Abstract

BackgroundThe rate of early (< 30 days) complications after bariatric surgery has been reported to be 0.4–27.4%. Although the incidence of serious adverse events has decreased with time and experience, controversy regarding how they are reported persists, and the current literature is heterogeneous. MethodsData from patients, who underwent primary bariatric surgery (gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy) at a single institution between 2012 and 2018, were retrospectively reviewed. Any deviation from a “normal” postoperative course (< 30 days) was identified, and a comparative analysis of early complications according to five models was performed: modified Clavien-Dindo; Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery (LABS); Bariatric Surgery Centers of Excellence (BSCOE); American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS); and Li (major/minor). ResultsA total of 788 patients (83.7% gastric bypass), of whom 8.8% deviated from a “normal” postoperative course, were included. After applying the five classifications, the results were as follows: Clavien-Dindo, 8.8%; LABS, 2.3%; BSCOE, 0.4%; ASMBS, 9.9%; and Li, 11.2%. The incidence of major/severe/adverse outcomes were as follows: Clavien-Dindo, 2.4%; LABS, 2.3%; BSCOE, 0.4%; ASMBS, 6.9%; and Li 9.2%. Minor complications were as follows: Clavien-Dindo, 6.5%; ASMBS, 3%; and Li, 2%. There was no mortality. ConclusionGermane heterogeneity was found in reporting of early complications after bariatric surgery. Incidence varied according to classification system applied, and Clavien-Dindo demonstrated accuracy as a reporting model. To avoid bias, standardized reporting should be mandatory, and a more stringent and homogeneous reporting system should be established.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call