| 1. |
- Al-Tai, Saif, 1978-, et al.
(author)
-
The impact of the bougie size and the extent of antral resection on weight-loss and postoperative complications following sleeve gastrectomy : results from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry
- 2024
-
In: Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases. - : Elsevier. - 1550-7289 .- 1878-7533. ; 20:2, s. 139-145
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: The optimal sleeve diameter and distance from the pylorus to the edge of the resection line in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) remain controversial.OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the influence of bougie size and antral resection distance from the pylorus on postoperative complications and weight-loss results in LSG.SETTING: Nationwide registry-based study.METHODS: This study included all LSGs performed in Sweden between 2012 and 2019. Data were obtained from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry. Reference bougie size of 35-36 Fr and an antral resection distance of 5 cm from the pylorus were compared to narrower bougie size (30-32 Fr), shorter distances (1-4 cm), and extended distances (6-8 cm) from the pylorus in assessing postoperative complications and weight loss as the outcomes of LSG. RESULTS: The study included 9,360 patients with postoperative follow-up rates of 96%, 79%, and 50% at 30 days, 1 year, and 2 years, respectively. Narrow bougie and short antral resection distance from the pylorus were significantly associated with increased postoperative weight loss. Bougie size was not associated with increased early or late complications. However, short antral resection distance was associated with high risk of overall early complications [odds ratio: 1.46 (1.17-1.82, P = .001)], although no impact on late complications at 1 and 2 years was observed.CONCLUSIONS: Using a narrow bougie and initiating resection closer to the pylorus were associated with greater maximum weight loss. Although a closer resection to the pylorus was associated with an increased risk of early postoperative complications, no association was observed with the use of narrow bougie for LSG.
|
|
| 2. |
- Al-Tai, Saif, 1978-, et al.
(author)
-
THE IMPACT OF THE BOUGIE SIZE AND THE EXTENT OF ANTRAL RESECTION ON WEIGHT-LOSS AND POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS FOLLOWING SLEEVE GASTRECTOMY : RESULTS FROM THE SCANDINAVIAN OBESITY SURGERY REGISTRY
- 2023
-
In: Obesity Surgery. - : Springer. - 0960-8923 .- 1708-0428. ; 33:Suppl. 2, s. 332-332
-
Journal article (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Background: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) as a primary bariatric procedure has gained increasing popularity world-wide. However, controversies still exist regarding several operative aspects, such as the optimal diameter of thesleeve and the optimal distance from the pylorus to the edge of the resection line, and whether these aspects haveeffects on weight-loss results and the risk to develop postoperative complications.Objective: The aim of this study was to compare weight-loss results and the incidence of postoperative complications betweensleeve with different diameters measured in bougie size and with different distances from the pylorus to the edge ofthe resection line measured in centimeter.Setting: Nationwide registry-based study.Method: This study is an analysis of sleeve gastrectomy performed in Sweden between 2012 and 2019. Data were collectedfrom Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry (SOReg). Patients with bougie size 30-32 and 35-36 and patients withdistance from pylorus 1-4 cm, 5 cm, 6-8 cm were identified and compared regarding weight-loss results and the riskto develop postoperative complications.Results: 9,360 patients were included. Follow-up rate was 96% at day 30, 78.8% at one year and 50% at two years. Bothbougie size 30-32 compared to 35-36 and distance from the pylorus 1-4 cm compared to 5 cm were associated withsignificant higher weight-loss at one and two years. No difference in the risk for early or late complications was seenbetween bougie size groups 30-32 and 35-36. Resection starting 1-4 cm from the pylorus compared to 5 cm was as-sociated with higher risk for overall early postoperative complications (OR 1.46 (1.17-1.82, P=.001)), but there wasno significant difference in the risk to develop late complication at 1 and 2 years. No difference in the leak rate andin the risk to develop stricture was seen between different Bougie sizes, nor distances from the Pylorus.Conclusion: Using a smaller Bougie size and starting the resection closer to the pylorus was associated with better maximumweight-loss. Closer resection to the Pylorus, but not Bougie size was associated with increased risk for early postop-erative complications after sleeve gastrectomy.
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Axer, Stephan, et al.
(author)
-
Non-response After Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy-the Theoretical Need for Revisional Bariatric Surgery : Results from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry
- 2023
-
In: Obesity Surgery. - : Springer. - 0960-8923 .- 1708-0428. ; 33:10, s. 2973-2980
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Revisional surgery is a second-line treatment option after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and gastric bypass (GBP) in patients with primary or secondary non-response. The aim was to analyze the theoretical need for revisional surgery after SG and GBP when applying four indication benchmarks. METHOD: Based on data from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry, SG and GBP were compared regarding four endpoints: 1. excess weight loss (%EWL) < 50%, 2. weight regain of more than 10 kg after nadir, 3. fulfillment of previous IFSO-guidelines, or 4. ADA criteria for bariatric metabolic surgery 2 years after primary surgery.RESULTS: A total of 60,426 individuals were included in the study (SG: n = 7856 and GBP: n = 52,570). Compared to patients in the GBP group, more SG patients failed to achieve a %EWL > 50% (23.0% versus 8.5%, p < .001), regained more than 10 kg after nadir (4.3% versus 2.5%, p < .001), and more often fulfilled the IFSO criteria (8.0% versus 4.5%, p < .001) or the ADA criteria (3.3% versus 1.8%, p < 001) at the 2-year follow-up.CONCLUSION: SG is associated with a higher risk for weight non-response compared to GBP. To offer revisional bariatric surgery to all non-responders exceeds the bounds of feasibility and operability. Hence, individual prioritization and intensified evaluation of alternative second-line treatments are necessary.
|
|
| 5. |
- Axer, Stephan, 1971-, et al.
(author)
-
Predictive factors of complications in revisional gastric bypass surgery : results from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry
- 2019
-
In: Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases. - : Elsevier. - 1550-7289 .- 1878-7533. ; 15:12, s. 2094-2100
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is the most common procedure for revisional bariatric surgery. This study is an analysis of revisional gastric bypass operations (rGBP) compared with primary gastric bypass (pGBP) performed in Sweden between 2007 and 2016.Objective: The aim was to compare the incidence of adverse events in primary and revisional gastric bypass surgery and to identify predictive factors of intraoperative, early, and late complications in revisional gastric bypass surgery.Setting: Forty-four hospitals.Methods: Registered study from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry. The study group (rGBP) comprised 1795 patients, and the control group (pGBP) comprised 46,055 patients.Results: Median follow-up time was 28 months. The rate of open procedures was significantly higher in the rGBP group (39.1% versus 2.4%; P < .001) decreasing from 70.8% in 2007 to 8.5% in 2016. Intraoperative complications (15.5% versus 3.0%, P < .001), early complications (24.6% versus 8.7%; P < .001), and late complications (17.7% versus 8.7%; P < .001) occurred more often in the rGBP group. Open access in revisional surgery was an independent risk factor for intraoperative complications (odds ratio 3.87; 95% confidence interval: 2.69-5.57, P < .001), early complications (odds ratio 2.08; 95% confidence interval: 1.53-2.83, P < .001), and late complications (odds ratio 1.91; 95% confidence interval: 1.31-2.78, P = .001). Indication for revision or type of index operation were not associated with complications.Conclusion: RGBP was associated with a higher incidence of intraoperative, early, and late complications compared with pGBP. Open access in revisional surgery was predictive of complications regardless of the index operation or indication for revision.
|
|
| 6. |
- Axer, Stephan, 1971-
(author)
-
Revisional bariatric surgery : more than a moral obligation
- 2022
-
Doctoral thesis (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Growing awareness of biological, genetic, environmental, and behavioural factors contributed to the recognition of obesity as a chronic disease. Nowadays, obesity and its medical/surgical treatment is widely acknowledgedin the medical curriculum. Bariatric surgery has long been shown to provide superior induction and maintenance of weight loss, together with improvement or resolution of obesity-related diseases. The role of revisional bariatric surgery for treatment of procedure-related complications is accepted. However, its role as second-line treatment of patients with primary or secondary non-response is still a matter of debate. This prompted Dr Henry Buchwald in 2015 to publish his article “Revisional Metabolic/Bariatric Surgery: A Moral Obligation”. Studies I and II in this doctoral thesis covered issues that fuel the ongoing controversy, namely effects and risks of revisional surgery. Conversion to gastric bypass is the most common revisional procedure in Sweden. In Studies I and II, we found revisional gastric bypass to give inferior weight loss with a higher risk for perioperative complications compared to primary gastric bypass. However, the beneficial effects on obesity-related disease were similar (Papers I and II). In Study III, the theoretical need for revisional bariatric surgery in patients with primary or secondary weight non-response was evaluated. When applying four different indication criteria, more than 13% of patients met the criteria for second-line treatment, with a significant higher probability after sleeve gastrectomy compared to gastric bypass (Paper III). To gain a clearer picture, a systematic review of the literature on revisional bariatric surgery after sleeve gastrectomy was inevitable. However, an evidence-based treatment strategy for patients with primary or secondary weight non-response could not be deduced from the current literature (Paper IV).
|
|
| 7. |
- Axer, Stephan, 1971-, et al.
