Revisional versus primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a case-matched analysis

Background: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has been a widely performed bariatric procedure. Unfortunately, revisional surgery is required in 20-30% of cases. Data comparing revisional and primary gastric bypass procedures are scarce. This study compared revisional malabsorptive laparoscopic very very long limb (VVLL) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) with primary VVLL RYGB and tested the hypothesis that one-stage revisional laparoscopic VVLL RYGB is an effective procedure after failed LAGB. Methods: In this study, 48 revisional VVLL RYGBs were matched one-to-one with 48 primary VVLL RYGBs. The outcome measures were operating time, conversion to open surgery, excess weight loss (EWL), and early and late morbidity. Results: Surgical and medical morbidities did not differ significantly. No conversions occurred. The revisional group showed an EWL of 41.8% after 12months of follow-up evaluation and 45.1% after 24months based on the pre-revisional weight. The total EWL based on the weight before the LAGB was calculated to be 54.3% after 12months and 57.2% after 24months. The EWL in the primary RYGB group was significantly higher for both types of calculation: 41.8%/54.3% versus 64.1% (p<0.001 and <0.01) after 12months and 45.1%/57.2% versus 70.4% (p<0.001 and <0.002) after 24months. Conclusions: Revisional laproscopic VVLL RYGB can be performed as a one-stage procedure by experienced bariatric surgeons but shows less effective EWL than primary RYGB procedures

Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Banding in Australian adolescents: Should it be done?

“This is a post-peer-review, pre-copyedit version of an article published in Obesity Surgery. The final authenticated version is available online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11695-017-2544-6”.Objective There are very few studies on laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) in obese adolescents with follow up for more than 36 months, let alone good prospective data beyond 24 months in Australian adolescents. We aimed to evaluate medium term (>36 months) safety and efficacy of LAGB in adolescents with severe obesity. Methods This is a prospective cohort study (March 2009–December 2015) in one tertiary referral hospital including obese adolescents (14–18 years) with a body mass index (BMI) >40 (or ≥35 with comorbidities) who consented to have LAGB. Exclusion criteria were syndromal causes of obesity, depression and oesophageal motility disorders. Main outcome measures include change in weight and BMI at 6, 12, 24, 36 and 48 months post LAGB; postoperative complications; and admissions. Results Twenty-one adolescents (median [interquartile range (IQR)] 17.4 [16.5–17.7] years, 9 males, mean ± SD BMI 47.3 ± 8.4 kg/m2) had a median follow up of 45.5 [32–50] months post LAGB. Follow up data were available for 16 adolescents. Weight and BMI improved significantly at all follow up times (all p < 0.01). The median maximum BMI loss was 10 [7.1–14.7] kg/m2. There were four minor early complications. Seven bands were removed due to weight loss failure/regain (two had also obstructive symptoms). Conclusions We have shown in the longest prospective LAGB postoperative follow up study of Australian adolescents that LAGB improves BMI in the majority of adolescents without significant comorbidities. LAGB is still a reasonable option to be considered as a temporary procedure to manage severe obesity during adolescence

Correction to: Two years later: Is the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still having an impact on emergency surgery? An international cross-sectional survey among WSES members

Background: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic is still ongoing and a major challenge for health care services worldwide. In the first WSES COVID-19 emergency surgery survey, a strong negative impact on emergency surgery (ES) had been described already early in the pandemic situation. However, the knowledge is limited about current effects of the pandemic on patient flow through emergency rooms, daily routine and decision making in ES as well as their changes over time during the last two pandemic years. This second WSES COVID-19 emergency surgery survey investigates the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic on ES during the course of the pandemic. Methods: A web survey had been distributed to medical specialists in ES during a four-week period from January 2022, investigating the impact of the pandemic on patients and septic diseases both requiring ES, structural problems due to the pandemic and time-to-intervention in ES routine. Results: 367 collaborators from 59 countries responded to the survey. The majority indicated that the pandemic still significantly impacts on treatment and outcome of surgical emergency patients (83.1% and 78.5%, respectively). As reasons, the collaborators reported decreased case load in ES (44.7%), but patients presenting with more prolonged and severe diseases, especially concerning perforated appendicitis (62.1%) and diverticulitis (57.5%). Otherwise, approximately 50% of the participants still observe a delay in time-to-intervention in ES compared with the situation before the pandemic. Relevant causes leading to enlarged time-to-intervention in ES during the pandemic are persistent problems with in-hospital logistics, lacks in medical staff as well as operating room and intensive care capacities during the pandemic. This leads not only to the need for triage or transferring of ES patients to other hospitals, reported by 64.0% and 48.8% of the collaborators, respectively, but also to paradigm shifts in treatment modalities to non-operative approaches reported by 67.3% of the participants, especially in uncomplicated appendicitis, cholecystitis and multiple-recurrent diverticulitis. Conclusions: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still significantly impacts on care and outcome of patients in ES. Well-known problems with in-hospital logistics are not sufficiently resolved by now; however, medical staff shortages and reduced capacities have been dramatically aggravated over last two pandemic years

Evolving trends in the management of acute appendicitis during COVID-19 waves. The ACIE appy II study

Background: In 2020, ACIE Appy study showed that COVID-19 pandemic heavily affected the management of patients with acute appendicitis (AA) worldwide, with an increased rate of non-operative management (NOM) strategies and a trend toward open surgery due to concern of virus transmission by laparoscopy and controversial recommendations on this issue. The aim of this study was to survey again the same group of surgeons to assess if any difference in management attitudes of AA had occurred in the later stages of the outbreak. Methods: From August 15 to September 30, 2021, an online questionnaire was sent to all 709 participants of the ACIE Appy study. The questionnaire included questions on personal protective equipment (PPE), local policies and screening for SARS-CoV-2 infection, NOM, surgical approach and disease presentations in 2021. The results were compared with the results from the previous study. Results: A total of 476 answers were collected (response rate 67.1%). Screening policies were significatively improved with most patients screened regardless of symptoms (89.5% vs. 37.4%) with PCR and antigenic test as the preferred test (74.1% vs. 26.3%). More patients tested positive before surgery and commercial systems were the preferred ones to filter smoke plumes during laparoscopy. Laparoscopic appendicectomy was the first option in the treatment of AA, with a declined use of NOM. Conclusion: Management of AA has improved in the last waves of pandemic. Increased evidence regarding SARS-COV-2 infection along with a timely healthcare systems response has been translated into tailored attitudes and a better care for patients with AA worldwide

Revisional versus primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a case-matched analysis

Background: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) has been a widely performed bariatric procedure. Unfortunately, revisional surgery is required in 20-30 % of cases. Data comparing revisional and primary gastric bypass procedures are scarce. This study compared revisional malabsorptive laparoscopic very very long limb (VVLL) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) with primary VVLL RYGB and tested the hypothesis that one-stage revisional laparoscopic VVLL RYGB is an effective procedure after failed LAGB.\ud \ud Methods: In this study, 48 revisional VVLL RYGBs were matched one-to-one with 48 primary VVLL RYGBs. The outcome measures were operating time, conversion to open surgery, excess weight loss (EWL), and early and late morbidity.\ud \ud Results: Surgical and medical morbidities did not differ significantly. No conversions occurred. The revisional group showed an EWL of 41.8 % after 12 months of follow-up evaluation and 45.1 % after 24 months based on the pre-revisional weight. The total EWL based on the weight before the LAGB was calculated to be 54.3 % after 12 months and 57.2 % after 24 months. The EWL in the primary RYGB group was significantly higher for both types of calculation: 41.8 %/54.3 % versus 64.1 % (p < 0.001 and >0.01) after 12 months and 45.1 %/57.2 % versus 70.4 % (p < 0.001 and <0.002) after 24 months.\ud \ud Conclusions: Revisional laproscopic VVLL RYGB can be performed as a one-stage procedure by experienced bariatric surgeons but shows less effective EWL than primary RYGB procedures

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus laparoscopic mini gastric bypass in the treatment of obesity: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Abstract Background Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is considered the gold standard in bariatric surgery, achieving durable long-term weight loss with improvement of obesity-related comorbidities. Lately, the laparoscopic mini gastric bypass (LMGB) has gained worldwide popularity with similar results to LRYGB in terms of weight loss and comorbidity resolution. However, there is a lack of randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing LMGB and LRYGB. This article describes the design and protocol of a randomized controlled trial comparing the outcomes of these two bariatric procedures. Methods/Design The trial is designed as a single center, randomized, patient and observer blinded trial. The relevant ethics committee has approved the trial protocol. To demonstrate that LMGB is not inferior to LRYGB in terms of excess weight loss (EWL) the study is conducted as a non-inferiority trial with the sample-size calculations performed accordingly. EWL 12 months after surgery is the primary endpoint, whereas 3-year EWL, morbidity, mortality, remission of obesity related comorbidities, quality of life (QOL) and hormonal and lipid profile changes are secondary endpoints. Eighty patients, 18 years or older and with a body mass index (BMI) between 35 and 50 kg/m2 who meet the Swiss guidelines for the surgical treatment of morbid obesity will be randomized. The endpoints and baseline measurements will be assessed pre-surgery, peri-surgery and post-surgery (fixed follow up measurements are at discharge and at the time points 6 weeks and 12 and 36 months postoperatively). Discussion With its 3-year follow up time, this RCT will provide important data on the impact of LMGB and LRYGB on EWL, remission of comorbidities, QOL and hormonal and lipid profile changes. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02601092 . Registered on 28 September 2015

Surgical repair of an esophageal perforation after radiofrequency catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation

Recent reports have described the incidence of atrioesophageal fistulas (AEF), often resulting in death, from radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF).1 Cases of esophageal perforation without concomitant AEF have not been described as extensively.1 The precise mechanisms leading to esophageal injury after catheter ablation without involvement of the left atrium are not fully understood. The surgical approach to treat esophageal perforation is strongly recommended.2 However, a unified surgical treatment approach has not yet been established. We describe a case of successful surgical repair of an esophageal perforation after ablation using surgical repair in combination with an omental wrap. Keywords: Atrial fibrillation, Radiofrequency catheter ablation, Surger

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Bariatric Surgery: Results from a Worldwide Survey

Background The ongoing “coronavirus disease 19” (COVID-19) pandemic has had a strong effect on the delivery of surgical care worldwide. Elective surgeries have been canceled or delayed in order to reallocate resources to the treatment of COVID-19 patients. Currently, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on bariatric and metabolic surgical practice remains unclear. Methods An internet-based online survey was performed among bariatric surgeons worldwide. The survey was sent to bariatric surgeons via the International Bariatric Club Facebook group and by electronic mail via the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and metabolic disorders (IFSO) secretariat to members of the associated national IFSO societies. Results One hundred sixty-nine (n = 169) bariatric surgeons participated in the survey. The majority of the respondents postponed preoperative upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopies, appointments in the outpatient clinic and bariatric operations. Most surgeons performed video calls for follow-up appointments instead of meeting the patients in the outpatient clinics. Laparoscopy was still the preferred treatment for surgical emergencies, but a trend towards conservative treatment of acute appendicitis and acute cholecystitis was shown. Rapid preoperative COVID-19 testing availability was poor; therefore, routine screening of emergency bariatric cases was not widely provided. A wide variance occurred regarding precautions and personal protection equipment among the participants. Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic showed a strong impact on bariatric surgical practice regarding surgical and outpatient planning as well as personnel management. Coordinated effort from the national bariatric societies should focus on strict implementation of the current recommendations regarding precaution measures and personal protection equipment. Further studies should evaluate how this impact will evolve in the near future

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Patients from a Bariatric Program: A Qualitative Analysis of Their Perceptions of Health and Well-Being

Introduction: The study was conducted to explore the perceptions of patients from a bariatric program who have undergone or will undergo bariatric surgery during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, specifically as related to their struggles with health issues and their psychological well-being. Materials and Methods: We conducted semi-structured, in-depth interviews with nineteen pre- or post-bariatric patients to generate data on their perceptions of COVID-19. Consistent with the methods of constructivist grounded theory, we collected and analyzed data iteratively through a constant comparative process for data coding and develop themes in the transcripts. Results: We identified themes to summarize the pandemic-associated experiences of our cohort as follows: their life structure before COVID-19, the turning point with changes and adaptations, and the impact of isolation on psychological well-being. We identified grief due to loss of social contacts as well as physical and psychological health impairment as consequences of pandemic-related lifestyle changes. Most participants were not aware of overweight and obesity being major risk factors for worse outcomes of COVID-19. We developed a theme-based theory on patients&rsquo; perceptions and fears regarding the pandemic as they live through phases of grief. Discussion: Most participants shared critical perceptions about their own somatic and psychological health. These findings may inform recommendations and strategies for both patients and healthcare professionals to manage the challenges potentially presented by this vulnerable patient group in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic