Bariatric Surgery Centers Of Excellence Research Articles

Outcomes in Obese vs Non-Obese Injured Patients at a Level 1 Trauma Center and Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence.

We hypothesized that the outcomes of trauma patients with a body mass index (BMI) equal to or greater than 30 compared to patients with BMI less than 30 would not differ at a level 1 trauma center that is also a Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP). Patients equal to and greater than 18years old treated between 1/1/2018 and 12/31/2020 were included. Demographics, BMI, comorbidities, and outcomes (hospital-LOS, ICU-LOS, blood products used, and mortality) were compared between 2 groups: obese (BMI ≥30) vs non-obese (BMI <30). Of the 4192 patients identified, 3821 met the inclusion criteria; 3019 patients had a BMI <30, and 802 had a BMI ≥30. There was a statistically significant difference between the 2 groups with respect to gender (females: 57% vs 47%, P < .0001) and age (median: 80 [IQR: 63-88] vs 69 [IQR: 55-81], P < .0001). When adjusted for age, sex, DM, dementia, ISS, and ICU admission, there was no statistically significant difference in hospital-LOS (4.30 [95% CI: 4.10, 4.52] vs 4.48 [95% CI: 4.18, 4.79]) or mortality. No statistical differences were seen between the 2 groups in blood product use. Obesity did not correlate with poorer outcomes at an ACS-verified level 1 Trauma Center and Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence. Further studies are needed to determine whether outcomes vary at hospitals without both designations.

Outcomes From a Level 1 Trauma and Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program Center of Excellence.

Trauma patients with obesity experience disparity in various outcomes. Similar to trauma centers, vetted credentialing is in practice for bariatric services. This study evaluates outcomes of trauma patients with obesity at a Level 1 Trauma Center and verified bariatric surgery center of excellence (BSCOE). The trauma registry was reviewed for individuals admitted between January 1, 2008 to December 31, 2020 who were age 19years or older and stratified by World Health Organization body mass index (BMI). Various morbidity and mortality outcomes were examined. There were 20788 patients included in this analysis. Intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS) was found to be statistically longer for patients with BMI >40. Overall results suggest that the infrastructure associated with this BSCOE may improve care for this specialized patient population.

Complications Rate Variability after Bariatric Surgery and the Importance of Standardization of a Reporting System

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.

Can Left Pleural Effusion Be an Indicator of Gastric Leaks after Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy?

Background: Coincidental pleural effusion has been observed by computed tomography (CT) scans in individual patients with gastric leaks after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy; however, the frequency of this phenomenon has not been investigated in cohort studies. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of left pleural effusion as an indicator of gastric leaks after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Setting: University hospital and bariatric surgery center of excellence. Methods: This single-center retrospective analysis included consecutive patients who had undergone laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy followed by CT scans to investigate suspected gastric leaks from September 2011 to September 2018. The sensitivity, specificity, Youden’s index, and predictive values were estimated using a 2 × 2 cross-tabulation. Results: The study involved assessing the CT scans of 148 patients; 80 patients (44 men and 36 women, mean age: 34 years, mean body mass index {BMI}: 46 kg/m2) had positive findings of gastric leaks after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, such as contrast leak, gas leak, and peri-gastric collection (either singly or in combination). The CT findings were negative for gastric leaks in 68 patients (38 men and 30 women, mean age: 33 years, mean BMI: 45 kg/m2). Pleural effusion manifested as a fluid density in the dependent portion of pleural cavity on CT. The sensitivity of left pleural effusion to predict gastric leaks after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy was 73.8%, and the specificity was 91.2%. The positive and negative predictive values were 90.8% and 74.7%, respectively, and the Youden’s index was 64.9%. Conclusion: Left pleural effusion exhibits good diagnostic accuracy for gastric leaks after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Notably, the specificity (91.2%) was very high.

Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery: Patients with Body Mass Index 60 or Greater

Introduction:Perioperative outcomes of bariatric surgery in patients with super super obesity (SSO) (BMI ≥ 60 kg/m2) merit further investigation.Methods:A retrospective review was conducted of patients with SSO who underwent surgery from Jun 2005 through Jun 2018 at a Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence. Quantitative demographic data was summarized using descriptive statistics; categorical variables were compared using Fisher’s exact test.Results:Two hundred fourteen procedures were performed, of which 208 were eligible for inclusion. Majority were female (65.4%). The mean age and BMI was 43 (17–68 years) and 65.9 kg/m2 (60 95 kg/m2), respectively. Comorbidities included: obstructive sleep apnea (74%), hypertension (59%), gastro-esophageal reflux disease (43%), osteoarthritis (41%), and diabetes mellitus (30%). Surgical approach: 97 Roux-en-Y gastric bypasses (46%), 88 laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomies (42%), and 23 adjustable gastric bands (11%). Additional subset included: primary (87%), conversion (7.7%), and revision (5.3%); majority being laparoscopic (75%) and robotic (24%). Complications via Clavien-Dindo classification: one Grade I, one Grade II, three Grade IIIa, three Grade IIIb, and three Grade IVa. Thirty-day events: 11 complications (5.3%; one leak [0.5%], one deep vein thrombosis [0.5%]), six re-admissions (3%), four re-operations (2%): repair of staple-line leak, repair of incisional hernia, uterine dilation and curettage, and cholecystectomy. No mortalities occurred. Complications occurred in 14.8% of conversion/revision cases, 3.9% in primary cases (p = 0.0395) with no difference observed between laparoscopic (4.5%) and robotic (6.1%) modalities (p = 0.7051).Conclusion:Bariatric surgery is feasible in patients with SSO. Revision procedures may increase risk of operative complications.

Does Size Matter? Outcomes in Obese vs Non-Obese Injured Patients at an American College of Surgeons-Verified Level I Trauma Center and Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence

Petrone, Patrizio MD, PhD, MPH, MHA, FACS; Howell, Raelina S. MD; Akerman, Meredith MS; Anthony Baltazar, Gerard DO, FACS; Joseph, D'Andrea K. MD, FACS; Brathwaite, Collin E.M. MD, FACS Author Information

Single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S): short-term outcomes from a prospective cohort study.

Single anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) is a modification of the classic duodenal switch (DS). These modifications are intended to address concerns about DS, including malnutrition, longer operative times, and technical challenges, while preserving the benefits. To evaluate safety and outcomes of SADI-S as it compares to classic DS procedure. Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence, University Hospital, Montreal, Canada. In a single-institution prospective cohort study, we compared safety and outcomes of the SADI-S versus DS procedures (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02792166; registered: 06/2016). Data is depicted as count (percentage) or median (interquartile range). There were 42 patients who underwent SADI-S, of whom 11 had it as a second-stage procedure (26%). There were 20 patients who underwent DS, of whom 12 had it as second-stage procedures (60%). Both groups were similar at baseline. The median age was 45 (14) years, 39 (63%) werefemale, the median body mass index (BMI) was 48.2 (7.7) kg/m2, and 29 (47%) patients had diabetes. The operative time was shorter for 1-stage SADI-S versus DS surgery (211 [70] versus 250 [60] min, respectively; P = .05) but was similar for second-stage procedures (P = .06). The 90-day complication rates were 11.9% (N = 5/42) after SADI-S and 5.0% (N = 1/20) after DS surgery (P = .64). There were no mortalities. Median follow-ups for 1-stage SADI-S and DS were 17 (11) and 12 (24) months, respectively (P = .65). Similar BMI changes were observed after 1-stage SADI-S (17.9 kg/m2 [8.7]) and DS (17.5 kg/m2 [16]; P = .65). At median follow-ups of 10 (20) and 14 (16) months after second-stage SADI-S and DS, respectively (P = .53), surgical procedures yielded added 5.0 kg/m2 (5.8) and 6.5 kg/m2 (7.1) changes in BMI, respectively (P = .26). Complete remission rates for diabetes were 91% after SADI-S (n = 21/23) and 50% after DS (n = 3/6). Compared with the SADI-S procedure, DS surgery was associated with higher frequencies of deficiencies in some fat-soluble vitamins, especially vitamin D. The SADI-S procedure is safe, and its short-term outcomes, including weight lossandthe resolution of co-morbidities, are similar to those of DS. SADI-S surgery also has promising potential as a second-stage procedure after sleeve gastrectomy.

