The Metabolic Health Index Identifies Patients That Will Benefit From Metabolic Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Metabolic syndrome is a modern world's major health hazard related to comorbidities like type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Bariatric surgery is well known to lower this health risk in patients with obesity. There is a need for an objective measure to assess the intended reduction in health hazard and indirectly the eligibility for bariatric surgery. The Metabolic Health Index (MHI) quantitatively summarizes the cumulative impact of the metabolic syndrome on health status on a scale from 1 to 6. This study describes the use of the MHI as a supportive tool in the decision for and outcome assessment of bariatric surgery. METHODS: The general usability of the MHI was tested by extending its application to patient data of five other bariatric centers in the Netherlands. Retrospective laboratory and national bariatric quality registry data of 11,501 patients were collected. RESULTS: The quantification of (improvement in) metabolic health burden as measured by the MHI was independent of the dataset that was used to derive the MHI model. Patients with MHI > 2.8 prior to surgery improved significantly more in MHI 12 mo after surgery compared to patients with MHI ≤ 2.8 (1.1 compared to 0.4 MHI points, respectively; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The MHI is robust between centers and is suitable for general use in clinical decision-making. As changes in MHI over time reflect metabolic health alterations, it is suitable as an outcome measure of surgery. An MHI cut-off value of 2.8 helps to predict the likelihood of significant improvement after surgery, independent of body mass index and known metabolic comorbidities.

Midterm Results from the Dutch Common Channel Trial (DUCATI): Superior Weight Loss Results of the Long Roux Limb Gastric Bypass in Comparison to the Standard Bypass at 3-Year Follow-Up.

In the multi-center Dutch Common Channel Trial (DUCATI), a very long Roux limb Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (VLRL-RYGB: BP-limb 60 cm, Roux limb variable, and common channel 100 cm) was compared to a standard Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (S-LRYGB: BP-limb 60 cm, Roux limb 150 cm, and common channel variable) in the treatment of morbidly obese patients. As all trial patients are beyond 3-year follow-up a midterm analysis was performed to investigate the effect of the VLRL-RYGB. METHODS: A total of 444 patients were randomized (1:1) to receive either a VLRL-RYGB or a S-LRYGB. Follow-up results for weight loss, effect on obesity-related comorbid conditions, complications, reoperation, and malnutrition are investigated. RESULTS: At 3-year follow-up a significant difference in %TWL (34.0% vs. 31.4%, p = 0.017) and %EWL (84.7% vs. 76.6%, p = 0.043) was observed in favor of VLRL-LRYGB group. Overall complication rate 3-years after surgery was 15.8% in the VLRL-LRYGB group vs. 9% in the S-LRYGB group (p = 0.031). Eight (3.6%) patients in the VLRL-LRYGB group versus 2 (0.9%) in the S-LRYGB group (p = 0.055) required revisional surgery for malabsorption. In the VLRL-LRYGB group 71.9% of patients had resolution of T2DM versus 48.9% in the S-LRYGB group (p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: At midterm FU a considerable, significantly increased effect on weight loss of the VLRL-LRYGB was observed compared to the S-LRYGB, with a higher risk of overall complications, but no significant nutritional side effects. These results might impact the current view on the value of the Roux limb in the discussion on optimum limb lengths in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery.

Comparison of Preoperative Diets Before Bariatric Surgery: a Randomized, Single-Blinded, Non-inferiority Trial.

OBJECTIVE: In order to increase weight loss and minimize complications, a preoperative diet before bariatric has been advocated. However, some diets are poorly tolerated by patients and this can lead to low compliance and too little weight loss. In this study, we aim to compare two preoperative diets in order to find the most suitable for this patient population. METHODS: Comparison of preoperative diets before bariatric surgery with a randomized non-inferiority trial in order to compare the standard very low calorie diet (VLCD) by protein shakes (Prodimed) with a standard diet using ordinary products. The primary outcome parameter was preoperative weight loss. Secondary outcome parameters were operation time, difficulty of surgery, short-term complications, short-term weight loss and compliance, tolerance, and acceptance of the diets. RESULTS: Two hundred twelve patients suitable for gastric bypass surgery were included and randomized. The Prodimed group contained 105 patients, the standard diet group 107 patients. Preoperative weight loss and 4 weeks after the procedure were not significantly different between the two diet groups. Operation time, difficulty of surgery, short-term complications, and short-term weight loss were also comparable without significant differences between the diet groups. However, most of the parameters measuring patients' compliance, tolerance, and acceptance of the diets were significantly better in the standard diet group as compared to the patients in the Prodimed group. CONCLUSION: Protein shakes and standard diets are capable of achieving good and comparable results on preoperative weight loss before bariatric surgery. However, patients' compliance, tolerance, and acceptance were all significantly better after a standard diet. We recommend giving patients a choice in preoperative diets in order to achieve the best possible weight loss and results.

Is there a relation between number of adjustments and results after gastric banding?

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) is a standard restrictive bariatric procedure. Previous studies have shown that patients lost to follow-up do worse than patients who remain in follow-up. However, it is unknown if this is purely because of a lack of band adjustments. The aim of this study was to study the relation between number of adjustments and results. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary LAGB from October 2006 until March 2009 were included. The following parameters were collected: demographic characteristics, preoperative and postoperative weight, preoperative and postoperative status of co-morbidities, type of band, short- and long-term complications, reoperations, date, number and volume of adjustments, total amount of inserted volume, and last measured volume. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-four patients underwent primary LAGB. Twelve patients did not attend follow-up visits after 24 months (8.1%). Mean follow-up was 46 months, and excess weight loss, 47%. Eleven patients (8.1%) developed long-term complications, and 12 patients (8.8%) underwent revisional surgery. Patients underwent a mean number of 5 adjustments with a range of 0 to 18. The mean volume of totally inserted milliliters was 8 mL, with a range of 0 to 14 mL. There was a strong positive relation between number of adjustments and weight loss as well as reduction in obesity-related co-morbidities (r = .22; P<.01). There was no significant relation between number of adjustments and complications or revisional surgery. CONCLUSION: There is a strong relation between the number of band adjustments and weight loss, whereas complications and reoperations seem to be independent of the number of adjustments. A continual and lifelong follow-up of LAGB patients, including regular band volume adjustments, is necessary.