Primary versus Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass - Outcomes of patients with at least eight-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) prevalence is increasing worldwide and shows good mid- to long-term results. Data on long-term outcomes of revisional OAGB (rOAGB) is limited. This study objective is to evaluate the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing primary OAGB (pOAGB) and rOAGB. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained patient registry at a single-tertiary center. Patients undergoing OAGB from January 2015 to May 2016 were included and grouped to pOAGB and rOAGB. RESULTS: There were 424 patients, of which 363 underwent pOAGB, and 61 underwent rOAGB. Baseline characteristics were insignificantly different between groups except for type 2 diabetes (T2D) rate which was higher in pOAGB (26% vs. 11.5%, p=0.01). The mean follow-up time was 98.5±3.9 months and long-term follow up data was available for 52.5% of patients. The mean total weight loss (TWL) was higher in the pOAGB group (31.3±14 vs. 24.1±17.6, p=0.006), however TWL was comparable when relating to the weight at primary surgery for rOAGB. The rate of T2D and hypertension resolution was 79% and 72.7% with no difference between groups. 13 patients (5.9%) underwent OAGB revision during follow-up, with no difference between groups. Two deaths occurred during follow-up, both non-related to OAGB. CONCLUSION: OAGB is effective as a primary and as a revisional procedure for severe obesity with good long-term results in terms of weight loss and resolution of associated diseases. In addition, the revisional surgery rates and chronic complications are acceptable. Further large prospective studies are required to clarify this data.

Long Term Effects of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery on Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Idiopathic Intracranial Hypertension (IIH) is a rare disorder, linked to severe obesity. The study aimed to evaluate long-term effects of metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) on IIH outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective study of patients with IIH and severe obesity who underwent MBS. Data were retrieved from prospectively maintained databases of two bariatric surgeons. RESULTS: Thirteen patients were included, of them 12 women. Median age was 36 (interquartile range;IQR 21,47) years and body mass index (BMI) was 40.4 (IQR 37.8,41.8) kg/m2. All patients had visual disturbances,12/13 had headaches, and 6/13 had tinnitus. The mean opening pressure on lumbar puncture was 45 cmH2O, and 11/13 patients had papilledema. Medications for IIH were consumed by 11/13 patients, and 2/13 patients had prior surgical intervention for IIH. MBS types included sleeve gastrectomy (n=7), adjustable gastric banding (n=2), roux-en-y gastric bypass (n=2), one anastomosis gastric bypass (n=1), duodenal switch (n=1). At a median follow-up of 10 years (IQR 8,13), the median BMI and total weight loss were 29.7 kg/m2 and 27%, respectively. Remission of symptoms was achieved in 9/13 patients. CONCLUSIONS: MBS results in significant and sustainable weight loss, with subsequent resolution or improvement of IIH. It may be considered as a preventive measure for IIH in patients with severe obesity.

The Effect of Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass After Sleeve Gastrectomy on Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease, Compared with Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Symptoms and Quality of Life Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is common after sleeve gastrectomy (SG). We aimed to evaluate the effect of revisional one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) on GERD, compared with revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) METHODS: A retrospective single-center study of a prospectively maintained patient registry (2018-2022). All patients with GERD undergoing OAGB and RYGB after SG were retrieved and included in the study. RESULTS: Seventy-eight SG patients had conversion to OAGB (n=31) and RYGB (n=47). Baseline characteristics were similar except age (43.8±11.5 vs. 50.3±13.4 years; p=0.03), body mass index (39.9±8.8 vs. 30.6±6 kg/m2; p<0.001), time interval (8±2.7 vs. 6.4±3.4 years; p=0.01), and sleep apnea (29% vs 8.5%; p=0.01), respectively. There was no significant difference between groups in number of patients consuming proton pump inhibitors (70.1% vs. 72.3%; p=0.66), GERD-health-related quality of life (HRQL) score (9.6±7.2 vs. 13.1±8; p=0.06), and pathological endoscopic findings (48.4% vs. 46.8%; p=0.89). Major complication rates were 0% vs. 8.5% (p=0.09). At 32.4 months follow-up, total weight loss was 22%±12.9 and 4.4%±14.6 (p<0.001), GERD resolution 77.4% and 91.9% (p=0.03), HRQL scoring improved to 1.7±4.5 and 1.7±2.7; p=0.94 for OAGB and RYGB, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SG conversion to RYGB provides better chances for definitive treatment of GERD. OAGB results in good symptom resolution and improved quality of life and may be considered for post-SG GERD treatment. The most appropriate solution should be individualized to each patient.

