Does the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program bariatric risk/benefit calculator hold its weight? An assessment of its accuracy.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric clinical calculators have already been implemented in clinical practice to provide objective predictions of complications and outcomes. The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Surgical Risk/Benefit Calculator is the most comprehensive risk calculator in bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the accuracy of the calculator predictions regarding the 30-day complication risk, 1-year weight loss outcomes, and comorbidity resolution. SETTING: MBSAQIP-accredited center. METHODS: All adult patients who underwent primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy at our institution between 2012 and 2019 were included. Baseline characteristics were used to generate the individualized outcome predictions for each patient through the bariatric risk calculator and were compared to actual patient outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using c-statistics, linear regression models, and McNemmar chi-square test. RESULTS: One thousand four hundred fifty-three patients with a median age of 45 (37, 55) and consisting of 80.1% females were included in the study. The c-statistics for the complications and comorbidity resolution ranged from .533 for obstructive sleep apnea remission to .675 for 30-day reoperation. The number of comorbidity resolutions predicted by the calculator was significantly higher than the actual remissions for diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension and obstructive sleep apnea (P < .001). On average, the calculator body mass index (BMI) predictions deviated from the observed BMI measurement by 3.24 kg/m2. The RYGB procedure (Coef -.89; P = .005) and preoperative BMI (Coef -.4; P = .012) were risk factors associated with larger absolute difference between the predicted and observed BMI. CONCLUSIONS: The MBSAQIP Surgical Risk/Benefit Calculator prediction models for 1-year BMI, 30-day reoperation, and reintervention risks were fairly well calibrated with an acceptable level of discrimination except for obstructive sleep apnea remission. The 1-year BMI estimations were less accurate for RYGB patients and cases with very high or low preoperative BMI measurements. Therefore, the bariatric risk calculator constitutes a helpful tool that has a place in preoperative counseling.

Assessment of gastric pouch blood supply with indocyanine green fluorescence in conversional and revisional bariatric surgery: a prospective comparative study.

Our study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of indocyanine green (ICG) angiography during conversional or revisional bariatric surgery. We prospectively enrolled all patients scheduled for reoperative bariatric surgery with gastric pouch resizing and ICG assessment and we compared them with a retrospective series of similar patients who did not receive ICG. The primary outcome was the rate of intraoperative change in the surgical strategy due to the ICG test. We included 32 prospective patients receiving intraoperatively an ICG perfusion test and 48 propensity score-matched controls. The mean age was 50.7 ± 9.7 years, 67 (83.7%) patients were female, and the mean BMI was 36.8 ± 5.3 kg/m2. The patient characteristics were similar in both groups. The ICG angiography was successfully conducted in all patients, and no change of the surgical strategy was necessary. Postoperative complications were similar in both groups (6.2% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.846), as well as operative time (125 ± 43 vs. 133 ± 47 min, p = 0.454) and length of hospital stay (2.8 ± 1.0 vs. 3.3 ± 2.2 days, p = 0.213). Our study suggested that ICG fluorescence angiography might not have been useful for assessing the blood supply of the gastric pouch in patients who underwent reoperative bariatric surgery. Therefore, it remains uncertain whether the application of this technique is indicated.

Metabolic and bariatric surgery for obesity in Prader Willi syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Obesity is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with Prader-Willi Syndrome (PWS). Our objective was to compare changes in body mass index (BMI) after metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) for the treatment of obesity (BMI ≥35 kg/m2) in PWS. A systematic review of MBS in PWS was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central, identifying 254 citations. Sixty-seven patients from 22 articles met criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Patients were organized into 3 groups: laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), gastric bypass (GB), and biliopancreatic diversion (BPD). No mortality within 1 year was reported in any of the 3 groups after a primary MBS operation. All groups experienced a significant decrease in BMI at 1 year with a mean reduction in BMI of 14.7 kg/m2 (P < .001). The LSG groups (n = 26) showed significant change from baseline in years 1, 2, and 3 (P value at year 3 = .002) but did not show significance in years 5, 7, and 10. The GB group (n = 10) showed a significant reduction in BMI of 12.1 kg/m2 in the first 2 years (P = .001). The BPD group (n = 28) had a significant reduction in BMI through 7 years with an average reduction of 10.7 kg/m2 (P = .02) at year 7. Individuals with PWS who underwent MBS had significant BMI reduction sustained in the LSG, GB, and BPD groups for 3, 2, and 7 years, respectively. No deaths within 1 year of these primary MBS operations were reported in this study or any other publication.

