Bariatric Surgery—from the Non-surgical Approach to the Post-Surgery Individual Care: Role of Endoscopy in Bariatric Therapy

Obesity is the underlying constant for the development of the most common modern diseases such as insulin resistance, high blood pressure, lipid metabolism disorders, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (fatty liver), joint problems and various malignancies. The role of endoscopic diagnostic and therapy in obese patients is highlighted in this chapter. In this chapter all devices and methods used in flexible endoscopy for diagnostic and treatment in obese patients are introduced. Role of endoscopy is presented in three parts: in preoperative setting, in post-operative complication management and instead of surgery as endoscopic bariatric therapy. If possible presentation of the effectiveness is compiled with study data. Finally, the interaction between endoscopy and surgery in the treatment of obesity is complex, essential and promising. Endoscopy is indispensable in preoperative preparation, as a primary therapeutic approach, and also in the detection and treatment of acute complications and long-term complications of obesity surgery

Analysis of the effects of the first and second/third waves of the COVID-19 pandemic on an Interdisciplinary Endoscopy Unit in a German 'hotspot' area: a single-center experience

BACKGROUND: Since December 2019, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has posed a pandemic threat to global health. We are now in the fourth wave of this pandemic. As the pandemic developed, the requirements and therapeutic endoscopic procedures for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients underwent changes. METHODS: Analysis of implications for an endoscopy unit during the first and second/third waves of the COVID-19 pandemic with a focus on COVID-19-related process changing. Addressed are number of SARS-CoV-2-positive patients and endoscopic examinations performed in patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during the various waves, adherence to scheduled examinations, rotation of staff to COVID-dedicated structures and, finally, impact of vaccination on infection rate among endoscopic staff. RESULTS: During the first wave, 10 SARS-CoV-2-positive in-house patients underwent a total of 22 gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedures. During the second and third waves, 59 GI endoscopies were performed in 38 patients. While in the first wave, GI bleeding was the main indication for endoscopy (82%), in the second and third waves the main indication for endoscopy was endoscopic insertion of deep feeding tubes (78%; p < 0.001). During the first wave, 5 (17%) of 29 Interdisciplinary Endoscopy Unit (IEU) staff members were moved to designated COVID wards, which was not necessary during the following waves. Lack of protective clothing was critical during the first wave, but not in the later waves. Screening tests for patients and staff were widely available after the first wave, and IEU staff was vaccinated during the second wave. CONCLUSION: Strategies to ensure safe endoscopies with respect to preventing transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from patients to staff were effective. Organizational adjustments allowed the routine program to continue unaffected. Indications for GI endoscopies changed over time: during the first wave, GI endoscopies were performed for life-threatening indications, whereas later supportive procedures were the main indication

Endoscopic negative pressure therapy as stand-alone treatment for perforated duodenal diverticulum: presentation of two cases

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic negative pressure therapy is a novel and successful treatment method for a variety of gastrointestinal leaks. This therapy mode has been frequently described for rectal and esophageal leakages. Duodenal diverticular perforations are rare but life-threatening events. The early diagnosis of duodenal diverticular perforation is often complicated by inconclusive symptoms. This is the first report about endoscopic negative pressure therapy in patients with perforated duodenal diverticula. CASE PRESENTATION: We present two cases of duodenal diverticula perforations treated with endoscopic negative pressure therapy as stand-alone treatment. Start of symptoms varied from one to three days before hospital admission. Early sectional imaging led to the diagnosis of duodenal diverticular perforation. Both patients were treated with endoluminal endoscopic negative pressure therapy with simultaneous feeding option. Three respective changes of the suction device were performed. Both patients were treated with antibiotics and antimycotics during their hospital stay and be discharged from hospital after 20 days. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first description of successful stand-alone treatment by endoscopic negative pressure therapy in two patients with perforated duodenal diverticulum. We thus strongly recommend to attempt interventional therapy with endoluminal endoscopic negative pressure therapy in patients with duodenal diverticular perforations upfront to surgery. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12876-021-02018-7

Retrospective analysis of different therapeutic approaches for retroperitoneal duodenal perforations

Surgical therapy of duodenal perforation into the retroperitoneum entails high morbidity. Conservative treatment and endoscopic negative pressure therapy have been suggested as promising therapeutic alternatives. We aimed to retrospectively assess outcomes of patients treated for duodenal perforation to the retroperitoneum at our department. A retrospective analysis of all patients that were treated for duodenal perforation to the retroperitoneum at our institution between 2010 and 2021 was conducted. Different therapeutic approaches with associated complications within 30 days, length of in-hospital stay, number of readmissions and necessity of parenteral nutrition were assessed. We included thirteen patients in our final analysis. Six patients underwent surgery, five patients were treated conservatively and two patients received interventional treatment by endoscopic negative pressure therapy. Length of stay was shorter in patients treated conservatively. One patient following conservative and surgical treatment each was readmitted to hospital within 30 days after initial therapy whereas no readmissions after interventional treatment occurred. There was no failure of therapy in patients treated without surgery whereas four (66.7%) of six patients required revision surgery following primary surgical therapy. Conservative and interventional treatment were associated with fewer complications than surgical therapy which involves high morbidity. Conservative and interventional treatment using endoscopic negative pressure therapy in selected patients might constitute appropriate therapeutic alternatives for duodenal perforations to the retroperitoneum