Comparison of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy for Revision of Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding: 5-Year Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is in continuous decline due to low effectiveness and high reoperation rates. This study aims to evaluate outcomes of converting LAGB to one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) for insufficient weight loss or weight regain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective comparative study, based on prospective registry database of a tertiary center (2012-2019). RESULTS: In all, 276 LAGB patients were converted to OAGB (n = 125) and SG (n = 151). Body mass index (BMI) at revision was 41.3 ± 6.6 and 42.3 ± 9.6 kg/m2 (P = 0.34) in OAGB and SG patients, respectively. Time interval was longer in OAGB patients (p < 0.001). Major early complication rates were comparable (2.4% and 4%; p = 0.46). At 5-years, OAGB patients had lower BMI (31.9 vs. 34.5 kg/m2; p = 0.002), and a higher total weight loss (25.1% vs. 18.8%; p = 0.003), compared with SG patients. Resolution of type 2 diabetes was higher in OAGB patients (93.3% vs. 66.6%; p = 0.047), while resolution of hypertension was not significantly different (84.6% and 80.5%; p = 0.68). Revision due to delayed complications was required in five (4%) OAGB patients and nine (8.6%) SG patients (p = 0.14). CONCLUSION: OAGB for revision after LAGB due to insufficient weight loss or weight regain is safe, and has better effectiveness in weight reduction and resolution of type 2 diabetes than SG.

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Compared with Sleeve Gastrectomy in Elderly Patients: Safety and Long-term Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: As life expectancy increases, more elderly patients are being considered for metabolic bariatric surgery. We aimed to assess the safety and long-term effectiveness of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) compared to sleeve gastrectomy (SG). METHODS: Single-center retrospective comparative study of OAGB and SG (2012-2019) in patients aged ≥ 65 years. RESULTS: In all, 124 patients underwent OAGB (n = 41) and SG (n = 83). Mean age was 67.6 ± 2.8 and 67.6 ± 2.6 years (p = 0.89), respectively. Baseline characteristics were comparable, except lower rates of hypertension (HTN) and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in OAGB than SG patients (43.9% vs. 74.6%; p < 0.001, and 39.0% vs. 89.1%; p < 0.001, respectively). Body mass index (BMI) of OAGB and SG patients decreased from 41.8 ± 7.8 and 43.3 ± 5.9 kg/m2 (p = 0.25) to 28.6 ± 4.7 and 33.2 ± 5.3 (p < 0.001), at long-term follow-up, respectively. Excess weight loss (EWL) > 50% was achieved in 80.6% and 43.2% of OAGB and SG patients, with a mean EWL of 67.2% ± 22.3 and 45.8% ± 18.0 (p < 0.001) and a mean total weight loss (TWL) of 30.7% ± 10.4 and 21.9% ± 8.1 (p < 0.001), respectively. Resolution rates of obesity-associated medical problems were similar, except type 2 diabetes (T2D) and HTN, which were 86.6% and 73.3% in OAGB, compared with 29.7% and 36.3% in SG patients (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001), respectively. Major early complication rates were comparable (2.4% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.73, respectively). Revision for late complications was required in two OAGB patients. CONCLUSIONS: OAGB in the elderly is safe and results in better long-term weight reduction and resolution of T2D and HTN than SG.