Quality evaluation of metabolic and bariatric surgical guidelines.

Objective: To evaluate the quality of surgical guidelines on bariatric/metabolic surgery. Methods: Four independent reviewers used the AGREE II (The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II) tool to assess the methodological quality of the included guidelines and conducted a comparative analysis of the main recommendations for surgical methods of these guidelines. Results: Nine surgical guidelines were included in this study. Five articles with AGREE II scores over 60% are worthy of clinical recommendation. The field of rigor of development was relatively low, with an average score of 50.82%. Among 15 key recommendations and the corresponding best evidence in the guidelines, only 4 key recommendations were grade A recommendations. Conclusions: The quality of metabolic and bariatric guidelines is uneven, and there is much room for improvement.

[Developing a competence center for obesity and metabolic surgery-Experiences from two different clinics]. / Der Weg zum Kompetenzzentrum für Adipositas und metabolische Chirurgie ­ Erfahrungen aus 2 verschiedenen Kliniken.

BACKGROUND: Due to the high incidence of obesity and the effectiveness of obesity (metabolic) surgery, the number of metabolic operations and the formation of certified obesity centers continue to increase. The aim of this study was to compare the experiences of two hospitals during establishing a certified obesity center in Heidelberg/Salem (HD/Salem) and in Baden-Baden (Bad). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The operation numbers, surgical procedures, the need for revision and the length of hospital stay were analyzed from August 2012 to June 2015 in HD/Salem and from May 2017 to December 2021 in Bad. In addition, a structured survey of patients took place to find out the preferred discharge date. The statistical evaluation was carried out with T-tests and χ2-tests for binary data. RESULTS: This analysis comprised 387 patients (181 patients Bad). There were 258 female patients (131 Bad). The mean age of all patients was 44.6 years (44.0 years Bad), the mean body mass index was 47.5 kg/m2 (47.0 kg/m2 Bad). In 12 of 206 patients (5.8%) from HD/Salem and 8 of 181 patients (4.4%) from Bad a revision was necessary. The average length of hospital stay decreased in HD/Salem from 6.5 days to 4.4 days (p < 0.05) and from 3.7 days to 3.4 days in Bad. Late revisions were necessary in HD/Salem in 4 of 206 patients (2.2%) and in Bad in 8 out of 181 patients (4.4%). The needed number of yearly operations required for certification was achieved for the first time in HD/Salem after 7 years and in Bad after 4 years. CONCLUSION: Building an obesity center at a different location from scratch to certification can be initiated and carried out by one experienced surgeon without loss of treatment quality regarding morbidity and mortality. From the start, the team should be familiar with early and late complications of metabolic surgery.

Weight-loss thresholds after bariatric surgery and cardiovascular outcomes: more is better.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Whether the extent of weight loss (WL) modulates bariatric surgery (BS) cardiovascular benefits has scarcely been assessed. Several WL thresholds have been commonly used to classify BS patients as good or poor responders without a proven clinical relevance. We examined the relationship between the magnitude of WL after BS and post-surgery major adverse cardiovascular-event (MACE) incidence. We also compared the performance of three different insufficient weight-loss (IWL) criteria for their association with MACE. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: All individuals who underwent a primary Roux-en Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in our institution at least six years before data analysis (12/2020) were included in the study. Data on MACE were available in 1638 of 1700 participants (96.4%). Proportional-hazard Cox analyses were performed to ascertain the association between MACE, WL, and the three IWL criteria. IWL was defined as: <50% excess weight loss (<50% EWL), <20% total body-weight loss (<20% TBWL), and -1 standard deviation of alterable weight-loss percentage (<1 SD% AWL). RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 10.2 ± 2.8 years, 86 participants experienced a first post-surgery MACE. Higher WL at one year (HR: 0.77 (95% CI: 0.61-0.98)) and 5 years (HR: 0.63 (95% CI: 0.42-0.92)) was related to a lower incidence of MACE. All short-term criteria for defining IWL were similarly associated with MACE, yet <1 SD% AWL identified more at-risk subjects. Five-year TBWL < 20% and 5-year <1 SD-AWL% were significantly associated with a higher risk for CV events. TBWL < 20% identified more subjects at risk. CONCLUSIONS: The extent of WL is closely related to long-term MACE incidence. Patients who lost -1SD% AWL at one year or <20% TBWL at five years may be considered poor responders.

