Do all roads lead to Rome?: A retrospective analysis on surgical technique in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

Abstract

New York University Langone Health has three accredited bariatric centers, with altogether ten different bariatric surgeons. This retrospective analysis compares individual surgeon techniques in laparoscopic or robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) to identify potential associations with perioperative morbidity and mortality. All adult patients who underwent RYGB between 2017 and 2021 at NYU Langone Health campuses were evaluated via electronic medical records and MBSAQIP 30-day follow-up data. We surveyed all ten practicing bariatric surgeons to analyze the relationship between their techniques and total adverse outcomes. Bleeding, SSI, mortality, readmission, and reoperation were specifically sub-analyzed via logistic regression. 54 (7.59%) out of 711 patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic RYGB encountered an adverse outcome. Lower adverse outcomes were observed with laparoscopic approach, creating the JJ anastomosis first, flat positioning, division of the mesentery, Covidien™ laparoscopic staplers, gold staples, unidirectional JJ anastomosis, hand-sewn common enterotomy, 100-cm Roux limb, 50-cm biliopancreatic limb, and routine EGD. Lower bleeding rates were observed with flat positioning, gold staples, hand-sewn common enterotomy, 50-cm biliopancreatic limb, and routine EGD. Lower readmission rates were observed in laparoscopic, flat positioning, Covidien™ staplers, unidirectional JJ anastomosis, and hand-sewn common enterotomy. Gold staples had lower reoperation rates. Otherwise, there was no statistically significant difference in SSI. Certain surgical techniques in RYGB within our bariatric surgery group had significant effects on the rates of total adverse outcomes, bleeding, readmission, and reoperation. Our findings warrant further investigation into the aforementioned techniques via multivariate regression models or prospective study design. This study was limited by the inherent nature of its retrospective and univariate statistical design. We did not account for the interaction between techniques. The sample size of surgeons was small, and follow-up of 30days was relatively short. We did not include patient characteristics in the model or control for surgeon skill.