Analysis of the Variability in Different Criteria to Define the Success of Bariatric Surgery : Retrospective Study 5-Year Follow-Up after Sleeve Gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

(1) Background: The current criteria for defining good or bad responders to bariatric surgery based on the percentage of weight loss do not properly reflect the therapeutic impact of the main bariatric techniques. At present there is an urgent need to fill this gap and provide scientific evidence that better define the success or failure of bariatric surgery in the long term. (2) Methods: This is a retrospective database study of a prospective cohort with 5-year follow-up. We established the success or failure of bariatric surgery in terms of weight loss according to a selected criterion: (1) Halverson and Koehler; (2) Reinhold modified by Christou; (3) Biron; (4) TWL > 20%; (5) percentage of changeable weight (AWL > 35%). We analyzed sensitivity and specificity for successful weight loss. (3) Results: 223 (38.7%) patients underwent sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and 353 (61.2%) underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGBP). The success rates at 5 years are: EWL > 50% 464 (80%), Reinhold 436 (75.6%), Biron 530 (92%), TWL > 20% 493 (85.5%), AWL 35 were the most adequate criteria as their specificities and sensibility were far above >80%. (4) Conclusions: The present study shows how the different definitions of success or failure are inconsistent in relation to the outcomes of BS. However, there are some criteria that associate statistically significant differences for the resolution of comorbidities and show the highest sensitivity and specificity rates

Conversion of aspireAssist system® to sleeve gastrectomy: Technical video description

Purpose: The AspireAssist System® (Aspire Bariatrics, Inc. King of Prussia, PA) is a new endoscopic procedure used to treat obese patients. The aim of this dedicated video is to present a case that required revision surgery due to failure of the AspireAssist System®, and to show how the cannula was removed from the abdomen, and why sleeve gastrectomy (SG) was a good option for revisional surgery in that patient. We aim to discuss technical aspects. Patient and Methods: A 43-year-old female patient who underwent a placement in 2016. Her initial BMI (body mass index) was 38 kg/m2, with a follow-up period of 26 months. A revisional surgery was performed including dissection of the previous gastric fistula and adhesiolysis from the previous AspireAssist System® placement. A complete dissection of the gastrostomy, including removal of all the system, was done. A decision was made, once the incisura angularis and the placement of a 40 Fch bougie showed that the transection could be performed. SG was done. Patients showed an uneventful postoperative course and 4 months follow-up with 45% EWL. Conclusion: In case of having the device in place, the surgeon must be aware to remove intraoperatively or endoscopically, the device. Surgeons should consider endoscopic removal of the AspireAssist System® before conversion to another procedure (SG or GBP) at least 6 months of the removal. Removal of the AspireAssist System® should be performed endoscopically but direct conversion to another bariatric procedure can be considered, either to SG or GBP depending on the technical intraoperative aspects

Laparoscopic conversion from single anastomosis duodeno-jejunal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADJ-S) to roux-en-Y gastric bypass (GBP): Improving unsatisfactory outcomes

Single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) can be considered as either a primary procedure or second stage procedure. Malnutrition is rare but could lead to a reversal of the SADI-S. The aim of this manuscript is to present the management and technique of weight regain after proximalization of a SADI-S by converting it to a gastric bypass

Analysis of the Variability in Different Criteria to Define the Success of Bariatric Surgery: Retrospective Study 5-Year Follow-Up after Sleeve Gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

(1) Background: The current criteria for defining good or bad responders to bariatric surgery based on the percentage of weight loss do not properly reflect the therapeutic impact of the main bariatric techniques. At present there is an urgent need to fill this gap and provide scientific evidence that better define the success or failure of bariatric surgery in the long term. (2) Methods: This is a retrospective database study of a prospective cohort with 5-year follow-up. We established the success or failure of bariatric surgery in terms of weight loss according to a selected criterion: (1) Halverson and Koehler; (2) Reinhold modified by Christou; (3) Biron; (4) TWL > 20%; (5) percentage of changeable weight (AWL > 35%). We analyzed sensitivity and specificity for successful weight loss. (3) Results: 223 (38.7%) patients underwent sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and 353 (61.2%) underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGBP). The success rates at 5 years are: EWL > 50% 464 (80%), Reinhold 436 (75.6%), Biron 530 (92%), TWL > 20% 493 (85.5%), AWL 35 were the most adequate criteria as their specificities and sensibility were far above >80%. (4) Conclusions: The present study shows how the different definitions of success or failure are inconsistent in relation to the outcomes of BS. However, there are some criteria that associate statistically significant differences for the resolution of comorbidities and show the highest sensitivity and specificity rates

Conversion of aspireassist system® to sleeve gastrectomy. Technical video description revisional surgery

...International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders SEC

Resultados y evolución histórica de las redes sociales en el American College of Surgeons Clinical Congress y el Congreso Nacional de Cirugía. Análisis del #ACSCC20 y #CNCirugia2020.