Defining Global Benchmarks in Elective Secondary Bariatric Surgery Comprising Conversional, Revisional, and Reversal Procedures.

OBJECTIVE: To define "best possible" outcomes for secondary bariatric surgery (BS). BACKGROUND: Management of poor response and of long-term complications after BS is complex and under-investigated. Indications and types of reoperations vary widely and postoperative complication rates are higher compared to primary BS. METHODS: Out of 44,884 BS performed in 18 high-volume centers from 4 continents between 06/2013-05/2019, 5,349 (12%) secondary BS cases were identified. Twenty-one outcome benchmarks were established in low-risk patients, defined as the 75th percentile of the median outcome values of centers. Benchmark cases had no previous laparotomy, diabetes, sleep apnea, cardiopathy, renal insufficiency, inflammatory bowel disease, immunosuppression, thromboembolic events, BMI> 50 kg/m2 or age> 65 years. RESULTS: The benchmark cohort included 3143 cases, mainly females (85%), aged 43.8 ±â€Š10 years, 8.4 ±â€Š5.3 years after primary BS, with a BMI 35.2 ±â€Š7 kg/m2. Main indications were insufficient weight loss (43%) and gastro-esophageal reflux disease/dysphagia (25%). 90-days postoperatively, 14.6% of benchmark patients presented ≥1 complication, mortality was 0.06% (n = 2). Significantly higher morbidity was observed in non-benchmark cases (OR 1.37) and after conversional/reversal or revisional procedures with gastrointestinal suture/stapling (OR 1.84). Benchmark cutoffs for conversional BS were ≤4.5% re-intervention, ≤8.3% re-operation 90-days postoperatively. At 2-years (IQR 1-3) 15.6% of benchmark patients required a reoperation. CONCLUSION: Secondary BS is safe, although postoperative morbidity exceeds the established benchmarks for primary BS. The excess morbidity is due to an increased risk of gastrointestinal leakage and higher need for intensive care. The considerable rate of tertiary BS warrants expertise and future research to optimize the management of non-success after BS.

Bariatric surgery short-term outcomes in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea: the Severe Obesity Outcome Network prospective cohort.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Although the benefits of bariatric surgery have been clearly established, it is not known whether they are as important in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). Primary aim: to evaluate whether patients with moderate-to-severe OSA (apnoea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥ 15 events/h) treated by continuous positive airway pressure/non-invasive ventilation (median [IQR] adherence 6.5 h/night [5; 7.9] at baseline) lose the same amount of body weight 1 year after bariatric surgery as patients with no or mild OSA. Secondary objectives: to compare the evolution of type 2 diabetes and hypertension after bariatric surgery, and surgical complication rates between groups. METHODS/SUBJECTS: Analyses were performed in 371 patients included in a prospective cohort of bariatric surgery, the Severe Obesity Outcome Network cohort. Subjects having moderate-to-severe OSA (n = 210) at baseline were compared with other subjects (n = 161). RESULTS: Excess weight loss (%EWL) at 1 year was lower in patients with moderate-to-severe OSA than in patients without (64.9%EWL [46.9; 79.5] vs. 73.8%EWL [56.6; 89.3], p < 0.01). Multivariable analysis showed that age, initial body mass index and type of surgery, but not OSA status, were associated with 1-year %EWL. Diabetes remitted in 25 (41%) patients with moderate-to-severe OSA and 16 (48%) patients with no or mild OSA (p = 0.48). Hypertension remitted in 28 (32.9%) patients with moderate-to-severe OSA and 9 (40.9%) with no or mild (p = 0.48). Complication rates were 28 (13.3%) in patients with moderate-to-severe OSA and 12 (7.5%) in patients with no or mild OSA (p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with OSA lose less body weight after bariatric surgery. This was related to older age and a higher baseline body mass index. However, the improvements of diabetes and hypertension were similar to that of patients without OSA, and the risk of surgical complications was not higher.

