, we compared all patients with obesity, diabetes mellitus (DM) and/or hypertension (HTN), who underwent bariatric surgery in Quebec, Canada during 2007-2012, with matched controls with obesity. The incidence of a composite MACE outcome (coronary artery events, heart failure, cerebrovascular events, and all-cause mortality) after bariatric surgery was compared between both groups. Cox regression was used to evaluate the long-term impact of surgery on MACE outcomes. RESULTS: The study cohort included 3627 surgical patients, who were matched to 5420 controls with obesity. Baseline demographics were comparable between groups, but DM was more prevalent among the surgical group. Median follow-up time was 7.05 years for the study cohort (range: 5-11 years). There was a significant long-term difference in the incidence of MACE between the surgical group and controls (19.6% vs. 24.8%, respectively; p < 0.01). After accounting for confounders, bariatric surgery remained an independent protective predictor of long-term MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83 [95%CI, 0.78-0.89]). The 10-year absolute risk reduction (ARR) for the surgical group was 5.14% (95%CI, 3.41-6.87). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with obesity, DM and HTN, bariatric/metabolic surgery is associated with a sustained (≥ 10 years) decrease in the incidence of MACE. The results from this population-level observational study should be validated in randomized controlled trials.

Predictive Factors of Cholelithiasis After Prophylactic Administration of Ursodeoxycholic Acid Following Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: Tehran Obesity Treatment Study.

PURPOSE: Cholelithiasis is a well-known consequence of obesity as well as rapid weight loss especially after bariatric surgery. A routine postoperative course of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) is recommended as a prophylactic measure against gallstone formation. However, the efficacy of UDCA after bariatric surgery and predictors of cholelithiasis despite prophylaxis are not well understood. We assessed the incidence and predictors of de novo cholelithiasis after bariatric surgery in patients who received UDCA prophylaxis. METHODS: Uniform data from 2629 consecutive patients who underwent either sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass between March 2013 and 2018 were collected prospectively. All patients received a 6-month course of UDCA 300 mg twice daily. Cholelithiasis was assessed with abdominal ultrasound at baseline as well as 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months postoperatively. The association between cholelithiasis and its predictors was examined by Cox proportional hazards models and restricted cubic spline regression. RESULTS: The cumulative rate of cholelithiasis in 24 months after surgery was 10.8% (n = 283) with the greatest incidence within the first year. After multivariate analysis, 6-month body mass index (BMI) loss was found to be the only independent predictor for postoperative cholelithiasis (HR = 1.10 [95% CI: 1.04-1.16]). The concordance index for predicting cholelithiasis was 0.60 (0.56-0.64) for 6-month BMI loss. CONCLUSION: Early postoperative rapid weight loss as represented by 6-month BMI loss is the main predictor of de novo cholelithiasis after bariatric surgery, although this parameter does not have enough power for discrimination of postoperative cholelithiasis.

Successful surgical weight loss with laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for morbid obesity prior to kidney transplantation.

Morbid obesity in kidney transplant (KT) candidates is associated with increased complications and graft failure. Multiple series have demonstrated rapid and significant weight loss after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) in this population. Long-term and post-transplant weight evolutions are still largely unknown. A retrospective review was performed in eighty patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) who underwent LSG in preparation for KT. From a median initial BMI of 43.7 kg/m2 , the median change at 1-year was -10.0 kg/m2 . Successful surgical weight loss (achieving a BMI < 35 kg/m2 or an excess body weight loss >50%) was attained in 76.3% and was associated with male gender, predialysis status, lower obesity class and lack of coronary artery disease. Thirty-one patients subsequently received a KT with a median delay of 16.7 months. Weight regain (increase in BMI of 5 kg/m2 postnadir) and recurrent obesity (weight regain + BMI > 35) remain a concern, occurring post-KT in 35.7% and 17.9%, respectively. Early LSG should be considered for morbidly obese patients with ESKD for improved weight loss outcomes. Early KT after LSG does not appear to affect short-term surgical weight loss. Candidates with a BMI of up to 45 kg/m2 can have a reasonable expectation to achieve the limit within 1 year.

Esophageal cancer after sleeve gastrectomy: a population-based comparative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common bariatric surgery; however, this approach may induce gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Both obesity and GERD are independent risk factors for esophageal cancer, however the impact of SG on risk of esophageal cancer remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the risk of esophageal cancer after reflux-prone bariatric surgery. SETTING: Population-level, provincial administrative healthcare database, Quebec, Canada. METHODS: We identified a population-based cohort of all patients with obesity who underwent reflux-prone surgery (SG and duodenal switch [DS]) or reflux-protective Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) during 01/2006-12/2012 in Quebec, Canada. For every surgical patient, 2-3 nonsurgical controls with obesity matched for age, sex, and geography were also identified. Crude incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for esophageal cancer were calculated using person-time analysis. Hazard ratios (HRs) were obtained using multivariate cox regression. RESULTS: A total of 4121 patients had reflux-prone procedures and 852 underwent RYGB. At a mean follow-up of 7.6 years, 8 cases of esophageal cancer were identified after bariatric surgery. Compared with RYGB, IRR for esophageal cancer in reflux-prone group was 1.45 (95%CI: .19-65.5) and HR = .83 (95%CI: .10-7.27). The crude incidence rate of esophageal cancer in the reflux-prone group was higher than that of nonsurgical controls (n = 12,159; IRR = 3.46, 95%CI: 1.00-12.5), but after adjustment the difference disappeared (HR = 2.47, 95%CI: .82-7.45). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term incidence of esophageal cancer after reflux-prone bariatric surgery is not greater than RYGB. While crude incidence of esophageal cancer after reflux-prone surgery is higher than in nonsurgical patients with obesity, such difference disappears after accounting for confounders. Given the low incidence of esophageal cancer and slow progression of dysplastic Barrett esophagus, studies with longer follow-up are needed.

Diastematomyelia type I associated with intramedullary lipoma and dermoid cyst.

Dysraphic entities like diastematomyelia are not uncommon. However, the co-existence of split cord malformation with two pathologically different lesions on the same hemicord is extremely rare. We report a case of a young child who presented with an unusual combination of diastematomyelia, intramedullary lipoma, and dermoid cyst.

Short-term outcomes of revisional surgery after sleeve gastrectomy: a comparative analysis of re-sleeve, Roux en-Y gastric bypass, duodenal switch (Roux en-Y and single-anastomosis).

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the most common primary bariatric surgery. Long-term, up to 20% of patients may need revisional surgery. We aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of various revisional bariatric surgeries after a failed primary SG. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study of a prospectively collected database of obese patients who underwent revisional bariatric surgery during 2010-2018 for a failed previous SG. Failure was defined as inadequate weight loss (< 50% excess weight loss), ≥ 20% weight regain of the weight lost, and presence of refractory non-reflux obesity-related comorbidities ≥ 1 year after SG. Revisions included were re-sleeve, Roux en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD/DS), and single-anastomosis duodenal switch (SADS). The primary outcome was weight loss after revision. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications. Due to varying follow-up rates, short-term outcomes (≥ 6 and ≤ 18 months) were assessed. Descriptive statistics are expressed as count(percentage) or median(interquartile range). RESULTS: Ninety-four patients met inclusion criteria. Forty-one underwent conversion to RYGB, 33 had BPD/DS, 7 had SADS, and 13 underwent re-sleeve surgery. Median interval between SG and revision was 31(27) months. At a median of 14(18) months, follow-up rate was 76% for the study cohort. Prior to revision, median BMI was 41.9(11.7) kg/m2 and 1 year after decreased by 6.3(5.1) kg/m2. BPD/DS resulted in the largest total weight loss of 21.8(10.9) kg followed by RYGB 13.2(11.3), SADS 12.2(6.1), and re-sleeve 12.0(11.9) kg; p = 0.023. Major 90-day and long-term complications occurred only after RYGB and BPD/DS and were similar (7.3% vs. 3.0%; p = 0.769 and 9.8% vs. 24.2%; p = 0.173, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: At 1 year, revisional procedures offer further weight loss after a failed primary SG. Bypass-type revisions are preferred over re-sleeve surgery. In the absence of refractory reflux symptoms, duodenal switch-type procedures are safe and effective options especially in patients with severe obesity before SG.

Single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S): short-term outcomes from a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) is a modification of the classic duodenal switch (DS). These modifications are intended to address concerns about DS, including malnutrition, longer operative times, and technical challenges, while preserving the benefits. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate safety and outcomes of SADI-S as it compares to classic DS procedure. SETTING: Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence, University Hospital, Montreal, Canada. METHODS: In a single-institution prospective cohort study, we compared safety and outcomes of the SADI-S versus DS procedures (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02792166; registered: 06/2016). Data is depicted as count (percentage) or median (interquartile range). RESULTS: There were 42 patients who underwent SADI-S, of whom 11 had it as a second-stage procedure (26%). There were 20 patients who underwent DS, of whom 12 had it as second-stage procedures (60%). Both groups were similar at baseline. The median age was 45 (14) years, 39 (63%) were female, the median body mass index (BMI) was 48.2 (7.7) kg/m2, and 29 (47%) patients had diabetes. The operative time was shorter for 1-stage SADI-S versus DS surgery (211 [70] versus 250 [60] min, respectively; P = .05) but was similar for second-stage procedures (P = .06). The 90-day complication rates were 11.9% (N = 5/42) after SADI-S and 5.0% (N = 1/20) after DS surgery (P = .64). There were no mortalities. Median follow-ups for 1-stage SADI-S and DS were 17 (11) and 12 (24) months, respectively (P = .65). Similar BMI changes were observed after 1-stage SADI-S (17.9 kg/m2 [8.7]) and DS (17.5 kg/m2 [16]; P = .65). At median follow-ups of 10 (20) and 14 (16) months after second-stage SADI-S and DS, respectively (P = .53), surgical procedures yielded added 5.0 kg/m2 (5.8) and 6.5 kg/m2 (7.1) changes in BMI, respectively (P = .26). Complete remission rates for diabetes were 91% after SADI-S (n = 21/23) and 50% after DS (n = 3/6). Compared with the SADI-S procedure, DS surgery was associated with higher frequencies of deficiencies in some fat-soluble vitamins, especially vitamin D. CONCLUSIONS: The SADI-S procedure is safe, and its short-term outcomes, including weight loss and the resolution of co-morbidities, are similar to those of DS. SADI-S surgery also has promising potential as a second-stage procedure after sleeve gastrectomy.

Surgeon and hospital volume outcomes in bariatric surgery: a population-level study.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes after bariatric surgery are tied to surgical volume; however, this relationship is not clearly established for each procedure. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of surgeon/hospital volumes on morbidity after bariatric surgery and identify volume cutoffs. SETTING: Multi-centric population-level study, province of Quebec, Canada. METHODS: We studied a population-based cohort of all morbidly obese patients who underwent bariatric surgery in Quebec, Canada during 2006 to 2012. We evaluated only the most common procedures in North America, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Multilevel, cross-classified logistic regressions were used to test the effects of annual surgeon volume (SV) and hospital volume (HV) on a composite 90-day postoperative outcome. Receiver operator curve was used to identify volume thresholds. RESULTS: Overall, 821 patients had RYGB and 1802 underwent SG by 34 surgeons in 15 centers. For RYGB, 10-case increase in SV was associated with adjusted odds ratio of .82 (95% confidence interval: .71-.94). Similar increase in HV resulted in odds ratio of .86 (95% confidence interval: .77-.96). Annual SV threshold of 21 RYGBs and HV of 25 cases were identified (area under the curve = .60 and .61, respectively). For SV, being in the higher volume category translated into an absolute risk reduction of 12.5% for 90-day major morbidity. For SG, annual 10-case increase in SV and HV was not significantly associated with a decrease in 90-day postoperative morbidity. CONCLUSION: SV and HV are significant independent predictors of 90-day major morbidity after RYGB. This study further supports establishing minimum surgical volume requirements for more complex anastomotic procedures like RYGB. However, the role of volume targets in SG remains unclear.

Safety and efficacy of the sleeve gastrectomy as a strategy towards kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Obese individuals suffering from advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) may be precluded from accessing kidney transplantation. Bariatric surgery is an effective treatment for obesity and related conditions but its use in those with severe CKD remains limited due to morbidity concerns. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in patients with severe CKD as a bridging strategy towards kidney transplant candidacy. METHODS: This is a single-center retrospective study of a prospectively collected database of obese patients referred by the multi-organ transplant team for surgical weight loss, who underwent SG during 2013-2018. The primary outcome was 90-day major morbidity. Secondary outcomes included weight loss, and successful kidney transplantation. Descriptive statistics are expressed as count (percent) or median (interquartile range). RESULTS: 32 patients met inclusion criteria. 18 (56%) were male with a median age and BMI of 51 (11) years and 42.3 (5.2) kg/m2, respectively. 29 (91%) patients were on dialysis for a median duration of 28 months before SG. Diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidemia were present in 15 (47%), 25 (78%), and 21 (66%) patients, respectively. At 90 days after SG, there were no leaks, reoperations, or mortality. The median length of stay was 2 (1.3) days. At 1 year, change in BMI and percent excess weight loss (EWL) were -9.8 (3.7) kg/m2 and 56% (27), respectively. In the year after SG, 20 (63%) patients were listed for transplant. 14 (44%) underwent successful kidney transplantation. One patient died while waiting for transplant. At time of transplant, median change in BMI and EWL were -9.0 (5.5) kg/m2 and 59% (30), respectively. After transplant, no patient required dialysis at a median follow-up of 17 (32) months. CONCLUSION: SG is safe and effective for weight loss and bridging to candidacy for kidney transplantation in patients with severe CKD. The acceptable safety and efficiency of SG in this high-risk population makes it an optimal choice as a bridging procedure.

How safe is bariatric surgery in patients with class I obesity (body mass index 30-35 kg/m2)?

BACKGROUND: The safety profile of bariatric surgery in patients with class I obesity, or body mass index ≥30 and <35 kg/m2, is a matter of concern among patients and physicians. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety profile of bariatric surgery in patients with class I obesity. SETTING: The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) data set. METHODS: The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program 2015 to 2016 data sets were queried for class I obesity patients who underwent primary bariatric procedures. The 30-day postoperative safety profile, predictors of adverse events, and comparison between Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) versus sleeve gastrectomy (SG) were studied. RESULTS: A total of 8628 cases with a mean preoperative body mass index of 33.7 ± 1.1 kg/m2 were analyzed: 1838 (21.3%) underwent RYGB, 6243 (72.4%) underwent SG, 530 (6.1%) underwent gastric banding, and 17 (.2%) underwent duodenal switch; 33.9% had diabetes and 75% had hypertension. The composite morbidity rate (defined as presence of any of 24 postoperative adverse events) for the entire cohort was 3.8%, and the serious morbidity rate (presence of any of 9 serious complications) was .7%. The 30-day mortality rate was .05% (4 cases). Presence of chronic kidney disease was found to be associated with higher composite and serious morbidity (composite morbidity: odds ratio 5.1, 95% confidence interval 2.22-11.71; serious morbidity: odds ratio 5.66, 95% confidence interval 1.52-21.14). SG patients had significantly better short-term safety outcomes than RYGB patients. CONCLUSION: Findings from this study, the largest series to date, indicate that bariatric surgery is safe in patients with class I obesity, with very low risk of morbidity and mortality.

Variability in Bariatric Surgical Care Among Various Centers: a Survey of All Bariatric Surgeons in the Province of Quebec, Canada.

BACKGROUND: Despite an increase in bariatric surgery across Quebec, Canada, access is still limited. Furthermore, there are differences in resources and multidisciplinary capabilities of providing centers that may impact quality of care and outcomes. METHODS: We performed an online survey of all bariatric surgeons in the province of Quebec, Canada, using the LimeSurvey software. RESULTS: Forty-six surgeons from 15 centers were surveyed. Response rate was 87% (n = 40). Only 13 (35%) surgeons have any formal fellowship training in bariatric surgery and 74% perform > 50 cases/year. All surgeons perform sleeve gastrectomy, 34% do duodenal switch, and 44% provide major revisions. Thirty-one surgeons (77%) identified access to operating room as the main cause for surgical delays. While most surgeons (52%) considered < 6 months as an acceptable wait-time, only 33% achieved this in their practice. Majority (70%) favored a centralized provincial referral system. Patient's geographical convenience, procedural choice, and multidisciplinary capabilities of providing centers are identified as important determinants for centralized referrals (93, 78, and 55%, respectively). Virtually, all supported accreditation/designation of centers and creation of Quebec Bariatric Network for quality control and research (85 and 98%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Bariatric surgical patterns vary among designated centers in Quebec, Canada. Access to multidisciplinary care and surgeon's fellowship training may be contributing factors for the observed variability. Wait-lists are long and timely access to surgery remains an issue. There is near consensus for establishing a centralized referral system, designation of referral vs. primary centers, and creating Quebec Bariatric Network for research and quality control.