The objective of this study is to analyze the impact of the American College of Surgeons Clinical Congress (ACSCC2020) and the National Surgery Congress of the Spanish Association of Surgeons (CNC2020) in virtual format due to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic according to the fingerprint. The Twitter hashtags # ACSCC20 and # CNCirugia2020 were studied to determine tweets, retweets, users and impressions. The data on the accounts with the greatest influence and the historical evolution of the congresses between 2015 and 2020 were analyzed. We used the symplur software to collect and analyze the data. Between 2015 and 2017 there was a consistent increase in the number of tweets, participants and impressions. Between 2018 and 2020, the ACS maintains the number of impressions with the fewest number of tweets. However, the CNC continues to grow and achieves its best metrics in 2020. We found statistically significant differences between the most prolific accounts of the ACSCC versus the CNC (P Virtual congresses generate a global impact through the use of Twitter for the dissemination of knowledge. In the present 2020, the growth of the impact on social networks has been proportionally greater in the CNC than in the ACSCC. However, the ACS virtual congress generated the greatest impact on social networks measured by the number of users, tweets and impressions between 2015 and 2020

EAES rapid guideline: systematic review, network meta-analysis, CINeMA and GRADE assessment, and European consensus on bariatric surgery-extension 2022

Background: The European Association for Endoscopic Surgery Bariatric Guidelines Group identified a gap in bariatric surgery recommendations with a structured, contextualized consideration of multiple bariatric interventions. Objective: To provide evidence-informed, transparent and trustworthy recommendations on the use of sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, adjustable gastric banding, gastric plication, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch, one anastomosis gastric bypass, and single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy in patients with severe obesity and metabolic diseases. Only laparoscopic procedures in adults were considered. Methods: A European interdisciplinary panel including general surgeons, obesity physicians, anesthetists, a psychologist and a patient representative informed outcome importance and minimal important differences. We conducted a systematic review and frequentist fixed and random-effects network meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) using the graph theory approach for each outcome. We calculated the odds ratio or the (standardized) mean differences with 95% confidence intervals for binary and continuous outcomes, respectively. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the CINeMA and GRADE methodologies. We considered the risk/benefit outcomes within a GRADE evidence to decision framework to arrive at recommendations, which were validated through an anonymous Delphi process of the panel. Results: We identified 43 records reporting on 24 RCTs. Most network information surrounded sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Under consideration of the certainty of the evidence and evidence to decision parameters, we suggest sleeve gastrectomy or laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass over adjustable gastric banding, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch and gastric plication for the management of severe obesity and associated metabolic diseases. One anastomosis gastric bypass and single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy are suggested as alternatives, although evidence on benefits and harms, and specific selection criteria is limited compared to sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The guideline, with recommendations, evidence summaries and decision aids in user friendly formats can also be accessed in MAGICapp: https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/Lpv2kE Conclusions: This rapid guideline provides evidence-informed, pertinent recommendations on the use of bariatric and metabolic surgery for the management of severe obesity and metabolic diseases. The guideline replaces relevant recommendations published in the EAES Bariatric Guidelines 2020

Use of failure-to-rescue after emergency surgery as a dynamic indicator of hospital resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. A multicenter retrospective propensity score-matched cohort study

10.1016/j.ijsu.2022.106890INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SURGERY106complete

Clinical practice guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES) on bariatric surgery : update 2020 endorsed by IFSO-EC, EASO and ESPCOP

Altres ajuts: This work was funded by the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery (EAES).Surgery for obesity and metabolic diseases has been evolved in the light of new scientific evidence, long-term outcomes and accumulated experience. EAES has sponsored an update of previous guidelines on bariatric surgery. A multidisciplinary group of bariatric surgeons, obesity physicians, nutritional experts, psychologists, anesthetists and a patient representative comprised the guideline development panel. Development and reporting conformed to GRADE guidelines and AGREE II standards. Systematic review of databases, record selection, data extraction and synthesis, evidence appraisal and evidence-to-decision frameworks were developed for 42 key questions in the domains Indication; Preoperative work-up; Perioperative management; Non-bypass, bypass and one-anastomosis procedures; Revisional surgery; Postoperative care; and Investigational procedures. A total of 36 recommendations and position statements were formed through a modified Delphi procedure. This document summarizes the latest evidence on bariatric surgery through state-of-the art guideline development, aiming to facilitate evidence-based clinical decisions. The online version of this article (10.1007/s00464-020-07555-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Surgeons' perspectives on artificial intelligence to support clinical decision-making in trauma and emergency contexts: results from an international survey

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) is gaining traction in medicine and surgery. AI-based applications can offer tools to examine high-volume data to inform predictive analytics that supports complex decision-making processes. Time-sensitive trauma and emergency contexts are often challenging. The study aims to investigate trauma and emergency surgeons' knowledge and perception of using AI-based tools in clinical decision-making processes. Methods: An online survey grounded on literature regarding AI-enabled surgical decision-making aids was created by a multidisciplinary committee and endorsed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). The survey was advertised to 917 WSES members through the society's website and Twitter profile. Results: 650 surgeons from 71 countries in five continents participated in the survey. Results depict the presence of technology enthusiasts and skeptics and surgeons' preference toward more classical decision-making aids like clinical guidelines, traditional training, and the support of their multidisciplinary colleagues. A lack of knowledge about several AI-related aspects emerges and is associated with mistrust. Discussion: The trauma and emergency surgical community is divided into those who firmly believe in the potential of AI and those who do not understand or trust AI-enabled surgical decision-making aids. Academic societies and surgical training programs should promote a foundational, working knowledge of clinical AI