Completion gastrectomy with esophagojejunostomy for management of complications of benign foregut surgery

Background: With the worldwide epidemic of obesity, an increasing number of bariatric operations and antireflux fundoplications are being performed. Despite low morbidity of the primary foregut surgery, completion gastrectomy may be necessary as a definitive procedure for complications of prior foregut surgery; however, the literature evaluating outcomes after completion gastrectomy with esophagojejunostomy (EJ) for benign diseases is limited. We present our experience of completion gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y EJ in the setting of benign disease at a single tertiary center. Methods and Procedures: All patients who underwent total, proximal, or completion gastrectomy with EJ for complications of benign foregut surgery from January 2006 to December 2015 were retrospectively identified. All cancer operations were excluded. Results: There were 23 patients who underwent gastrectomy with EJ (13 laparoscopic EJ [LEJ] and 10 open EJ). The index operations included 12 antireflux, 9 bariatric, and 2 peptic ulcer disease surgeries. Seventy-eight percent of patients had surgical or endoscopic interventions before EJ, with a median of one prior intervention and a median interval from the index operation to EJ of 25 months (interquartile range 9–87). The 30-day perioperative complication rate was 30% with 17% classified being major (Clavien–Dindo ≥ III) and no 30-day perioperative mortality. Comparing laparoscopic and open approaches showed similar operative times, estimated blood loss, and overall complication rate. LEJ was associated with a shorter length of stay (LOS) (P < .001), fewer postoperative ICU days (P = .002), fewer 6-month complication rates (P < .007), and decreased readmission rate (P = .024). Conclusion: Our series demonstrates that EJ is a reasonable option for reoperative foregut surgery. The laparoscopic approach appears to be associated with decreased LOS and readmissions

Principal Considerations For The Contemporary High-Fidelity Endovascular Simulator Design Used In Training And Evaluation

Background The simulation and rehearsal of virtual endovascular procedures are anticipated to improve the outcomes of actual procedures. Contemporary, high-fidelity simulation is based on feedback systems that combine concepts of mechanical, electrical, computer, and control systems engineering to reproduce an interactive endovascular case. These sophisticated devices also include psychometric instruments for objective surgical skill assessment. The goal of this report is to identify the design characteristics of commercially available simulators for endovascular procedures and to provide a cross-section comparison across all devices to aid in the simulator selection process. Methods Data were obtained (1) by a standard questionnaire issued to four simulator companies prompting for relevant design details of each model for the expressed purpose of publication, (2) from each manufacturer\u27s respective website including appended sales brochures and specification sheets, and (3) by an evaluation of peer-reviewed literature. Focus topics include haptic technology, vessel segmentation, physiologic feedback, performance feedback, and physical logistics (ie, weight, dimensions, and portability). All data sources were surveyed between January 1, 2012, and June 30, 2013. Results All of the commercially available, high-fidelity endovascular simulators use interactive virtual environments with preprogrammed physics and physiology models for accurate reproduction of surgical reality. The principal differences between devices are the number of access sites and haptic devices, the ability to reconstruct patient-specific anatomy for preprocedural rehearsal, and the available peripheral training modalities. Hardware and software options can also vary within the same device in comparing patient-specific with generic cases. Conclusions Despite our limited knowledge about the potential of high-fidelity simulation within the endovascular world, today\u27s currently available simulators successfully provide high-fidelity reproductions of the endovascular environment. We have found that all of the commercially available devices incorporate the necessary features for a high-fidelity experience: (1) haptic technology, (2) vessel reconstruction, (3) physiology feedback, and (4) performance feedback. Significant variations in design do exist and may influence differences in skill development, evaluation, or cost. However, further validation of these differences is still needed and would benefit program directors interested in expanding these platforms for vascular training and certification as this technology matures. © 2014 by the Society for Vascular Surgery

Principal Considerations For The Contemporary High-Fidelity Endovascular Simulator Design Used In Training And Evaluation

Background The simulation and rehearsal of virtual endovascular procedures are anticipated to improve the outcomes of actual procedures. Contemporary, high-fidelity simulation is based on feedback systems that combine concepts of mechanical, electrical, computer, and control systems engineering to reproduce an interactive endovascular case. These sophisticated devices also include psychometric instruments for objective surgical skill assessment. The goal of this report is to identify the design characteristics of commercially available simulators for endovascular procedures and to provide a cross-section comparison across all devices to aid in the simulator selection process. Methods Data were obtained (1) by a standard questionnaire issued to four simulator companies prompting for relevant design details of each model for the expressed purpose of publication, (2) from each manufacturer\u27s respective website including appended sales brochures and specification sheets, and (3) by an evaluation of peer-reviewed literature. Focus topics include haptic technology, vessel segmentation, physiologic feedback, performance feedback, and physical logistics (ie, weight, dimensions, and portability). All data sources were surveyed between January 1, 2012, and June 30, 2013. Results All of the commercially available, high-fidelity endovascular simulators use interactive virtual environments with preprogrammed physics and physiology models for accurate reproduction of surgical reality. The principal differences between devices are the number of access sites and haptic devices, the ability to reconstruct patient-specific anatomy for preprocedural rehearsal, and the available peripheral training modalities. Hardware and software options can also vary within the same device in comparing patient-specific with generic cases. Conclusions Despite our limited knowledge about the potential of high-fidelity simulation within the endovascular world, today\u27s currently available simulators successfully provide high-fidelity reproductions of the endovascular environment. We have found that all of the commercially available devices incorporate the necessary features for a high-fidelity experience: (1) haptic technology, (2) vessel reconstruction, (3) physiology feedback, and (4) performance feedback. Significant variations in design do exist and may influence differences in skill development, evaluation, or cost. However, further validation of these differences is still needed and would benefit program directors interested in expanding these platforms for vascular training and certification as this technology matures. © 2014 by the Society for Vascular Surgery

Revisional Procedures after Sleeve Gastrectomy for Weight Recurrence or Inadequate Weight Loss: An Analysis of the MBSAQIP Database

Introduction: The safety of conversional bariatric procedures after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) for weight recurrence (WR) or inadequate weight loss (IWL) is debated due to limited evidence. Conversion options include Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass (SADI), and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD-DS). We aimed to compare serious complications and mortality rates between these procedures within 30 days. Methods: Using the 2020 and 2021 MBSAQIP databases, we identified patients who underwent a conversion from SG to RYGB, SADI, or BPD-DS. We performed a multivariable logistic regression to assess predictors of 30-day complications and mortality. Results: Among 7388 patients (77.6% RYGB, 8.7% SADI, 13.7% BPD-DS), those undergoing SADI and BPD-DS had higher preoperative body mass index. Conversion reasons included WR (63.0%) and IWL (37.0%). SADI and BPD-DS patients had longer operative times (p p = 0.001). Serious complications, reoperations, readmissions, and 30-day mortality were similar across groups. Conversion procedure type was not an independent predictor of complications. Conclusion: RYGB was the most performed conversional procedure after SG. The study indicated a similar safety profile for revisional RYGB, SADI, and BPD-DS, with comparable 30-day complications and mortality rates. However, SADI and BPD-DS patients had longer operative time and higher leak rates