Understanding the Experience of Osteoporosis Risk in Bariatric Surgical Patients.

Despite what is known about risk factors, preventive treatment, and increased prevalence of fragility fractures in post-bariatric surgical patients, little is known about how patient perspectives of osteoporosis risk inform their commitment to bone health. The purpose of this study was to examine the lived experience of osteoporosis risk in people who have had bariatric surgery. Interpretive phenomenology was used to explore osteoporosis from the perspectives of patients who have had bariatric surgery. Eligibility criteria included female, age older than 18 years, and able to understand and speak English. This research provided an understanding of the risk of osteoporosis from the constructed realities and experiences of those who have had bariatric surgery. Participants in this study incorrectly felt they had little to no risk for osteoporosis after bariatric surgery. Patients need to be aware of an increased risk for osteoporosis leading to the potential for fragility fractures after bariatric surgery; nurses are well positioned to enhance osteoporosis prevention efforts in this population through pre- and postoperative education.

Association of Bariatric Surgery With Vascular Outcomes.

Importance: Bariatric surgical weight loss is associated with reduced cardiovascular mortality; however, the mechanisms underlying this association are incompletely understood. Objectives: To identify variables associated with vascular remodeling after bariatric surgery and to examine how sex, race, and metabolic status are associated with microvascular and macrovascular outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based longitudinal cohort included 307 individuals who underwent bariatric surgery. Participants were enrolled in the bariatric weight loss program at Boston Medical Center, a large, multi-ethnic urban hospital, with presurgical and postsurgical assessments. Data were collected from December 11, 2001 to August 27, 2019. Data were analyzed in September 2019. Exposure: Bariatric surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: Flow-mediated dilation (FMD) and reactive hyperemia (RH) (as measures of macrovascular and microvascular function, respectively) and clinical variables were measured preoperatively at baseline and at least once postoperatively within 12 months of the bariatric intervention. Results: A total of 307 participants with obesity (mean [SD] age, 42 [12] years; 246 [80%] women; 199 [65%] White; mean [SD] body mass index, 46 [8]) were enrolled in this study. Bariatric surgery was associated with significant weight loss and improved macrovascular and microvascular function across subgroups of sex, race, and traditional metabolic syndrome (mean [SD] pre- vs postsurgery weight: 126 [25] kg vs 104 [25] kg; P < .001; mean [SD] pre- vs postsurgery FMD: 9.1% [5.3] vs 10.2% [5.1]; P < .001; mean [SD] pre- vs postsurgery RH: 764% [400] vs 923% [412]; P < .001). Factors associated with change in vascular phenotype correlated most strongly with adiposity markers and several metabolic variables depending on vascular territory (eg, association of weight change with change in RH: estimate, -3.2; 95% CI, -4.7 to -1.8; association of hemoglobin A1c with change in FMD: estimate, -0.5; 95% CI, -0.95 to -0.05). While changes in macrovascular function among individuals with metabolically healthy obesity were not observed, the addition of biomarker assessment using high-sensitivity C-reactive protein plasma levels greater than 2 mg/dL identified participants with seemingly metabolically healthy obesity who had low-grade inflammation and achieved microvascular benefit from weight loss surgery. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this study suggest that bariatric intervention is associated with weight loss and favorable remodeling of the vasculature among a wide range of individuals with cardiovascular risk. Moreover, differences in arterial responses to weight loss surgery by metabolic status were identified, underscoring heterogeneity in physiological responses to adiposity change and potential activation of distinct pathological pathways in clinical subgroups. As such, individuals with metabolically healthy obesity represent a mixed population that may benefit from more refined phenotypic classification.