(author)
-
Weight loss and alterations in co-morbidities after revisional gastric bypass : A case-matched study from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry
- 2017
-
In: Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases. - : Elsevier. - 1550-7289 .- 1878-7533. ; 13:5, s. 796-800
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: In Sweden, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is the most common procedure when revising a previous bariatric procedure. This study is an analysis of all revisional gastric bypass operations (rGBP) compared with a matched group of primary gastric bypass (pGBP) operated between 2007 and 2012.Objective: The aim was to determine whether improvement of obesity-related co-morbidity and changes in weight after revisional gastric bypass surgery were comparable with those seen after primary surgery.Setting: 44 hospitals in SwedenMethods: Retrospective data were retrieved from the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry. The study group (rGBP) comprised 1224 patients, and the control group (pGBP) comprised 3612 patients matched for age and gender.Results: The indication for revision was weight failure in 512 patients (42%), a late complication of the initial procedure in 330 patients (27%), and a combination of weight failure and complication in 303 patients (25%). A total of 66% of patients in the rGBP group and 67% in the pGBP group completed the 2-year follow-up in the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Registry.The rGBP-group had significantly less excess BMI loss (%EBMIL, 59.4 +/- 147.0 versus 79.5 +/- 24.7, P < .001) and a lower dyslipidemia remission rate (42.9% versus 62.0%, P = .005) at the time of the 2-year follow-up. Remission rates of sleep apnea, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and depression were similar. The effects on obesity-related co-morbidity were not related to the indication for revisional surgery or the initial bariatric procedure.Conclusion: Even if weight results might be inferior compared with primary bypass procedures, the improvement of co-morbidity is similar. (C) 2017 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. All right reserved
|
|
| 8. |
- Axer, Stephan, et al.
(author)
-
Weight-Related Outcomes After Revisional Bariatric Surgery in Patients with Non-response After Sleeve Gastrectomy : a Systematic Review
- 2023
-
In: Obesity Surgery. - : Springer. - 0960-8923 .- 1708-0428. ; 33:7, s. 2210-2218
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Weight non-response after sleeve gastrectomy is an emerging issue. This systematic review compared revisional procedures for weight-related outcomes. We searched several databases for relevant articles and included adult patients with revisional bariatric procedures after primary sleeve gastrectomy. Twelve trials with 1046 patients were included, covering five revisional procedures. There were no randomised controlled trials, and 10 studies had a critical risk of bias. Significant variations in inclusion criteria, therapy benchmarks, follow-up schemes, and outcome measurements were observed, preventing meaningful comparison of results. Evidence-based treatment strategies for weight non-response after sleeve gastrectomy cannot be deduced from the current literature. Prospective studies with well-defined indications, standardised techniques, and strict adherence to outcome measurements are needed.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Nedelcut, Sebastian, et al.
(author)
-
The risk and benefit of revisional vs. primary metabolic- bariatric surgery and drug therapy - A narrative review
- 2024
-
In: Metabolism. - : Elsevier. - 0026-0495 .- 1532-8600. ; 154
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) leads to long-term weight loss, reduced risk of cardiovascular events and cancer, and reduced mortality. Sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass are currently the most common surgical techniques. Weight loss after MBS was previously believed to work through restriction and malabsorption, however, mechanistic studies show that MBS techniques with long term efficacy instead alter physiological signaling between the gut and the brain. In revisional MBS, the initial surgical technique is corrected, modified, or converted to a new one. The indication for revisional MBS can be to achieve further weight loss or improvement in obesity comorbidity, but it may be necessary due to complications (e.g., gastroesophageal reflux or obstruction). Revisional MBS is associated with an increased risk of surgical complications and often less weight loss compared to the results following primary surgery. This narrative review summarizes data from revisional MBS where information is often presented with inconsistent definitions for indications and outcomes, making comparison between strategies difficult. In summary, we suggest careful weighing of potential benefits and risks with revisional MBS, bearing in mind the option of add-on therapy with new anti-obesity drugs.
|
|
