Patients' perspectives on weight recurrence after bariatric surgery: a single-center survey.

BACKGROUND: Weight recurrence (WR) affects nearly 20% of patients after bariatric surgery and may decrease its benefits, affecting patients' quality of life negatively. Patient perspectives on WR are not well known. OBJECTIVES: Assess patient needs, goals, and preferences regarding WR treatment. SETTING: Single MBSAQIP-accredited academic center, and online recruitment. METHODS: An 18-item, web-based survey was distributed to adults seeking treatment for WR after a primary bariatric surgery (PBS), in addition to online recruitment, between 2021 and 2023. Survey items included somatometric data, questions about the importance of factors for successful weight loss, procedure decision-making, and treatment expectations. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients with > 10% increase from their nadir weight were included in the study. Patients had initially undergone Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (62.5%), sleeve gastrectomy (28.6%), adjustable gastric banding (3.6%), or other procedures (5.3%). When assessing their satisfaction with PBS, 57.1% were somewhat/extremely satisfied, 33.9% somewhat/extremely dissatisfied, while 8.9% were ambivalent. Patients considered the expected benefits (for example, weight loss) as the most important factor when choosing a treatment option for WR. Patient goals included "feeling good about myself" (96.4% very/extremely important), "being able to resume activities I could not do before" (91% very/extremely important), and "improved quality of life" and "-life expectancy" (> 90% very/extremely important). Finally, RBS, lifestyle modification with peer support, and anti-obesity medication were ranked as first treatment options for WR by 40%, 38.8%, and 29.8% of the respondents, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients considered weight loss as the most important factor when choosing treatment modality for WR, with RBS and lifestyle changes being preferred over weight-loss medications. Large prospective randomized trials are needed to counsel this patient population better.

What is the ideal timing of cholecystectomy after percutaneous cholecystostomy for acute cholecystitis?

BACKGROUND: Acute cholecystitis (AC) is one of the most prevalent diseases in clinical practice. Poor surgical candidates may benefit from early percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) drainage followed by interval cholecystectomy (IC), which is the definitive treatment. The optimal timing between the PC drainage and the IC has not been identified. This study aimed to investigate how the duration between PC and IC affects perioperative outcomes and identify the optimal IC timing to minimize complications. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all adult patients diagnosed with AC who underwent PC followed by IC at a single institution center between 2014 and 2022. Patients with a history of hepatobiliary surgery, stones in the common bile duct, cirrhosis, active malignancy, or prolonged immunosuppression were excluded. The analysis did not include cases with major concurrent procedures during cholecystectomy, previously aborted cholecystectomies, or failure of the PC drain to control the inflammation. Linear and logistic regression models were used to analyze the impact of the interval between PC and IC on intra- and perioperative outcomes. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-two patients (62.1% male) with a mean age of 64.4 ± 15 (mean ± SD) years were diagnosed with AC (25% mild, 47.7% moderate, 27.3% severe). All patients underwent PC followed by IC after a median of 64 [48-91] days. Longer ICU stay was associated with longer time intervals between PC and IC (Coef 105.98, p < 0.001). No significant variations were detected in the intraoperative and perioperative outcomes between patients undergoing IC within versus after 8 weeks from PC placement. However, a higher percentage of patients with delayed IC (after 8 weeks) were discharged home (96.4% vs. 83.7%; p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Patients may benefit from undergoing IC after the 8-week cutoff after PC. However, very long periods between PC and IC procedures may increase the risk of longer ICU stay.

Distal gastric bypass revision for weight recurrence or nonresponse to primary procedure: initial experience and outcomes in an academic practice.

