Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with an extensive posterior mobilization: Technique and preliminary results

Background: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is becoming increasingly popular as a stand-alone procedure for the treatment of morbidly obese patients. A direct posterior approach to the angle of His was developed at our department to improve visualization of the difficult dissection of the short gastric vessels and to facilitate proper mobilization of the stomach around the left crus enabling safe realization of a tight sleeve. The technique and its preliminary results are described. Methods: LSG by posterior approach was performed in a consecutive series of 445 (110 male/335 female, age 18-63 years, mean body mass index 46 kg/m2 (range 35-76)) patients between 2007 and 2010. Results: Weight loss defined as mean percent excess weight loss (%EWL) was 71% (±26%) at 1 year, 69% (±25%) at 2 years, and 55% (±27%) at 3 years. Sixteen patients (4%) developed postoperative intra-abdominal hematoma, 8 patients (2%) anastomotic leakage, and 6 patients intra-abdominal abscess (1%), requiring reoperation in 20 patients (4%). Five patients (1%) had pulmonary embolism. Thirty-day mortality rate was 0.2%. Conclusions: LSG by the posterior approach is a safe and effective procedure, enabling a tight sleeve formation leading to satisfactory %EWL results. Since long-term results of LSG are unknown, further studies are needed to define the exact place of the LSG as a stand-alone bariatric proc

Results of Implementing an Enhanced Recovery After Bariatric Surgery (ERABS) Protocol

Background: With the increasing prevalence of morbid obesity and healthcare costs in general, interest is shown in safe, efficient, and cost-effective bariatric care. This study describes an Enhanced Recovery After Bariatric Surgery (ERABS) protocol and the results of implementing such protocol on procedural times, length of stay in hospital (LOS), and the number of complications, such as readmissions and reoperations. Methods: Results of implementing an ERABS protocol were analyzed by comparing a cohort treated according to the ERABS protocol (2012–2014) with a cohort treated before implementing ERABS (2010–2012). Differences between both cohorts were analyzed using independent t tests and chi-squared tests. Results: A total of 1.967 patients (mean age 43.3 years, 80 % female) underwent a primary bariatric procedure between 2010 and 2014, of which 1.313 procedures were performed after implementation of ERABS. A significant decrease of procedural times and a significantly decreased LOS, from 3.2 to 2.0 nights (p < 0.001), were seen after implementation of ERABS. Significantly more complications were seen post-ERABS (16.1 vs. 20.7 %, p = 0.013), although no significant differences were seen in the number of major complications. Conclusion: Implementation of ERABS can result in shorter procedural times and a decreased LOS, which may lead to more efficient and cost-effective bariatric care. The increase in complications was possibly due to better registration of complications. The main goal of an ERABS protocol is efficient, safe, and evidence-based bariatric care, which can be achieved by standardization of the total process