Safety and feasibility of resuming bariatric surgery under the cloud of COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Because of the COVID-19 pandemic, numerous bariatric surgical units globally have halted weight loss surgery. Obesity itself has been shown to be a predictor of poor outcome in people infected with the virus. The aim of this study was to report our experience as a high-volume bariatric institution resuming elective weight loss surgery safely amidst emergency admissions of COVID-19-positive patients. METHODS: A standard operating procedure based on national guidance and altered to accommodate local considerations was initiated across the hospital. Data were collected prospectively for 50 consecutive patients undergoing bariatric surgery following recommencement of elective surgery after the first national lockdown in the UK. RESULTS: Between 28 June and 5 August 2020, a total of 50 patients underwent bariatric surgery of whom 94% were female. Median age was 41 years and median body mass index was 43.8 (interquartile range 40.0-48.8)kg/m2. Half of the patients (n = 25/50) underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and half underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Of these 50 patients, 9 (18%) had revisional bariatric surgery. Overall median length of hospital stay was 1 day, with 96% of the study population being discharged within 24h of surgery. The overall rate of readmission was 6% and one patient (2%) returned to theatre with an obstruction proximal to jejuno-jejunal anastomosis. None of the patients exhibited symptoms or tested positive for COVID-19. CONCLUSION: With appropriately implemented measures and precautions, resumption of bariatric surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic appears feasible and safe with no increased risk to patients.

Obesidad y SARS-CoV-2: consideraciones sobre la cirugía bariátrica y recomendaciones para el inicio de la actividad quirúrgica / Obesity and SARS-CoV-2: Considerations on bariatric surgery and recommendations for the start of surgical activity

La pandemia SARS-CoV-2 ha tenido un gran impacto en todo el mundo, siendo España uno de los países más afectados. La demora en la cirugía bariátrica puede tener consecuencias fatales, ya que hasta el 50% de los pacientes que se encuentran en lista de espera desarrollan una nueva comorbilidad durante el tiempo que permanecen en ella y el 1,5% de pacientes fallecen mientras esperan la intervención. Es por ello por lo que la cirugía bariátrica no debe demorarse en cuanto la ocupación del hospital por pacientes COVID-19+ disminuya de forma significativa y se disponga de recursos y seguridad suficiente para realizar la cirugía en pacientes con patología benigna. Este documento recoge las principales recomendaciones para los programas de cirugía bariátrica en nuestro país desde el punto de vista tanto de seguridad como de preparación y seguimiento del paciente bariátrico en el contexto de la pandemia SARS-CoV-2

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has a great impact worldwide, being Spain one of the most affected countries. The delay in bariatric surgery can have fatal consequences since up to 50% of the patients who are on the waiting list develop a new comorbidity during the time they remain on it and 1.5% of patients die while waiting for the intervention. That is why bariatric surgery should not be delayed, if the occupation of the hospital by COVID-19+ patients decreases significantly, and sufficient resources and safety are available to restart surgery in patients with benign pathology. This document contains the main recommendations for the bariatric surgery programs in our country from the point of view of safety, bariatric patient preparation and follow up during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemia

Type 2 diabetes and metabolic surgery guidelines and recommendations should urgently be unified.

Metabolic surgery has been studied in the last decades as an effective and safe treatment for type 2 diabetes (T2D), and randomized controlled trials generally found surgery superior when compared with medical treatment. In 2016, the DSS-II Joint Statement recognized the importance of metabolic surgery in the treatment of T2D and urged clinicians to discuss, recommend, or at least consider this procedure for their patients. Diabetes societies also cogitate metabolic surgery as an option for T2D patients in their guidelines. However, there are some differences in recommendations that could lead a careful reader to some confusion. This was potentialized in a recent document published by the same DSS-II group concerning prioritization for surgery after the COVID-19 pandemic, in which the criteria suggested for an expedited recommendation that is not exactly evidence-based, and collided substantially with several clinical guidelines worldwide, especially with regard to secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. A more harmonious discussion and unified guidelines between clinicians and surgeons are needed in order to provide the same message for those who read different articles.

Obesity and SARS-CoV-2: Considerations on bariatric surgery and recommendations for the start of surgical activity. / Obesidad y SARS-CoV-2: consideraciones sobre la cirugía bariátrica y recomendaciones para el inicio de la actividad quirúrgica.

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has a great impact worldwide, being Spain one of the most affected countries. The delay in bariatric surgery can have fatal consequences since up to 50% of the patients who are on the waiting list develop a new comorbidity during the time they remain on it and 1.5% of patients die while waiting for the intervention. That is why bariatric surgery should not be delayed, if the occupation of the hospital by COVID-19+ patients decreases significantly, and sufficient resources and safety are available to restart surgery in patients with benign pathology. This document contains the main recommendations for the bariatric surgery programs in our country from the point of view of safety, bariatric patient preparation and follow up during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemia.