Metabolic And Bariatric Surgery Accreditation And Quality Improvement Program Database Research Articles

First Assistant In Bariatric Surgery: A Comparison Between Laparoscopic And Robotic Approaches: A 4-Year Analysis of the MBSAQIP Database (2016-2019).

The first assistant (FA) plays an important role in the operating room for bariatric surgery. The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between the type of FA and operative time (OT) and postoperative outcomes comparing robotic and laparoscopic approaches in bariatric surgery. The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) data for 2016-2019 was queried. Log-normal regression was performed to evaluate the association of FAs and OT variations within and between groups. We used logistic regression to examine the relationship between the type of FA and 30-day outcomes across all procedures and approaches. A total of 691,789 patients who underwent robotic (R), and laparoscopic (L) sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric-bypass (RYGB), and duodenal switch (DS) were included. The percentage variation of OT was higher in the laparoscopic group (L-SG: 8.18%, L-RYGB: 9.88%, and L-DS: 15.00%) compared to the robotic group (R-SG: 2.43%, R-RYGB: 5.76%, and R-DS: 0.80%). There was not a significant difference in 30-day outcomes between laparoscopic and robotic approaches for the same procedures. The FA was associated with a decreased variability in OT in the robotic cohort compared to the laparoscopic group with no significant difference in complication rates. These results suggest that the robotic approach may decrease the need for skilled FAs in bariatric procedures.

Predicting readmission after bariatric surgery using machine learning.

While bariatric surgery is an effective method for achieving long-term weight loss, postoperative readmissions are associated with negative clinical outcomes and significant costs. We aimed to use machine learning (ML) algorithms to predict readmissions and compare results to logistic regression. Hospitals participating in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program, United States. Patients who underwent sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch between 2016 and 2020 were selected from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. Patient variables reported by the MBSAQIP database were analyzed by ML algorithms random forest (RF), gradient boosting (XGB), and deep neural networks (NN), and the results of the predictive models were compared to logistic regression using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Our study included 863,348 patients, of which 39,068 (4.52%) were readmitted. AUROC scores were XGB .785 (95% CI .784-.786), RF .785 (95% CI .784-.785), and NN .754 (95% CI .753-.754), compared with .62 (95% CI .62-.621) for logistic regression (LR) (P < .001). The sensitivity and specificity for XGB, the best performing model, were 73.81% and 70%, compared with 52.94% and 70% for logistic regression. The most important variables were intervention or reoperation prior to discharge, unplanned ICU admission, initial procedure, and the intraoperative transfusion. ML demonstrates significant advantages over logistic regression when predicting 30-day readmission following bariatric surgery. With external validation, models could identify the best candidates for early discharge or targeted postdischarge resources.

When do leaks occur? An analysis of the metabolic and bariatric surgery accreditation and quality improvement program.

Leak is a feared complication of bariatric surgeries. Time to presentation is important in their management. We used the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) to evaluate the rate and timing of leaks. To determine when leaks present after bariatric surgery. MBSAQIP database. The MBSAQIP Participant Use Files (PUF) for the years 2015-2020 were evaluated. Outcomes of interest were "organ space infection" and "leak." We evaluated the time to presentation for these variables as well as patient characteristics, operative time, complication rates and 30-day outcomes. There were 370,369 sleeve gastrectomies (SG) and 159,280 Roux-en-Y gastric bypasses (RYGB). We identified 598 (.16%) SG leaks with an average time to presentation of 13.2 ± 7.8 days. For RYGB, there were 520 leaks (.32%) with an average time to presentation of 9.5 ± 7.4 days. Both procedures had longer operative times for the patients with leak; RYGB was 115 minutes versus 131 minutes and SG was 67 minutes versus 77 minutes (both P < .01). SG and RYGB patients with a leak had a higher relative risk (RR) of grade 4 and 5 Clavien-Dindo complication rates. RR of mortality rates in SG patients with leak was 35.2 (confidence interval (CI): 20-61) and in RYGB with leak was 31.4 (CI: 19-50). The length of time for SG leak presentation was more delayed than RYGB leak presentation. Surgeons should be vigilant for leaks for at least 3 weeks after surgery. Leaks increase the mortality rate and overall serious complications.

The Impact of Trainee Involvement on Outcomes in Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.

The number of bariatric operations performed in the USA rises annually. Trainee exposure to this field is necessary to ensure competency in future surgical generations. However, the safety of trainee involvement of these operations has been called into question. The aim of our study is to describe differences in outcomes between trainees and non-trainees as first assistants (FA) in sleeve gastrectomy (SG). The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database METHODS: Patients from the MBSAQIP database who underwent primary SG from 2015 to 2020 were identified. Statistical analysis included two-tailed t-tests and χ2-tests to evaluate the impact of trainees (residents and fellows) compared to non-trainees on post-operative morbidity and operative time. Of the 559,324 cases, 25.8% were performed with trainees as FA. Operative length was 27.9% longer in trainee cases. In the trainee group, there was a higher risk of conversion to open procedure (OR 1.32), readmission (OR 1.19), and specific complications (cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, progressive renal insufficiency, pulmonary embolism, sepsis, transfusion, intubation, UTI, VTE, ICU admission, and reintervention), though overall rates were < 1% in each group. Non-trainees had a higher rate of septic shock (OR 1.4). No significant difference was seen in all other perioperative outcomes. Trainee involvement in SG leads to longer operative times without a clinically significant increase in morbidity and mortality. Such findings should be used to counsel patients and shape expectations for surgeons and hospitals. A focused bariatric surgery trainee curriculum may lessen this gap.

MBSAQIP database: are the data reliable?

BackgroundThe Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database collects data from all accredited centers in the US. A prior study showed data quality issues limiting use of up to 20% of the 2015 database. ObjectivesTo evaluate the completeness and data quality (internal validity, accuracy, and consistency) of the MBSAQIP database between 2015 and 2019. SettingUnited States. MethodsAll subsets of data from the MBSAQIP Participant User Data File (PUDF) were compiled into one main file. Completeness, internal validity, accuracy, and consistency were evaluated. Completeness was determined via missing values. Internal validity was assessed using the percentage of patients with a body mass index (BMI) < 30 kg/m2 who underwent primary bariatric surgery. Accuracy was evaluated using reported versus calculated BMI. Consistency was assessed using the percentage of patients with a gain of >5 or a loss of >20 units of BMI change in 30 days. Effects across years were assessed using a chi-squared test. ResultsMissing data for age, BMI, and ASA was consistently low (<2.5%) with no significant difference across years. Only .02% of patients who underwent a primary bariatric procedure had a reported BMI <30 kg/m2. The mean difference between reported versus calculated BMI was −.02 units. A maximum of .33% of patients gained >5 units of BMI, and a maximum of .85% of patients lost > 20 units of BMI in early follow-up. ConclusionsWhile the MBSAQIP is a database with acceptable data quality and minimal changes from 2015–2019, ongoing efforts are needed to improve data.

Extended postoperative venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after bariatric surgery: a comparison of existing risk-stratification tools and 5-year MBSAQIP analysis.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of 30-day mortality after metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS). Multiple predictive tools exist for VTE risk assessment and extended VTE chemoprophylaxis determination. To review existing risk-stratification tools and compare their predictive abilities. MBSAQIP database. Retrospective analysis of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database was performed (2015-2019) for primary minimally invasive MBS cases. VTE clinical factors and risk-assessment tools were evaluated: body mass index threshold of 50 kg/m2, Caprini risk-assessment model, and 3 bariatric-specific tools: the Cleveland Clinic VTE risk tool, the Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative tool, and BariClot. MBS patients were deemed high risk based on criteria from each tool and further assessed for sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value. Overall, 709,304 patients were identified with a .37% VTE rate. Bariatric-specific tools included multiple predictors: procedure, age, race, gender, operative time, length of stay, heart failure, and dyspnea at rest; operative time was the only variable common to all. The body mass index cutoff and Caprini risk-assessment model had higher sensitivity but lower specificity when compared with the Michigan Bariatric Surgery Collaborative and BariClot tools. While the sensitivity of the tools varied widely and was overall low, the Cleveland Clinic tool had the highest sensitivity. The bariatric-specific tools would have recommended extended prophylaxis for 1.1%-15.6% of patients. Existing MBS VTE risk-assessment tools differ widely for inclusion variables, high-risk definition, and predictive performance. Further research and registry inclusion of all significant risk factors are needed to determine the optimal risk-stratified approach for predicting VTE events and determining the need for extended prophylaxis.