BACKGROUND: Considerable weight recurrence (WR) after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) may occur in nearly 20% of patients. While several nonoperative, endoscopic, and surgical interventions exist for this population, the optimal approach is unknown. This study reports our initial experience with distal bypass revision (DGB) and provides a comparison with patients after primary RYGB. METHODS: Single-institution, retrospective review was conducted for patients who underwent DGB from 2018 to 2020. A Roux and common channel of 150 cm each were constructed (total alimentary limb 300 cm). A group of primary RYGB patients with similar demographics were selected as controls. Demographics, comorbidity resolution, surgical technique, complications, excess weight loss (EWL), total weight loss (TWL), BMI, and weight change data were compared. Patient postoperative weight loss (WL) was also compared after their primary and DGB operations. RESULTS: Sixteen DGB patients, all female, were compared with 29 controls. DGB was performed on average 12.3 years after primary RYGB. In the DGB group, mean BMI was 53.7 before primary RYGB, 31.9 at nadir, and 44.1 prior to DGB. Post-DGB, mean BMI was 40.5, 37.4, 34.8, and 34.4, at 3-, 6-, 12-, and 24-months, respectively. Five patients (31.3%) experienced complications and were readmitted within 30 days, with two of them (12.5%) requiring reintervention and one (6.3%) undergoing reoperation. Mean EWL and TWL up to 2 years after DGB were lower than that after the patient's original RYGB (52.3 ± 18.6 vs. 67.2 ± 33.2; p = 0.126 and 19.6 ± 13.3 vs. 29.6 ± 11.8; p = 0.027, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: DGB resulted in excellent WL up to 2 years after surgery but was associated with considerable postoperative complication rates. The magnitude of TWL was lower compared with the primary operation. Only a few patients experienced nutritional complications. Results of this study can help counsel patients pursuing DGB for WR or nonresponse to primary RYGB. The comparative effectiveness of this approach to other available options remains to be determined.

Resolution and recurrence of anemia following repair of paraesophageal hernias.

BACKGROUND: Iron deficiency anemia is a common paraesophageal hernia (PEH) symptom and may improve after repair. When present, anemia has also been proposed to be associated with an increase in length of hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality after PEH repair. This study aimed to determine anemia-related factors in patients with PEH, the rate of anemia resolution after PEH repair, and the risk of anemia recurrence when repair failed. METHODS: We included patients who received a PEH repair between June 2019 and June 2020 and had 24 months of postoperative follow-up. Demographics and comorbidities were recorded. Anemia was defined as pre-operative hemoglobin values < 12.0 for females and < 13.0 for males, or if patients were receiving iron supplementation. Anemia resolution was determined at 6 months post-op. Length of hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality was recorded. Logistic regression and ANCOVA were used for binary and continuous outcomes respectively. RESULTS: Of 394 patients who underwent PEH repair during the study period, 101 (25.6%) had anemia before surgery. Patients with pre-operative anemia had larger hernia sizes (6.55 cm ± 2.77 vs. 4.34 cm ± 2.50; p < 0.001). Of 68 patients with available data by 6 months after surgery, anemia resolved in 36 (52.9%). Hernia recurred in 6 patients (16.7%), 4 of whom also had anemia recurrence (66.7%). Preoperative anemia was associated with a higher length of hospital stay (3.31 days ± 0.54 vs 2.33 days ± 0.19 p = 0.046) and an increased risk of post-operative all-cause mortality (OR 2.7 CI 1.08-6.57 p = 0.05). Fundoplication type (p = 0.166), gastropexy, or mesh was not associated with an increased likelihood of resolution (OR 0.855 CI 0.326-2.243; p = 0.05) (OR 0.440 CI 0.150-1.287; p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Anemia occurs in 1 out of 4 patients with PEH and is more frequent in patients with larger hernias. Anemia is associated with a longer hospital stay and all-cause mortality after surgery. Anemia recurrence coincided with hernia recurrence in roughly two-thirds of patients.

Early postoperative weight loss predicts nadir weight and weight regain after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

BACKGROUND: Weight regain (WR) post bariatric surgery affects almost 20% of patients. It has been theorized that a complex interplay between physiologic adaptations and epigenetic mechanisms promotes WR in obesity, however, reliable predictors have not been identified. Our study examines the relationship between early postoperative weight loss (WL), nadir weight (NW), and WR following laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data was conducted for LRYGB or LSG patients from 2012 to 2016. Demographics, preoperative BMI, procedure type, and postoperative weight at 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months were recorded. WR was defined as > 20% increase from NW. Univariate and multivariate linear and logistic regression models were used to determine the association between early postoperative WL with NW and WR at 4 years. RESULTS: Thousand twenty-six adults were included (76.8% female, mean age 44.9 ± 11.9 years, preoperative BMI 46.1 ± 8); 74.6% had LRYGB and 25.3% had LSG. Multivariable linear regression models showed that greater WL was associated with lower NW at 6 months (Coef - 2.16; 95% CI - 2.51, - 1.81), 1 year (Coef - 2.33; 95% CI - 2.58, - 2.08), 2 years (Coef - 2.04; 95% CI - 2.25, - 1.83), 3 years (Coef - 1.95; 95% CI - 2.14, - 1.76), and 4 years (Coef - 1.89; 95% CI - 2.10, - 1.68), p ≤ 0.001. WR was independently associated with increased WL between 6 months and 1 year (Coef 1.59; 95% CI 1.05,2.14; p ≤ 0.001) and at 1 year (Coef 1.24; 95% CI 0.84,1.63;p ≤ 0.001) postoperatively. The multivariable logistic regression model showed significantly increased risk of WR at 4 years for patients with greater WL at 6 months (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.08,1.33; p = 0.001) and 1 year (OR 1.14; 95% CI 1.06,1.23; p ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that higher WL at 6 and 12 months post bariatric surgery may be risk factors for WR at 4 years. Surgeons may need to follow patients with high early weight loss more closely and provide additional treatment options to maximize their long-term success.

Embolic protection devices for carotid artery stenting: A network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is an alternative treatment option for patients at high risk for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) but has been correlated with increased risk for distal embolization and periprocedural stroke despite the use of adjunctive embolic protection devices (EPD). This study compared four types of EPDs and their intra and periprocedural related complications. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was conducted in PubMed/Medline to identify studies that investigated the outcomes of CAS with adjuvant use of EPDs, including Proximal Balloon (PB), Distal Filter (DF), and Distal Balloon (DB) strategy. Continuous flow reversal performed via transcarotid approach by a commercially available device as an embolic protection strategy was intentionally excluded based on its distinct procedural characteristics and lack of availability outside of the United States. This network meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. RESULTS: Overall, 45 studies, consisting of 7600 participants satisfied the predetermined search criteria and were included in this network meta-analysis. Overall, 13 studies provided data regarding the number of patients with new ischemic lesions detected in the DW-MRI. DF (OR: 3.15; 95% CI: 1.54-6.44; p = 0.002) and DB (OR: 2.28; 95% CI: 1.58-3.29; p < 0.001) were associated with higher odds of new ischemic lesions compared to PB on DW-MRI imaging. No statistical difference was identified between DB versus DF groups (OR: 1.48; 95% CI: 0.73-2.59; p = 0.317). 36 and 27 studies reported on periprocedural stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA) rates, respectively, showing similar odds of neurologic adverse events between all three groups. CONCLUSIONS: PB deployment during CAS is superior to DF and DB in preventing distal embolization phenomena. However, no statistically significant difference in TIA and stroke rate was found among any of the analyzed EPD groups. Further research is warranted to investigate the association of embolic phenomena on imaging after CAS with clinically significant neurologic deficits.

Transcervical carotid artery revascularization: A systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Carotid artery stenosis is considered a determinant factor for cerebrovascular events, estimated to be the cause of 10% to 20% of all ischemic strokes. Transcervical carotid artery revascularization (TCAR) has been offered as an alternative to transfemoral carotid artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy to treat carotid artery stenosis. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective and retrospective studies reporting the outcomes of patients who had undergone TCAR for carotid artery stenosis. The incidence of periprocedural adverse events was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 45 studies with 14,588 patients met the predefined eligibility criteria and were included in the present meta-analysis. The technical success rate was 99% (95% confidence interval [CI], 98%-99%). The reasons for technical failure included an inability to cross the lesion and/or failure to deploy the stent. Access site complications occurred in 2% of all cases (95% CI, 1%-2%; 30 studies). Overall, the incidence of cranial nerve (CN) injuries was very rare, with only 33 of 8994 patients experiencing neurologic deficits attributed to CN involvement. Bleeding complications were reported by 20 studies and occurred in 2% (95% CI, 1%-3%) of all cases. The overall periprocedural all-cause mortality and stroke rate was 0.5% and 1.3%, respectively. In-stent restenosis was observed in 4 of 260 patients (1.5%; 7 studies), and early (30-day) reocclusion or acute thrombosis of the target lesion occurred in 12 of 1243 patients (∼1%; 11 studies). CONCLUSIONS: The results from the present study have provided significant evidence that TCAR is a very promising and safe carotid revascularization approach with favorable technical success rates associated with low periprocedural stroke and CN injury rates.

Management of Morgagni's Hernia in the Adult Population: A Systematic Review of the Literature.

BACKGROUND: Morgagni's hernia (MH) is defined by the protrusion of abdominal viscera through an anterior retrosternal diaphragmatic defect. The objective of this study was to systematically review current literature on MHs in adult population and assess their clinical characteristics and therapeutic approach. METHODS: PubMed and Cochrane bibliographical databases were searched (last search: 15th January 2021) for studies concerning MHs. RESULTS: Inclusion criteria were met by 189 studies that included 310 patients (61.0% females) with an age of 57.37 ± 18.41 (mean ± SD) years. Pulmonary symptoms, abdominal pain, and nausea-vomit were among the most frequent symptomatology. MHs were predominantly right-sided (84.0%), with greater omentum (74.5%) and transverse colon (65.1%) being the most commonly herniated viscera. The majority of cases underwent an open procedure, while 42.3% of patients had a minimally invasive procedure. Abdominal approach was mostly preferred, while a thoracic one was chosen at 20.6% of cases and a thoracoabdominal at 3.2%. Thirty-day postoperative complications were recorded at 29 patients and 30-day mortality was 2.3%. CONCLUSIONS: MH is a rare type of congenital diaphragmatic hernia which rarely manifests in adult population with atypical pulmonary and gastrointestinal symptoms. Surgery is the gold standard for their management. Open surgical approach is preferable in emergency cases, while laparoscopic surgery is favored in elective setting and is associated with shorter hospitalization. Further studies are crucial in order to elucidate etiology and optimal therapeutic approach.

The Impact of Cirrhosis on Pancreatic Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cirrhosis has been considered a contraindication to major abdominal surgeries, due to increased risk for postoperative morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of pancreatectomy in cirrhotic versus non-cirrhotic patients. METHODS: The present systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. All meta-analyses were performed using the random effects model. RESULTS: Eight studies were eventually included, enrolling 1229 patients (cirrhotics: 722; and Child-Pugh A: 593; Child-Pugh B/C: 129) who underwent surgery for pancreatic cancer. The overall postoperative morbidity rate was 66% (51%-80%). Infections (26%) and ascites formation/worsening (23%) were the most common postoperative complications, followed by anastomotic leak/fistula (17%). Non-cirrhotic patients were less likely to suffer from anastomotic leak/fistula (OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.23-0.65) and infections (OR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.25-0.67). Postoperative mortality rate was statistically significantly lower in non-cirrhotic versus cirrhotic patients (OR: 0.18; 95% CI:0.18-0.39). The odds ratios of 1 year (OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.30-1.30), 2 year (OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.25-1.83) and 3 year all-cause mortality (OR: 0.32; 95% CI: 20.03-2.99) were not significantly different between cirrhotic versus non-cirrhotic patients. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that non-cirrhotic patients were less likely to undergo any type of re-intervention and had statistically significant lower postoperative mortality rates compared to patients with cirrhosis.

Synchronous Carotid Endarterectomy and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft versus Staged Carotid Artery Stenting and Coronary Artery Bypass Graft for Patients with Concomitant Severe Coronary and Carotid Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Owing to the systemic nature of atherosclerosis, medium and large arteries at different sites are commonly simultaneously affected. As a result, severe coronary artery disease (CAD) requiring coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) frequently coexists with significant carotid stenosis that warrants revascularization. The aim of this study was to compare synchronous carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and CABG vs. staged carotid artery stenting (CAS) and CABG for patients with concomitant CAD and carotid artery stenosis in terms of perioperative (30-day) outcomes. METHODS: This study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eligible studies were identified through a search of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane until July 2018. A meta-analysis was conducted with the use of a random-effects model. The I-square statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. RESULTS: Five studies comprising 16,712 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Perioperative stroke (odds ratio [OR]: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43-1.64; I2 = 39.1%), transient ischemic attack (TIA; OR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.04-2.67; I2 = 27.6%), and myocardial infarction (MI) rates (OR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.08-3.85; I2 = 68.9%) were similar between the two groups. However, patients who underwent simultaneous CEA and CABG were at a statistically significant higher risk for perioperative mortality (OR: 1.80; 95% CI: 1.05-3.06; I2 = 0.0%). CONCLUSIONS: The current meta-analysis did not detect statistically significant differences in the rates of perioperative stroke, TIA, and MI between the groups. However, patients in the simultaneous CEA and CABG group had a significantly higher risk of 30-day mortality. Future randomized trials or prospective cohorts are needed to validate our results.

A meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing bovine pericardium and other patch materials for carotid endarterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Patch angioplasty during carotid endarterectomy is commonly used to treat symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. The objective of the present study was to compare the different patch materials that are currently available (synthetic vs venous vs bovine pericardium) in terms of short- and long-term outcomes. METHODS: This study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and eligible randomized control trials were identified through a comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central published until September 2017. A meta-analysis was conducted with the use of a random effects model. The I2 statistic was used to assess for heterogeneity. The primary study end point was the incidence of long-term restenosis. Secondary study end points were 30-day stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), myocardial infarction, neck wound infection, local hematoma, carotid artery thrombosis, cranial nerve injury, long-term stroke incidence, and death. RESULTS: Eighteen studies and 3234 patients were included. The risk of 30-day stroke (relative risk [RR], 1.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-2.19; I2 = 0%), TIA (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.41-3.19; I2 = 0%), myocardial infarction (odds ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.14-3.97; I2 = 0%), death (RR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.21-1.34; I2 = 0%), wound infection (RR, 1.84; 95% CI, 0.43-7.81; I2 = 0%), carotid artery thrombosis (RR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.44-4.97; I2 = 0%), cranial nerve palsy (RR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.53-2.77; I2 = 0%), and long-term stroke (RR, 2.33; 95% CI, 0.76-7.10; I2 = 0%), death (RR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.65-1.83; I2 = 0%) and restenosis of greater than 50% (RR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.19-1.20; I2 = 0%) were similar between the synthetic vs venous patch groups. Also, no differences in terms of 30-day stroke (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.02-5.16; I2 = 63.1%), TIA (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.14-1.76; I2 = 0%), death (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.05-10.51; I2 = 31.7%), carotid artery thrombosis (RR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.02-1.07; I2 = 0%), and long-term restenosis of greater than 70% (RR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.01-2.29; I2 = 70.9%) were detected between the synthetic polytetrafluoroethylene and Dacron patch groups. The comparison between the bovine pericardium vs synthetic patch did not yield any statistically significant results in terms of 30-day stroke (RR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.19-10.79; I2 = 12.7%), TIA (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.11-10.27; I2 = 0%), local neck hematoma (RR, 4.01; 95% CI, 0.46-34.85; I2 = 0%), and death (RR, 4.01; 95% CI, 0.46-34.85; I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Closure of the carotid arteriotomy with any of the studied patch materials seems to be similar in terms of short- and long-term end points. However, additional randomized trials with adequate follow-up periods are needed to compare bovine pericardium patches with other patch materials.

Outcome comparison between primary and revisional bariatric surgery: A propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Revisional bariatric procedures for weight recurrence are rising but are considered higher risk and less effective than primary bariatric procedures. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes between primary and revisional bariatric surgery for weight recurrence. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from adult patients who underwent revisional or primary bariatric surgery from 2016 to 2020 in an academic institution were reviewed. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy were performed primarily or as conversion procedures after laparoscopic adjustable gastric band, vertical banded gastroplasty, and sleeve gastrectomy. 1:1 propensity score matching was performed between revisional bariatric surgery and primary bariatric surgery, and logistic regression analysis was used to compare up to 2-year weight loss and comorbidity resolution outcomes. RESULTS: A total of172 cases (86 revisional bariatric surgery versus 86 primary bariatric surgery) were included. Groups were matched for age, sex, preoperative body mass index, bariatric procedure, diabetes, hypertension, and obstructive sleep apnea. Procedure duration (203 ± 78 vs 154 ± 69 minutes; P < .001) and length of stay (2.3 ± 2.1 vs 1.7 ± 1 days; P = .02) were longer for revisional bariatric surgery versus primary bariatric surgery, respectively. Total weight loss was less in revisional bariatric surgery compared with primary bariatric surgery at 1 year (23 ± 10% vs 32 ± 9%; P < .001) and 2 years (21 ± 12.% vs 32 ± 10%; P < .001) of follow-up; however, no differences were detected in postoperative occurrences, emergency department visits, readmissions, reintervention and reoperation rates, and comorbidity resolution. CONCLUSION: Although revisional bariatric surgery was associated with longer operation times, prolonged hospitalization, and lower weight loss than primary bariatric surgery, it was accomplished safely and led to substantial weight loss and comorbidity resolution. This information can guide patient counseling before revisional surgery for weight recurrence.

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.

Cholecystectomy After Percutaneous Cholecystostomy for Acute Cholecystitis: Experience and Outcomes in an Academic Practice.

Percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) tube insertion has been shown to be an effective treatment of acute cholecystitis (AC) as a temporary step to subsequent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). However, the optimal time gap between PC implantation and LC has not been identified. Adult patients who underwent PC followed by LC for the treatment of AC between 2016 and 2020 were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed. One hundred twelve patients, consisting of 59.8% males, were included and received LC after a median of 65 [48 - 96.5] days following the PC placement. No deaths or reoperations occurred within 30 days, but 16 (14.3%) patients were readmitted, and 16 (14.3%) required subsequent reintervention. Although a longer interval between PC and LC had no effect on perioperative outcomes, it was associated with considerably longer intensive care unit (ICU) stay. According to these findings, patients may benefit from early LC following PC for the treatment of AC.

Proton pump inhibitor prophylaxis after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: A national survey of surgeon practices.

BACKGROUND: Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are frequently used after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) to prevent marginal ulceration. The optimal duration of PPI treatment after surgery to minimize ulcer development is unclear. OBJECTIVES: Assess bariatric surgeon practice variability regarding postoperative PPI prophylaxis. SETTING: Survey of medical directors of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program-accredited centers. METHODS: Members of the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery research committee developed and administered a web-based anonymous survey in November 2021 to bariatric surgeons of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program-accredited programs detailing questions related to surgeons' use of PPI after RYGB including patient selection, medication, dosage, and treatment duration. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 112 surgeons (response rate: 52.6%). PPIs were prescribed by 85.4% of surgeons for all patients during their hospitalization, 3.9% for selective patients, and 10.7% not at all. After discharge, 90.3% prescribed PPIs. Pantoprazole was most often used during hospitalization (38.5%), while omeprazole was most prescribed (61.7%) after discharge. The duration of postoperative PPI administration varied; it was 3 months in 43.6%, 1 month in 20.2%, and 6 months in 18.6% of patients. Finally, surgeons' practice setting and case volume were not associated with the duration of prophylactic PPI administration after RYGB. CONCLUSIONS: PPI administration practices vary widely among surgeons after RYGB, which may be related to the limited comparative evidence and guidelines on best duration of PPI administration. Large prospective clinical trials with objective outcome measures are needed to define optimal practices for PPI prophylaxis after RYGB to maximize clinical benefit.

Evaluating the success of American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery research grants.

BACKGROUND: Since 2004 the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) Foundation has funded competitive proposals by ASMBS members that are administered through the ASMBS Research Committee. These grants are intended to further the knowledge in the field of metabolic and bariatric surgery and support the scholarly growth of its members. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this project was to evaluate the factors associated with grant completion success and barriers encountered by investigators. SETTING: ASMBS. METHODS: Members of the ASMBS Research Committee retrospectively reviewed all awarded research grants since 2004. Information captured included research topic, status of awarded grants, and related publications. Further, a web-based survey of grant recipients was administered exploring the perceived factors of successful completion and barriers encountered. RESULTS: Since 2004, ASMBS members have been awarded 28 research grants funded by the ASMBS Foundation totaling $1,033,000. Fifty-seven percent of awardees responded to the survey. Seventeen projects had been completed at the time of the survey leading to 13 publications, while 11 remain in progress. Seventy percent of non-completed grant recipients indicated that a publication was forthcoming in the next 12 months. Overall, 64% received additional funding. Factors reported to influence successful completion of grants included the effectiveness of the research team, principal investigator (PI) perseverance, PI protected time, institutional support and available resources, and mentorship. Over the last decade, the average time from the award to publication was 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: The research grants awarded by the AMSBS are successful at producing peer reviewed publications at a high rate and often lead to further funding suggesting that they boost the career of their recipients. The identified factors of success can help guide future applicants and the ASMBS Research Committee during its grant selection process.

Patient perspectives on the usefulness of the MBSAQIP Bariatric Surgical Risk/Benefit Calculator: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Bariatric Surgical Risk/Benefit Calculator uses procedure-specific prediction models to generate individualized surgical risk/outcome estimates. This tool helps guide informed consent and operative selection. We hypothesized that calculator use would influence patient procedure choice. OBJECTIVE: To assess patient perspectives on the bariatric surgical calculator. SETTING: A randomized controlled trial at an MBSAQIP-accredited center. METHODS: During the preoperative bariatric surgical office consultation, patients were randomized into 2 groups: the control group received conventional surgeon-led counseling, whereas surgeons used the risk/benefit calculator to guide decision making for the calculator group. Surveys were completed by patients following consultations to evaluate satisfaction and perceived impact of the risk/benefit calculator on operative selection. RESULTS: Between 2020 and 2022, 61 patients were randomized to the calculator group and 68 patients to the control group. The percentage of patients whose procedure of choice changed following consultation was similar in the calculator versus control group (44.3% versus 41.2%; P = .723). However, calculator group patients were less likely to perceive surgeon counseling as very important for their decision making (43.3% versus 76.5%; P < .001). Eighty-five percent of calculator group patients rated the calculator as useful or very useful, and only 1.7% found it not very important. The reasons patients changed procedure choice were similar between the groups (P = .091); the most common cause was to improve their anticipated outcome (48.7% versus 54.8%). CONCLUSIONS: While the risk/benefit calculator was perceived as a helpful tool by most patients, its use did not influence their procedure choice. However, the patient-reported usefulness and importance of the calculator during surgeon counseling suggest that the information provided has weight in patient decision making.

Relationship between stress and resident non-technical skills during interdisciplinary trauma simulations.

BACKGROUND: Non-technical skills, such as communication and situation awareness, are vital for patient care and effective surgical team performance. Previous research has found that residents' perceived stress is associated with poorer non-technical skills; however, few studies have investigated the relationship between objectively assessed stress and non-technical skills. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between objectively assessed stress and non-technical skills. METHODS: Emergency medicine and surgery residents voluntarily participated in this study. Residents were randomly assigned to trauma teams to manage critically ill patients. Acute stress was assessed objectively using a chest-strap heart rate monitor, which measured average heart rate and heart rate variability. Participants also evaluated perceived stress and workload using the 6-item version of the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory and the Surgery Task Load Index. Non-technical skills were assessed by faculty raters using the non-technical skills scale for trauma. Pearson's correlation coefficients were used to examine relationships between all variables. RESULTS: Forty-one residents participated in our study. Heart rate variability (where higher values reflect lower stress) was positively correlated with residents' non-technical skills overall and leadership, communication, and decision-making. Average heart rate was negatively correlated with residents' communication. CONCLUSION: Higher objectively assessed stress was associated with poorer non-technical skills in general and nearly all non-technical skills domains of the T-NOTECHS. Clearly, stress has a deleterious effect on residents' non-technical skills during trauma situations, and given the importance of non-technical skills in surgical care, educators should consider implementing mental skills training to reduce residents' stress and optimize non-technical skills during trauma situations.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis after bariatric surgery: a national survey of MBSAQIP director practices.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is the most common cause of death following metabolic/bariatric surgery (MBS), with most events occurring after discharge. The available evidence on ideal prophylaxis type, dosage, and duration after discharge is limited. OBJECTIVES: Assess metabolic/bariatric surgeon VTE prophylaxis practices and define existing variability. SETTING: Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP)-accredited centers. METHODS: The members of the ASMBS Research Committee developed and administered a web-based survey to MBSAQIP medical directors and ASMBS members to examine the differences in clinical practice regarding the administration of VTE prophylaxis after MBS. RESULTS: Overall, 264 metabolic/bariatric surgeons (136 medical directors and 128 ASMBS members) participated in the survey. Both mechanical and chemical VTE prophylaxis was used by 97.1% of the participants, knee-high compression devices by 84.7%, enoxaparin (32.4% 40 mg every 24 hours, 22.7% 40 mg every 12 hours, 24.4% adjusted the dose based on body mass index) by 56.5%, and heparin (46.1% 5000 units every 8 hours, 22.6% 5000 units every 12 hours, 20.9% 5000 units once preoperatively) by 38.1%. Most surgeons (81.6%) administered the first dose preoperatively, while the first postoperative dose was given on the evening of surgery by 44% or the next morning by 42.2%. Extended VTE prophylaxis was prescribed for 2 weeks by 38.7% and 4 weeks by 28.9%. CONCLUSIONS: VTE prophylaxis practices vary widely among metabolic/bariatric surgeons. Variability may be related to limited available comparative evidence. Large prospective clinical trials are needed to define optimal practices for VTE risk stratification and prophylaxis in bariatric surgery patients.

Bariatric Surgeon Perspective on Revisional Bariatric Surgery (RBS) for Weight Recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Weight recurrence (WR) after bariatric surgery occurs in nearly 20% of patients. Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) may benefit this population but remains controversial among surgeons. OBJECTIVES: Explore surgeon perspectives and practices for patients with WR after primary bariatric surgery (PBS). SETTING: Web-based survey of bariatric surgeons. METHODS: A 21-item survey was piloted and posted on social media closed groups (Facebook) utilized by bariatric surgeons. Survey items included demographic information, questions pertaining to the definition of suboptimal and satisfactory response to bariatric surgery, and general questions related to different WR management options. RESULTS: One hundred ten surgeons from 19 countries responded to the survey. Ninety-eight percent responded that WR was multifactorial, including behavioral and biological factors. Failure of PBS was defined as excess weight loss < 50% by 31.4%, as excess weight loss <25% by 12.8%, and as comorbidity recurrence by 17.4%. Surgeon responses differed significantly by gender (P = .036). 29.4% believed RBS was not successful, while 14.1% were unsure. Nevertheless, 73% reported that they would perform RBS if sufficient evidence of benefit existed. Most frequently performed revisional procedures included conversion of sleeve gastrectomy to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), adjustable gastric band to RYGB, and RYGB revision (21.9% versus 18.2% versus 15.3%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: This survey demonstrates significant variability in surgeon perception regarding causes and the effectiveness of RBS. Moreover, they disagree on what constitutes a nonsatisfactory response to PBS and to whom they offer RBS. These findings may relate to limited available clinical evidence on best management options for this patient population. Clinical trials investigating the comparative effectiveness of various treatment options are needed.