Outcomes of reoperative surgery in severely obese patients after sleeve gastrectomy: a single-institution experience.

Despite its popularity, sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is not devoid of postoperative complications and weight regain. Some of these cases warrant conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or proximal gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy. Complications after conversion are scarcely reported in the literature. Report and review the outcomes of reoperation on severely obese patients with weight regain or complications after SG. Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence; Community Hospital, United States. We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients converted from SG to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass/proximal gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y esophagojejunostomy at our center, from 2004 to 2018. Patients were stratified by reason for conversion. Group A included those converted for complications (leaks, strictures, or gastroesophageal reflux disease) and group B for reported weight regain. Demographic characteristics, postoperative outcomes, and complications were described. From 77 conversions identified, 63.6% (n = 49) underwent primary SG at an outside hospital. We observed predominant female (68.8%; n = 53) and Caucasian (76.6%; n = 59) populations. Conversions for complications were performed in 67.5% (n = 52) and for weight regain in 32.4% (n= 25). The most common conversion indication in group A was chronic leak (29.9%; n = 23), followed by gastroesophageal reflux disease (20.8%; n = 16), and stricture (16.9%; n = 13). Overall, major complications occurred in 16.9% (n = 13) and minor complications in 19.4% (n = 15). In group A, most common major complications were anastomotic leak and organ space surgical site infection (3.9%; n = 2 each); the most common minor complication was nonperforated marginal ulcer (7.7%; n = 4). In group B, the most common major complication was perforated marginal ulcer (8%; n = 2); the most common minor complication was stricture (16%; n = 4). Group B mean preconversion body mass index was 38.4 ± 4.3 and percentage excess body mass index loss was 48 ± 33, 63 ± 45, 59 ± 63, and 73 ± 25 (12, 24, 36, ≥48 mo). Our experience shows that major complications can occur in up to 17% of patients after conversion. Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass in nonresponders appears to be a safe and effective option for body mass index reduction.

Management of Anastomotic Leak after Bariatric Surgery at a Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence

Management of Anastomotic Leak after Bariatric Surgery at a Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence

Obesity in Adolescents and Youth: The Case for and against Bariatric Surgery

Obesity in Adolescents and Youth: The Case for and against Bariatric Surgery

Portal Vein Thrombosis a Rare but Life-threatening Complication after Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A 5 Years Study in a Bariatric Center of Excellence.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is actually the most performed bariatric procedures in the world, and porto-mesenteric vein thrombosis (PVT) has been increasingly reported as a rare but serious complication. The best algorithm for PVT's prevention and therapy is still under discussion. The aim of this study is to explore the incidence and the outcomes of the PVT after LSG in a Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence (BS-CoE) and elaborate a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm for PVT after LSG. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all the consecutive patients who underwent elective LSG within the last five years, between November 2014 and October 30th 2019, in Ponderas Academic Hospital, Bucharest, Romania. All the patients received an extended DVT prophylaxis protocol with adjusted doses of LMWH. Anti-factor Xa concentrations measurement to monitor the activity of LMWH in all the high-risk patients was used for the last two years. The patients suspected of PVT were scanned by computed tomography using IV contrast. All PVT patients were initially treated with systemic anticoagulation (Heparin), further interventions, such as systemic thrombolysis or surgery, being considered. After the acute stage, the PVT patients received longterm anticoagulation. Results: Of the 3861 patients who underwent elective LSG, three were readmitted 7-60 days after the bariatric procedure for PVT, equating to an incidence of 0.077%. The average age of the patients developing PVT was 40 years (SD 11.97), the average body mass index (BMI) was 40.34 (SD 7.994) kg/m2 and all of them underwent the same protocol for LSG. Two patients underwent conservative therapy with heparin anticoagulation and no surgery was needed. The third patient had a fulminant evolution in ICU, due to an extensive PVT, with death within two hours from his admission despite all resuscitation measures taken. The two patients remained on long life anticoagulant therapy. A high clinical suspicion of PVT after LSG is required with prompt diagnosis and treatment. The BS-CoE protocol with adjusted doses of LMWH and extended prophylaxis proved to be very efficient showing a very low incidence of PVT.

Outcomes at Bariatric Surgery Centers of Excellence and Non-Designated Centers: A Retrospective Cohort Study in a TRICARE Population

In 2013, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reversed their coverage policy that limited bariatric operations to Centers of Excellence (COE). Data from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services may not be generalizable to younger, healthier populations; additional data are needed to inform coverage policies for other plans. This retrospective cohort study used the 2010 to 2011 administrative claims data from the TRICARE military healthcare program to evaluate readmission rates, readmission length of stay, and postoperative healthcare costs among patients who had bariatric surgery at a COE versus non-designated centers. Outcomes were reported at 30, 60, and 90 days, and compared using logistic and linear regression models while controlling for age, gender, and military status. A total of 3027 patients underwent bariatric operations (mean age 44.16, 84.11% female). At 30 days, there were no significant differences between patients in COEs (n = 2413) and non-designated centers (n = 614), in readmission rates (4.77%, 4.40%, P = 0.70), mean length of stay (5.5 days, 6.7 days, P = 0.41), or mean postoperative healthcare costs ($754, $962, P = 0.398). There were no significant differences in any outcomes at 60 or 90 days. Combined with concerns related to COE patient access barriers, these findings strengthen the evidence that reject the requirement for bariatric surgeries to be performed at COEs.

Variation in Outcomes at Bariatric Surgery Centers of Excellence

In the United States, reports about perioperative complications associated with bariatric surgery led to the establishment of accreditation criteria for bariatric centers of excellence and many bariatric centers obtaining accreditation. Currently, most bariatric procedures occur at these centers, but to what extent they uniformly provide high-quality care remains unknown. To describe the variation in surgical outcomes across bariatric centers of excellence and the geographic availability of high-quality centers. This retrospective review analyzed the claims data of 145 527 patients who underwent bariatric surgery at bariatric centers of excellence between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2013. Data were obtained from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's State Inpatient Database. This database included unique hospital identification numbers in 12 states (Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Massachusetts, Maryland, North Carolina, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, Washington, and Wisconsin), allowing comparisons among 165 centers of excellence located in those states. Participants were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Those included in the study cohort were patients with a primary diagnosis of morbid obesity and who underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, open Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, laparoscopic gastric band placement, or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Excluded from the cohort were patients younger than 18 years or who had an abdominal malignant neoplasm. Data were analyzed July 1, 2016, through January 10, 2017. Risk-adjusted and reliability-adjusted serious complication rates within 30 days of the index operation were calculated for each center. Centers were stratified by geographic location and operative volume. In this analysis of claims data from 145 527 patients, wide variation in quality was found across 165 bariatric centers of excellence, both nationwide and statewide. At the national level, the risk-adjusted and reliability-adjusted serious complication rates at each center varied 17-fold, ranging from 0.6% to 10.3%. At the state level, variation ranged from 2.1-fold (Wisconsin decile range, 1.5%-3.3%) to 9.5-fold (Nebraska decile range, 1.0%-10.3%). After dividing hospitals into quintiles of quality on the basis of their adjusted complication rates, 38 of 132 (28.8%) had a center in a higher quintile of quality located within the same hospital service area. Variation in rates of complications existed at centers with low volume (annual mean [SD] procedure volume, 156 [20] patients; complication range, 0.6%-6.4%; 9.8-fold variation), medium volume (annual mean [SD] procedure volume, 239 [27] patients; complication range, 0.6%-10.3%; 17.5-fold variation), and high volume (annual mean [SD] procedure volume, 448 [131] patients; complication range, 0.6%-4.9%; 7.5-fold variation). Even among accredited bariatric surgery centers, wide variation exists in rates of postoperative serious complications across geographic location and operative volumes. Given that a large proportion of centers are geographically located near higher-performing centers, opportunities for improvement through regional collaboratives or selective referral should be considered.

A bariatric surgery center of excellence: operative trends and long-term outcomes.

Surgery remains the most effective intervention for obesity and its comorbidities. However, the long-term efficacy of bariatric procedures is rarely reported. This study addresses operative trends, efficiency, and long-term outcomes from a large bariatric program. Data were prospectively collected on 3,460 patients undergoing 3,503 operations from January 2004 to March 2013. Primary procedures included Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RY; n= 2,966), adjustable band (AB; n= 352), and sleeve gastrectomy (SG; n= 118). There were 67 revisional procedures (RP). Mean operative time, hospital length of stay, major 30-day morbidity/mortality, follow-up compliance, and weight loss per procedure at follow-up were recorded. Mean operative times decreased to the following: RY, 53 minutes; AB, 35 minutes; SG, 46 minutes; and RP, 71 minutes. Mean length of stay was reduced to the following: RY, 1.53 days; AB, 0.97 days; SG, 2.12 days; and RP, 2.68 days. Major complications were mortality, 0.09%; leak, 0.51%; bleed, 2.37%; pneumonia, 0.63%; venous thromboembolism, 0.40%; and reoperation, 2.34%. The complication rate was lowest for AB and highest for SG (p < 0.05). Adjustable band was the initial procedure in 73% of cases requiring RP. Follow-up compliance was 93% at 1 year, 79% at 3 years, 71% at 5 years, and 33% at 9 years. Adjustable band offered significant weight loss at 1 and 3 years (p < 0.0001), but less than RY or SG (p < 0.0001). Excess weight loss was not significantly different between RY and SG at 1 year. Significant weight loss with RY persisted at 7 to 9 years (p < 0.0001). Our bariatric program experienced an increase in SG and RP and a decrease in AB. Optimization of care reduced operative time and length of stay. All procedures achieved significant weight loss in the first year. Adjusted band had the lowest morbidity, but inferior weight loss and greater need for revision. Long-term weight-loss data are only available for RY.

Procedure-Related Morbidity in Bariatric Surgery: A Retrospective Short- and Mid-Term Follow-Up of a Single Institution of the American College of Surgeons Bariatric Surgery Centers of Excellence

Our objective was to ascertain procedure-related morbidity among laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), and laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) patients. These are the 3 most common bariatric procedures performed worldwide. We reviewed our experience since the introduction of LSG and compared the procedure-related morbidity among all 3 procedures. We conducted a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of all morbidly obese patients who underwent bariatric surgery between the years 2005 and 2011. We identified and compared complications, mortality, readmissions, and reoperations in patients who underwent LRYGB, LAGB, and LSG. A total of 2,199 bariatric procedures were performed during this period of time. Of those procedures, 1,327 were LRYGB, 619 were LSG, and 253 were LAGB. Perioperative mortality was not applicable for all 3 procedures. The leak rate was 0.5% for LRYGB and 0.3% for LSG, and was not applicable for LAGB. The average number of readmissions postoperatively was less than 2 times for all 3 procedures: LRYGB 1.96 times, LSG 1.49 times, and LAGB 1.54 times. The percentages of procedures requiring reoperations due to complications or failures were 14.6% in the LAGB group, 6.6% in the LRYGB group, and 1.8% in the LSG group. In short- and mid-term follow-up, LSG appears to have the lowest procedure-related morbidity when compared with LRYGB and LAGB.

Volume-Outcome Association in Bariatric Surgery

To systematically examine the association between annual hospital and surgeon case volume and patient outcomes in bariatric surgery. Bariatric surgery remains a technically demanding field with significant risk for morbidity and mortality. To mitigate this risk, minimum annual hospital and surgeon case volume requirements are being set and certain hospitals are being designated as "Bariatric Surgery Centers of Excellence." The effects of these interventions on patient outcomes remain unclear. A comprehensive systematic review on volume-outcome association in bariatric surgery was conducted by searching MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Evidence Based Medicine Reviews databases. Abstracts of identified articles were reviewed and pertinent full-text versions were retrieved. Manual search of bibliographies was performed and relevant studies were retrieved. Methodological quality assessment and data extraction were completed in a systematic fashion. Pooling of results was not feasible due to the heterogeneity of the studies. A qualitative summary of results is presented. From a total of 2928 unique citations, 24 studies involving a total of 458,032 patients were selected for review. Two studies were prospective cohorts (level of evidence [LOE] 1), 3 were retrospective cohorts (LOE 3), 2 were retrospective case controls (LOE 3), and 17 were retrospective case series (LOE 4). The overall methodological quality of the reviewed studies was fair. A positive association between annual surgeon volume and patient outcomes was reported in 11 of 13 studies. A positive association between annual hospital volume and patient outcomes was reported in 14 of 17 studies. There is strong evidence of improved patient outcomes in the hands of high-volume surgeons and high-volume centers. This study supports the concept of "Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence" accreditation; however, future research into the quality of care characteristics of successful bariatric programs is recommended. Understanding the characteristics of high-volume surgeons, which lead to improved patient outcomes, also requires further investigation.

Risk for Hospital Readmission following Bariatric Surgery

Background and ObjectivesComplications resulting in hospital readmission are important concerns for those considering bariatric surgery, yet present understanding of the risk for these events is limited to a small number of patient factors. We sought to identify demographic characteristics, concomitant morbidities, and perioperative factors associated with hospital readmission following bariatric surgery.MethodsWe report on a prospective observational study of 24,662 patients undergoing primary RYGB and 26,002 patients undergoing primary AGB at 249 and 317 Bariatric Surgery Centers of Excellence (BSCOE), respectively, in the United States from January 2007 to August 2009.Data were collected using standardized assessments of demographic factors and comorbidities, as well as longitudinal records of hospital readmissions, complications, and mortality.ResultsThe readmission rate was 5.8% for RYGB and 1.2% for AGB patients 30 days after discharge. The greatest predictors for readmission following RYGB were prolonged length of stay (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 2.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0–2.7), open surgery (OR, 1.8; CI, 1.4–2.2), and pseudotumor cerebri (OR, 1.6; CI, 1.1–2.4). Prolonged length of stay (OR, 2.3; CI, 1.6–3.3), history of deep venous thrombosis or pulmonary embolism (OR, 2.1; CI, 1.3–3.3), asthma (OR, 1.5; CI, 1.1–2.1), and obstructive sleep apnea (OR, 1.5; CI, 1.1–1.9) were associated with the greatest increases in readmission risk for AGB. The 30-day mortality rate was 0.14% for RYGB and 0.02% for AGB.ConclusionReadmission rates are low and mortality is very rare following bariatric surgery, but risk for both is significantly higher after RYGB. Predictors of readmission were disparate for the two procedures. Results do not support excluding patients with certain comorbidities since any reductions in overall readmission rates would be very small on the absolute risk scale. Future research should evaluate the efficacy of post-surgical managed care plans for patients at higher risk for readmission and adverse events.