Outcomes of Staple Line Reinforcement Following Robotic Assisted Sleeve Gastrectomy Based on MBSAQIP Database.

The objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes for Staple Line Reinforcement (SLR) in RA-SG based on the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database for 2019. We selected patients who underwent RA-SG in the MBSAQIP PUF (Public Utility File) for the year 2019 and grouped them based on their SLR status: Oversewing (OS), Buttressing (BR), both OS and BR and neither. Our primary outcomes were bleeding, organ space infection (OSI), and adverse events (AEs), and our secondary outcomes were operation length, hospital length of stay, readmissions, and conversion to open rates. We conducted separate chi square or one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) as appropriate and multivariable direct logistic regression models for the categorical outcomes. We found 115,621 patients with complete data of which there were 16,494 who underwent RA-SG. Our results did not show a statistically significant decrease in incidence of postoperative bleeding for BR and OS (Adjusted OR = 0.782, p = 0.2291 and Adjusted OR of 0.482, p = 0.054 for BR and OS respectively). There was a statistically significant effect for SLR status on operation length, with OS patients having the highest operative times (log-transformed mean = 2.03), followed by both BR + OS patients (log-transformed mean = 1.99). BR patients had the shortest operation length. SLR did not result in any significant differences related to bleeding, OSI or AEs following RA-SG according to MBSAQIP for the year 2019. However, OS resulted in significantly longer operative time compared to BR alone.

Concurrent paraesophageal hernia repair in revisional/conversional laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: propensity score-matched analysis of the MBSAQIP database.

Patients requiring concurrent paraesophageal hernia repair (CPHR) have been shown to have favorable outcomes in primary bariatric surgery. However, patients requiring revisional or conversional surgery represent a group of patients with higher perioperative risk. Currently, few reports on concurrent paraesophageal hernia repair utilizing the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database are available. The primary aim of this study was to determine perioperative complications associated with CPHR and the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) as a revisional/conversional operation. In this study, patients undergoing revisional/conversional RYGB between 2015 and 2020 were accessed via the MBSAQIP database. Patients were categorized based on the presence of a paraesophageal hernia as a concurrent procedure. Patients who underwent revisional/conversional surgery without additional procedures were utilized for controls. A propensity score-matched cohort was generated and E-analysis utilized to assess unmeasured confounding. After exclusions, 35,698 patients were available. Patients receiving CPHR were more likely to be female (90.79% vs 87.37%; p < 0.001) and have increased frequency of gastroesophageal reflux disease (69.20% vs 51.69%; p < 0.001). However, these patients had lower frequencies of sleep apnea (24.12% vs 30.13%; p < 0.001), hypertension requiring medication (38.51% vs 42.59%; p < 0.001), and decreased frequency of hyperlipidemia (19.44% vs 21.60%;p < 0.001). After matching, 6,231 patient pairs were developed and showed that patients undergoing CPHR were at increased risk of readmission (9.44% vs 7.58%; p < 0.001), intervention (3.56% vs 2.79%; p = 0.018), increased requirement for outpatient dehydration treatment (5.87% vs 4.67%;p = 0.004), and overall increased operation time (169.3min ± 76.0 vs 153.5 ± 73.3; p < 0.001). However, there were no significant increases in the rates of reoperation, death, postoperative leak complications, or bleeding complications after CPHR. Patients undergoing revisional/conversional RYGB with CPHR may be at higher risk for a small number of rare postoperative complications. CPHR is a safe procedure in patients undergoing revisional/conversional RYGB in the short-term postoperative period.

