Multicenter prospective randomized study comparing the technique of using a bovine pericardium biological prosthesis reinforcement in parietal herniorrhaphy (Tutomesh TUTOGEN) with simple parietal herniorrhaphy, in a potentially contaminated setting

The use of parietal synthetic prosthetic reinforcement material in potentially contaminated settings is not recommended, as there is a risk that the prosthesis may become infected. Thus, simple parietal herniorrhaphy, is the conventional treatment, even though there is a significant risk that the hernia may recur. Using new biomaterials of animal origin presently appears to offer a new therapeutic solution, but their effectiveness has yet to be demonstrated. The purpose of this multicenter prospective randomized single-blind study was to compare the surgical treatment of inguinal hernia or abdominal incisional hernia by simple parietal herniorrhaphy without prosthetic reinforcement (Group A), with Tutomesh TUTOGEN biological prosthesis reinforcement parietal herniorrhaphy (Group B), in a potentially contaminated setting. We examined early postoperative complications in the first month after the operation, performed an assessment after one year of survival without recurrence and analyzed the quality of life and pain of the patients (using SF-12 health status questionnaire and Visual Analog Pain Scale) at 1, 6, and 12 months, together with an economic impact study. Hundred and thirty four patients were enrolled between January 2009 and October 2010 in 20 French hospitals. The groups were comparable with respect to their enrollment characteristics, their history, types of operative indications and procedures carried out. At one month post-op, the rate of infectious complications (n(A)?=?11(18.33%) vs. n(B)?=?12(19.05%), p?=?0.919) was not significantly different between the two groups. The assessment after one year of survival without recurrence revealed that survival was significantly greater in Group B (Group A recurrence: 10, Group B: 3; p?=?0.0475). No difference in the patients' quality of life was demonstrated at 1, 6, or 12 months. However, at the 1 month follow-up, the "perceived health" rating seemed better in the group with Tutomesh (p?=?0.022). No significant difference between the two parietal repair groups was observed during the follow-ups with respect to the criterion of pain (using a visual analog scale). There was a significant difference between the two parietal repair groups with regard to the number of days spent in intensive care unit, in favor of the Tutomesh technique (p?=?0.010). The use of a Tutomesh bioprosthesis for hernia repair or postincisional hernia in a potentially contaminated workplace reduces the risk of short-term recurrence without increasing overall comorbidity

A149 Procedureless Gastric Balloon for Weight Loss: Multi-Center Experience in 1623 Consecutive Patients

[eng] Background The Elipse¿ Balloon has emerged as a novel, non-endoscopic option for patients with obesity or overweight. It is swallowed in an outpatient setting and filled with 550ml of fluid. After 4 months of gastric residence, the balloon spontaneously empties and is excreted naturally. Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the current generation Elipse Balloon in a large, multicenter, international population. Methods Outcomes data from 1623 consecutive Elipse Balloon patients (1171F/506M) treated in 19 centers across 7 countries were pooled for analysis. Nutritional counseling was provided. Data included weight loss, metabolic parameters, ease of placement, device performance, and complications. Results At placement, mean age was 39.2±12 yrs, mean weight 94±18.6 kg and mean BMI 34.2±5.4 kg/m2. Triglycerides, LDL cholesterol and HgB A1C were 144.6±70.8 mg/dl, 133.2±43.8 mg/dl and 5.1±1.2% respectively. After 4 months, TBWL was 13.6±5.7%. Mean WL, mean EWL and mean BMI reduction were 12.9±6.5 kg, 55.8±1.1% and 4.9±3.3 kg/m2 respectively. All metabolic parameters improved. 99.9% patients were able to swallow the device with 31.7% needing stylet assistance. Ten (0.62%) empty balloons were vomited and the rest were excreted in stool. Three (0.18%) balloons deflated early. 41 (2.5%) patients had intolerance requiring endoscopic balloon removal. One (0.06%) patient developed esophagitis. One (0.06%) had gastric perforation requiring surgery. There were no small bowel obstructions or any other serious complications. Conclusion The Elipse¿ Balloon demonstrated an excellent safety profile with no small bowel obstructions. The balloon also exhibited remarkable efficacy with 13.6% TBWL and improvement across all metabolic parameters

The Procedureless Elipse Gastric Balloon Program: Multicenter Experience in 1770 Consecutive Patients

[eng] Purpose The Elipse balloon is a novel, non-endoscopic option for weight loss. It is swallowed and filled with fluid. After 4 months, the balloon self-empties and is excreted naturally. Aim of the study was to evaluate safety and efficacy of Elipse balloon in a large, multicenter, population. Materials and Methods Data from 1770 consecutive Elipse balloon patients was analyzed. Data included weight loss, metabolic parameters, ease of placement, device performance, and complications. Results Baseline patient characteristics were mean age 38.8 ± 12, mean weight 94.6 ± 18.9 kg, and mean BMI 34.4 ± 5.3 kg/m2. Triglycerides were 145.1 ± 62.8 mg/dL, LDL cholesterol was 133.1 ± 48.1 mg/dL, and HbA1c was 5.1 ± 1.1%. Four-month results were WL 13.5 ± 5.8 kg, %EWL 67.0 ± 64.1, BMI reduction 4.9 ± 2.0, and %TBWL 14.2 ± 5.0. All metabolic parameters improved. 99.9% of patients were able to swallow the device with 35.9% requiring stylet assistance. Eleven (0.6%) empty balloons were vomited after residence. Fifty-two (2.9%) patients had intolerance requiring balloon removal. Eleven (0.6%) balloons deflated early. There were three small bowel obstructions requiring laparoscopic surgery. All three occurred in 2016 from an earlier design of the balloon. Four (0.02%) spontaneous hyperinflations occurred. There was one (0.06%) case each of esophagitis, pancreatitis, gastric dilation, gastric outlet obstruction, delayed intestinal balloon transit, and gastric perforation (repaired laparoscopically). Conclusion The ElipseTM Balloon demonstrated an excellent safety profile. The balloon also exhibited remarkable efficacy with 14.2% TBWL and improvement across all metabolic parameters

30-Day Morbidity and Mortality of Bariatric Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: a Multinational Cohort Study of 7704 Patients from 42 Countries.

BACKGROUND There are data on the safety of cancer surgery and the efficacy of preventive strategies on the prevention of postoperative symptomatic COVID-19 in these patients. But there is little such data for any elective surgery. The main objectives of this study were to examine the safety of bariatric surgery (BS) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and to determine the efficacy of perioperative COVID-19 protective strategies on postoperative symptomatic COVID-19 rates. METHODS We conducted an international cohort study to determine all-cause and COVID-19-specific 30-day morbidity and mortality of BS performed between 01/05/2020 and 31/10/2020. RESULTS Four hundred ninety-nine surgeons from 185 centres in 42 countries provided data on 7704 patients. Elective primary BS (n = 7084) was associated with a 30-day morbidity of 6.76% (n = 479) and a 30-day mortality of 0.14% (n = 10). Emergency BS, revisional BS, insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, and untreated obstructive sleep apnoea were associated with increased complications on multivariable analysis. Forty-three patients developed symptomatic COVID-19 postoperatively, with a higher risk in non-whites. Preoperative self-isolation, preoperative testing for SARS-CoV-2, and surgery in institutions not concurrently treating COVID-19 patients did not reduce the incidence of postoperative COVID-19. Postoperative symptomatic COVID-19 was more likely if the surgery was performed during a COVID-19 peak in that country. CONCLUSIONS BS can be performed safely during the COVID-19 pandemic with appropriate perioperative protocols. There was no relationship between preoperative testing for COVID-19 and self-isolation with symptomatic postoperative COVID-19. The risk of postoperative COVID-19 risk was greater in non-whites or if BS was performed during a local peak

Effect of BMI on safety of bariatric surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic, procedure choice, and safety protocols - An analysis from the GENEVA Study

Background: It has been suggested that patients with a Body Mass Index (BMI) of > 60 kg/m2 should be offered expedited Bariatric Surgery (BS) during the Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The main objective of this study was to assess the safety of this approach. Methods: We conducted a global study of patients who underwent BS between 1/05/2020 and 31/10/2020. Patients were divided into three groups according to their preoperative BMI -Group I (BMI < 50 kg/m2), Group II (BMI 50-60 kg/m2), and Group III (BMI > 60 kg/m2). The effect of preoperative BMI on 30-day morbidity and mortality, procedure choice, COVID-19 specific safety protocols, and comorbidities was assessed. Results: This study included 7084 patients (5197;73.4 % females). The mean preoperative weight and BMI were 119.49 & PLUSMN; 24.4 Kgs and 43.03 & PLUSMN; 6.9 Kg/m2, respectively. Group I included 6024 (85 %) patients, whereas Groups II and III included 905 (13 %) and 155 (2 %) patients, respectively.The 30-day mortality rate was higher in Group III (p = 0.001). The complication rate and COVID-19 infection were not different. Comorbidities were significantly more likely in Group III (p = < 0.001). A significantly higher proportion of patients in group III received Sleeve Gastrectomy or One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass compared to other groups. Patients with a BMI of > 70 kg/m2 had a 30-day mortality of 7.7 % (2/26). None of these patients underwent a Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass. Conclusion: The 30-day mortality rate was significantly higher in patients with BMI > 60 kg/m2. There was, however, no significant difference in complications rates in different BMI groups, probably due to differences in procedure selection

Safety of Bariatric Surgery in ≥ 65-Year-Old Patients During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background Age >= 65 years is regarded as a relative contraindication for bariatric surgery. Advanced age is also a recognised risk factor for adverse outcomes with Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19) which continues to wreak havoc on global populations. This study aimed to assess the safety of bariatric surgery (BS) in this particular age group during the COVID-19 pandemic in comparison with the younger cohort.Methods We conducted a prospective international study of patients who underwent BS between 1/05/2020 and 31/10/2020. Patients were divided into two groups - patients >= 65-years-old (Group I) and patients < 65-years-old (Group II). The two groups were compared for 30-day morbidity and mortality.Results There were 149 patients in Group 1 and 6923 patients in Group II. The mean age, preoperative weight, and BMI were 67.6 +/- 2.5 years, 119.5 +/- 24.5 kg, and 43 +/- 7 in Group I and 39.8 +/- 11.3 years, 117.7 +/- 20.4 kg, and 43.7 +/- 7 in Group II, respectively. Approximately, 95% of patients in Group 1 had at least one co-morbidity compared to 68% of patients in Group 2 (p = < 0.001). The 30-day morbidity was significantly higher in Group I ( 11.4%) compared to Group II (6.6%) (p = 0.022). However, the 30-day mortality and COVID-19 infection rates were not significantly different between the two groups.Conclusions Bariatric surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with a higher complication rate in those >= 65 years of age compared to those < 65 years old. However, the mortality and postoperative COVID-19 infection rates are not significantly different between the two groups

30-Day morbidity and mortality of bariatric metabolic surgery in adolescence during the COVID-19 pandemic – The GENEVA study

Background: Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is an effective treatment for adolescents with severe obesity. Objectives: This study examined the safety of MBS in adolescents during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: This was a global, multicentre and observational cohort study of MBS performed between May 01, 2020, and October 10,2020, in 68 centres from 24 countries. Data collection included in-hospital and 30-day COVID-19 and surgery-specific morbidity/mortality. Results: One hundred and seventy adolescent patients (mean age: 17.75 ± 1.30 years), mostly females (n = 122, 71.8%), underwent MBS during the study period. The mean pre-operative weight and body mass index were 122.16 ± 15.92 kg and 43.7 ± 7.11 kg/m2, respectively. Although majority of patients had pre-operative testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (n = 146; 85.9%), only 42.4% (n = 72) of the patients were asked to self-isolate pre-operatively. Two patients developed symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection post-operatively (1.2%). The overall complication rate was 5.3% (n = 9). There was no mortality in this cohort. Conclusions: MBS in adolescents with obesity is safe during the COVID-19 pandemic when performed within the context of local precautionary procedures (such as pre-operative testing). The 30-day morbidity rates were similar to those reported pre-pandemic. These data will help facilitate the safe re-introduction of MBS services for this group of patients