Underdosing of common antibiotics for obese patients in the ED

BackgroundObesity is a growing problem in the United States. Obesity alters the pharmacokinetic profiles of various drugs. Although there are guidelines for dose adjustments for many of the antibiotics commonly used in the emergency department (ED), they are seldom used. MethodsThis is an institutional review board–approved retrospective study at an American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence and a level I trauma center with annual ED volumes of more than 80 000 visits. Data were retrospectively collected from ED pharmacy records during a 3-month period in 2008. Any first dose of cefepime, cefazolin, or ciprofloxacin administered in our ED to a patient recorded as both more than 100 kg and with a body mass index greater than 40 kg/m2 was compared with our hospital guidelines and found to either adhere or not adhere to those guidelines. ResultsThere were 1910 orders found to meet the study criteria: 775 orders for cefepime, 625 orders for cefazolin, and 510 orders for ciprofloxacin. Adherence rates for first dose of cefepime, cefazolin, and ciprofloxacin administered, respectively, were 8.0%, 3.0%, and 1.2%. ConclusionEmergency physicians frequently underdose cefepime, cefazolin, and ciprofloxacin in obese patients. Underdosing antimicrobials presents risk of treatment failure and may promote antimicrobial resistance. Education is necessary to improve early antibiotic administration to obese patients.

Laparoscopic bariatric surgery for those with body mass index of 70–125 kg/m2

BackgroundData on laparoscopic bariatric surgery in the extremely obese are limited. Technical difficulties, in addition to the patients' severe weight-related co-morbidities, can compromise the safety of bariatric surgery in these patients. Our objectives were to assess the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic bariatric surgery in extremely obese patients and to compare the outcomes of different surgical approaches at a bariatric surgery center of excellence in an academic medical center. MethodsWe reviewed our prospectively collected database and identified all patients with a body mass index (BMI) of ≥70 kg/m2 who had undergone bariatric surgery. The data on patient demographics, baseline characteristics, and outcomes of bariatric surgery were retrieved. ResultsA total of 49 patients with a mean BMI of 80.7 kg/m2 (range 70–125) underwent 61 bariatric procedures. Of the 49 patients, 26 underwent sleeve gastrectomy, 11 gastric bypass, and 12 underwent a 2-stage procedure (sleeve gastrectomy followed by gastric bypass). At a mean follow-up of 17.4 months, the average BMI had decreased to 60.9 kg/m2 (36% excess weight loss). Overall, the patients who underwent a 2-stage procedure achieved greater percentage of excess weight loss (54.5%) than did those who underwent either single-stage sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass (25.4%, P = .002 and 43.8%, P = .519, respectively). Of the 61 cases, 60 (98.4%) were completed laparoscopically. The early complication rate was 16.4% overall; most were minor complications. The late complication rate was 14.8%. A single late mortality occurred in this series. ConclusionLaparoscopic bariatric surgery can be performed safely on patients with a BMI of ≥70 kg/m2. A staged approach might offer better weight loss results.

The effect of insurance status on bariatric surgical outcomes

Introduction In 1991, the NIH Consensus Conference on Gastrointestinal Surgery for Severe Obesity emphasized the importance of epidemiologic research in bariatric surgery: The effects of surgical therapy should be defined in various subgroups stratified for gender, age, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, comorbidity, and fat distribution. Nearly twenty years later, the answer to whether socioeconomic status impacts outcomes remains unresolved. Methods Prospective data collected on bariatric surgical patients at 555 facilities participating in the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Bariatric Surgery Center of Excellence (BSCOE) program were collected between June 2007 and September 2009. 65,410 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 8,537 patients had insurance provided by Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS); 7,090 with Medicare and 1,808 with Medicaid insurance. Demographic, clinical, perioperative and postoperative data were compared between patients with CMS insurance (CMS) and those whose surgery was covered by other insurers (non-CMS). Results CMS patients differ sharply from those covered by private insurance in terms of mean age (years) (53.0 vs 44.3; p Conclusions Patients insured by Medicare and Medicaid undergoing bariatric surgery present with a higher risk profile and suffer worse postoperative outcomes compared to those covered by private carriers. While the CMS patients may have the most to gain from the surgery, they also bring higher risks.