One- versus two-stage conversions of adjustable gastric bands: an analysis of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database.

Laparoscopic adjustable gastric bands (AGB) are converted at high rates to secondary bariatric procedures. The available literature on the safety of converting in 1- versus 2-stage processes has not included large databases. To evaluate the safety of a 1- versus 2-stage conversion of AGB. Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP), United States. The MBSAQIP database for the years 2020 and 2021 was evaluated. One-stage AGB conversions were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes and database variables. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine whether 1- or 2-stage conversions were associated with 30-day serious complications. There were 12,085 patients who underwent conversion from previous AGB to sleeve gastrectomy (SG) (63.0%) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) (37.0%), of whom 41.0% underwent conversion in 1 stage and 59.0% in 2 stages. Patients who underwent 2-stage conversions had higher body mass indexes. Rates of serious complications were higher for patients undergoing RYGB compared with SG (5.2% versus 3.3%, P < .001) but were similar between 1-stage and 2-stage conversions in both cohorts. In both cohorts, there were similar rates of anastomotic leaks, postoperative bleeding, reoperation, and readmissions. Mortality was rare and similar between conversion groups. There was no difference in outcomes or complications in 30 days between 1- and 2-stage conversions of AGB to RYGB or SG. Conversions to RYGB have higher complication and mortality rates than to SG, but there was no statistically significant difference between staged procedures. One- and 2-stage conversions from AGB are equivalent in safety.

Effect of Smoking History on 30-Day Morbidity Following Bariatric Surgery.

Smoking and postoperative complications are well documented across surgical specialties. Preoperative smoking cessation is frequently recommended by surgeons. In this study, we assessed to what degree documented smoking history increased a patient's risk of postoperative complications. The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database for the years 2015-2018 was used. Patients were included if they underwent primary sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). Patients with a documented smoking history were assigned to the "SH" cohort and patients without smoking history were assigned to the "NSH" cohort. Patients without documentation regarding smoking history, missing variables, younger than 18, with prior surgery, or lost to follow-up were excluded. 30-day morbidity and mortality data were assessed. Multiple logistic regression analysis was made based on all available patient characteristics and perioperative factors, continuous variables were analyzed using Student's t-test and categorical variables were compared using the chi-square test. After evaluation of 760,076 patients on the MBSAQIP database, 650,930 patients underwent non-revisional bariatric surgery, including 466,270 SG and 184,660 LRYGB. Of the total patients included in the study, 44,606 patients were assigned to the SH cohort and 479,601 were assigned to the NSH cohort. 4628 of patients did not have documented smoking status. Within 30 days SH patients had higher rates of readmission (4.2% vs 3.7%, P < .0001), reoperation (1.3% vs 1.1%, P < .0001), unplanned intubation (.2% vs .1%, P = .0212), and unplanned ICU admission (.7% vs .0.6%, P = .0022). SH patients undergoing bariatric surgery were at significantly increased risk of readmission and reoperation within 30days of procedure. In addition, SH patients were more likely to have unplanned intubation and unplanned ICU admission. Given the higher rates of complications in smoking patients, this study would suggest that preoperative smoking cessation in patients prior to primary bariatric surgery might be beneficial. Further study is warranted to compare short-term cessation vs long-term cessation preoperatively, which was not assessed in our study.

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Single Anastomosis Duodenoileostomy with Sleeve: Comparative Analysis of 30-Day Outcomes Using the MBSAQIP.

One anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) and single anastomosis duodenoileostomy with sleeve (SADI-S) are two highly effective bariatric procedures that have been recently endorsed by the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS). We compared the outcomes and safety profiles of SADI-S and OAGB using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. Retrospective analysis on patients who underwent SADI-S or OAGB obtained from the MBSAQIP database 2020-2021. Patients who underwent concurrent procedures (besides EGD) or had missing data were removed. Variables included age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, and pertinent medical comorbidities. Data were analyzed for 30-day postoperative morbidity, mortality, reoperation, reintervention, and readmissions. p values were calculated using Student's t-test or Fisher analysis. A total of 694 and 1068 patients respectively underwent SADI-S or OAGB. Statistically significant comorbidities included age (42.2 ± 10.8 vs. 43.7 ± 12.2), BMI (50.6 ± 9.1 vs. 45.3 ± 7.1), ASA 2 (66 (9.5%) vs. 165 (15.4%)), ASA 4 [69 (9.9%) vs. 20 (1.9%)], and immunosuppressive therapy [24 (3.5%) vs. 17 (1.6%)]. Clavien-Dindo-based analysis highlighted that SADI-S had higher grade 2 (p = 0.005) and grade 4b (p = 0.001) complications. Patients who underwent SADI-S were twice as likely to be readmitted within 30days (3.7% vs. 1.9%; p = 0.021). SADI-S had higher readmission rates and higher Clavien-Dindo grade 2 and 4b complications. To note, SADI-S patients had higher BMIs. Further studies are needed to determine the long-term complications and efficacy of both operations.

Single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass with sleeve in the United States: a first comparative safety analysis of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database.

The single-anastomosis duodenoileal bypass with sleeve (SADI-S) is a relatively new bariatric procedure. In 2020, the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) started reporting outcomes for SADI-S. We aimed to study the perioperative safety of SADI-S and compare it with other established bariatric procedures utilizing the MBSAQIP database. Academic hospital, United States. The 2020 MBSAQIP Participant Use File was used to evaluate SADI-S outcomes. We included SADI-S primary cases and excluded revisions and concurrent operations. A 5:1 propensity matched analysis (PMA) for 20 variables was performed to compare the outcomes of the SADI-S with the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and a 2:1 PMA to the biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD/DS). There were 255 primary SADI-S reported in 2020. After PMA, the only significant complications between the RYGB and SADI-S cohorts were Clavien-Dindo grade IVa and IVb (.1% and 1.4% versus 1.6% and 7.1%, respectively). SADI-S had more Clavien-Dindo grade II, IVa, and IVb complications than the SG cohort (1.3% versus 3.5%, P = .03; .2% versus 1.6%, P = 0; 1.% versus 7.1%, P = 0). When compared with BPD/DS, outcomes including readmission, reoperation, and intervention were not statistically significant. SADI-S, in its early adoption stage, has a higher incidence of perioperative complications than RYGB and SG. It has comparable 30-day outcomes to BPD/DS.

Method of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis is not a predictor of pulmonary embolus following elective bariatric surgery: a retrospective cohort study of 135,409 patients.

Patients with obesity are at increased risk of pulmonary embolus (PE), a risk that increases perioperatively and is challenging to manage. An analysis of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database was performed to determine predictors of PE in patients undergoing elective bariatric surgery. North American accredited bariatric surgery institutions included in the MBSAQIP database from 2020-2021. We extracted data from the MBSAQIP database (2020-2021) on patients who underwent elective Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Data were extracted on patient co-morbidities, race, prior history of deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and type of DVT prophylaxis. A multivariate logistic regression model was developed to determine predictors of PE and impact of PE on 30-day serious complications and mortality. In the MBSAQIP database, a total of 135,409 patients underwent SG or RYGB from 2020 to 2021. PE was reported in 194 patients (.14%). Prior history of DVT (odds ratio [OR] = 3.28; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.85-5.83; P < .0001), Black race (OR = 3.03; 95% CI: 2.22-4.13; P<.0001), gastroesophageal reflux disease (OR = 1.51; 95% CI: 1.11-2.04; P = .008), higher body mass index (OR = 1.11; 95% CI: 1.01-1.20; P = .023), male sex (OR = 1.76; 95% CI: 1.26-2.45; P = .001), and older age (OR = 1.27; 95% CI: 1.10-1.46; P = .001) were associated with increased odds of PE. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, sleep apnea, and hypertension were not significant predictors of PE (P > .05). Neither combined mechanical and pharmacologic DVT prophylaxis nor pharmacologic prophylaxis alone was a significant predictor of PE (P > .05). Prior history of DVT is the strongest predictor of PE after bariatric surgery. African American race, male sex, and gastroesophageal reflux disease are additional risk factors. Method of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis was not identified as significant predictor of PE. Further, studies on the evaluation and optimization of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis are required.

American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery 2020 estimateof metabolic and bariatric procedures performed in the United States.

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), despite being the only effective durable treatment for obesity, remains underused as approximately 1% of all patients who qualify undergo surgery. The American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery created a Numbers Taskforce to specify annual rate of utilization for obesity treatment interventions and to determine if patients in need are receiving appropriate treatment. The objective of this study was to provide the best estimated number of metabolic and bariatric procedures performed in the United States in2020. United States. We reviewed data from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP), National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, Bariatric Outcomes Longitudinal Database, and Nationwide Inpatient Sample. In addition, data from industry and state databases were used to estimate activity at nonaccredited centers. Data from 2020 were compared mainly with data from the previous 2 years. Compared with 2019, the total number of MBS performed in 2020 decreased from approximately 256,000 to 199,000. Sleeve gastrectomy continues to be the most common procedure. The gastric bypass procedure trend remained relatively stable, and the gastric band procedure trend continued to decline. The percentage of revision procedures and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch procedures increased slightly. Single-anastomosis duodeno-ileostomy was listed for the first time in 2020. Intragastric balloons placement declined from the previous year. There was a 22.5% decrease in MBS volume from 2019 to 2020, which coincided withthe COVID-19 pandemic. Sleeve gastrectomy continues to be the dominant procedure, and for thefirst time, single-anastomosis duodeno-ileostomy is reported in the MBSAQIP database.

The Impact of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgeon Status on Outcomes After Bariatric Surgery: a Retrospective Cohort Study Using the MBSAQIP Database.

Differences between complication rates of bariatric surgeries performed by general surgeons (GS) versus those performed by metabolic and bariatric surgeons (MBS) are poorly understood. We analyzed the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database focusing on RYGB and SG procedures between 2016 and 2019. Our primary objective was to evaluate trends in the number of bariatric procedures performed by GS and MBS. Secondary objectives were assessing for differences in 30-day mortality and the incidence of serious complications. Differences between groups were evaluated by chi-squared analysis for categorical data and ANOVA tests for continuous data. A multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine the influence of subspecialized training on the incidence of serious complications and 30 day mortality. A total of 622,079 patients were analyzed, 15,485 were operated on by GS (2.5%, mean age 44.7 years, mean BMI 45.2 kg/m2), while 606,594 procedures were performed by MBS (97.5%, mean age 44.4 years, mean BMI 45.2 kg/m2). The proportion of procedures being completed by the GS group decreased from n=4662, 3.2% in 2016, to n=3414, 2.1% in 2019. After adjusting for comorbidities, MBS patients did not have differences in death at 30 days (OR 1.26 [0.67-2.38], p=0.467) or serious complications (OR 0.97 [0.89-1.06], p=0.554). The majority of bariatric procedures are being completed by MBS with the proportion completed by GS decreasing. We found no difference in the number of serious complications and 30-day mortality rates across the MBS and GS groups. Graphical abstract.

Duodenal switch versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a perioperative risk comparative analysis of the MBSAQIP Database (2015-2019).

Biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD/DS) is a procedure that has long been considered to have a higher early postoperative morbidity than Roux-En-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). However, patients who undergo BPD/DS have more baseline co-morbidities that may affect the reported early postoperative morbidity. To compare 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality between BPD/DS and RYGB propensity score-matched cohorts obtained from the MBSAQIP database. Analysis of data obtained from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. Retrospective analysis of 21-variable propensity score-matched patients in the BPD/DS and RYGB groups obtained from the MBSAQIP database between 2015 and 2019. Variables included age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, and pertinent medical co-morbidities. Data were analyzed for 30-day postoperative morbidity, mortality, reoperation, reintervention, and readmissions. Before matching, RYGB and BPD/DS cohorts contained 134 188 and 5079 patients, respectively. After multivariable propensity score matching, each cohort contained 5050 patients. The RYGB group had a higher rate of surgical-site infections than the BPD/DS group (1% versus .5%, P = .007) and a higher rate of blood product transfusions (1.1% versus .6%, P = .018). The rate of other early postoperative complications was similar between the 2 groups (P > .05). There was no statistically significant difference in the 30-day mortality, readmission rate, reoperation rate, or reintervention rate between the 2 groups (P > .05). When matched for baseline body mass index and co-morbidities, BPD/DS does not lead to a higher 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality than RYGB. Patients can be counseled that in the short term, BPD/DS is as safe as RYGB.

Exploring perioperative outcomes in metabolic and bariatric surgery amongst the elderly: an analysis of the 2015-2017 MBSAQIP database.

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is increasingly performed in patients >65 years. Studies of perioperative outcomes have shown equivocal results. Our study objective was to explore perioperative outcomes in elderly MBS patients compared with those <65 years. Academic Hospital. Primary sleeve (SG) and gastric bypass (RYGB) cases were identified from the 2015-2017 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. Selected cases were stratified by age (≥65 yr versus <65 yr). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed comparing outcomes in the elderly with the general MBS cohort. 26,557 (5.6%) of MBS cases were performed in elderly patients, who were more likely to be white, male, have a lower mean body mass index (BMI), receive a gastric bypass, and robotic-assisted surgery. Elderly patients had a significantly higher disease burden, and most outcome measures were significantly higher in elderly patients, including mortality and morbidity. On multivariate regression analyses, elderly patients undergoing SG have significantly less risk of mortality and morbidity compared with RYGB. In general, co-morbidities were in most cases more strongly predictive of complications than age alone. The number needed to harm (NNH) for overall and related morbidity were 59 and 232, respectively. Elderly MBS patients have higher disease burden and higher adverse outcomes following MBS; however, complications in this cohort remain overall rare. When performing bariatric surgery on elderly patients, procedure consideration should favor SG as RYGB is independently associated with worse outcomes.

Risk factors for readmission for early small bowel obstruction following laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: an MBSAQIP analysis

Abstract Background Small bowel obstruction (SBO) following laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) is associated with significant morbidity. Objectives To evaluate the rate of and risk factors for readmission for SBO within 30 days of LRYGB. Setting Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP)–accredited centers. Methods This is a retrospective study using the MBSAQIP database. A query was performed from 2015–2018 for patients who underwent LRYGB and required readmission for SBO. Those who had a reoperation, intervention, readmission, or expired from causes other than SBO were excluded. Descriptive, bivariate, and binary logistic regression analyses were performed. Results Among 184,660 patients undergoing LRYGB, 1189 (.64%) required readmission due to SBO. Among the readmission cases, 978 (82.5%) were identified as having intestinal obstruction (unspecified), 108 (9.1%) incisional hernia, and 100 (8.4%) internal hernia. Among these cases, 69% had a reoperation and 1.3% expired during the 30-day period. From a logistic regression model, parameters independently associated with an increased risk for readmission for early SBO include being female (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.53) or black (AOR, 1.41) and having gastroesophageal reflux (AOR, 1.35), a history of myocardial infarction (AOR, 1.76), a history of deep vein thrombosis (AOR, 1.73), previous obesity surgery/foregut surgery (AOR, 1.79), a robotic-assisted procedure (AOR, 1.23), concurrent hiatal hernia repair (AOR, 1.66) and adhesiolysis (AOR, 1.42). Conclusion The rate of readmission for early SBO following LRYGB was less than 1%. The majority of these cases required reoperation. The increased intraoperative complexity of LRYGB is associated with an increased risk of readmission due to early SBO.

Variations in bariatric surgical practice patterns between general and bariatric surgeons: a matched analysis of the 2017 MBSAQIP database.

While general surgeons (GSs) perform metabolic and bariatric surgery (MABS), these procedures are increasingly performed by metabolic and bariatric surgeons (MBSs). