Clinical outcomes in bariatric surgery

The Dutch Audit for Treatment of Obesity (DATO) provides individual and composite outcome measures, assessing the short-term postoperative outcome after bariatric surgery, enable the possibility to identify outliers. Most importantly, individual hospitals can identify differences in outcome, whereas these may remain hidden in daily practice. This between-hospital variation may initiate an improvement cycle. This will probably result in hospital and surgical quality improvements leading to improved outcomes in bariatric surgery.LUMC / Geneeskund

Obesity as a determinant of perioperative and postoperative outcome in patients following colorectal cancer surgery: A population-based study (2009-2016)

Surgical oncolog

Textbook Outcome: an Ordered Composite Measure for Quality of Bariatric Surgery

Analysis and support of clinical decision makin

Perioperative Outcomes of Primary Bariatric Surgery in North-Western Europe : a Pooled Multinational Registry Analysis

Introduction: The global prevalence of obesity has increased in recent decades, and bariatric surgery has become a part of the treatment algorithm of obesity. National high-quality registries enable large-scale evaluations of the use and outcome of bariatric surgery and may allow for improved knowledge. The main objective was to evaluate the rate and type of complications after primary bariatric surgery in three North-Western European countries using nationwide registries. Materials and Methods: Data from three registries for bariatric surgery were used (January 2015-December 2016). All registries have nationwide coverage with data on patient characteristics, obesity-related diseases, surgical technique, complications, grading of complications, reinterventions, readmissions, and mortality. Eligibility criteria for bariatric surgery were similar and included body mass index of 40.0 or 35.0kg/m(2), with one or more obesity-associated diseases. Results: A total of 35,858 procedures (32,177 primary) were registered. The most common procedure was gastric bypass in the Netherlands (78.9%) and Sweden (67.0%), and sleeve gastrectomy in Norway (58.2%). A total of 904 (2.8%) patients developed major complications after primary surgery and 12 patients (0.04%) died within 30days. Total number of complications between the registries were comparable (p=0.939). However, significant differences were seen for Clavien-Dindo Classification grades IIIb and IV (p<0.001). Pooled readmission rates were 4.3% (n=1386). Discussion: Bariatric surgery is safely performed in the three evaluated countries. Standardization of registries and consensus of variables are essential for international comparison and may contribute to improved quality of treatment across nations

Measuring quality of life in bariatric surgery: a multicentre study

Background Current studies mainly focus on total weight loss and comorbidity reduction. Only a few studies compare Quality of Life (QoL) after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). This study was conducted to examine the extent of improvement in QoL on different domains after primary bariatric surgery and compare these results to Dutch reference values. Methods The study included prospectively collected data from patients who underwent primary bariatric surgery in five Dutch hospitals. The RAND-36 questionnaire was used to measure the patient's QoL; preoperatively and twelve months postoperatively. Postoperative scores were compared to Dutch reference values, standardized for age, using t-test. A difference of more than 5% was considered a minimal important difference. A multivariate linear regression analysis was used to compare SG and RYGB on the extent of improvement, adjusted for case-mix factors. Results In total, 4864 patients completed both the pre- and postoperative questionnaire. Compared with Dutch reference values, patients postoperatively reported clinically relevant better physical functioning (RYGB + 6.8%), physical role limitations (SG + 5.6%; RYGB + 6.2%) and health change (SG + 77.1%; RYGB + 80.0%), but worse general health perception (SG - 22.8%; RYGB - 17.0%). Improvement in QoL was similar between SG and RYGB, except for physical functioning (beta 2.758; p-value 0.008) and general health perception (beta 2.607; p-value < 0.001) for which RYGB patients improved more. Conclusions SG and RYGB patients achieved a better postoperative score in physical functioning, physical role limitations and health change compared to Dutch reference values, and a worse score in general health perception.Analysis and support of clinical decision makin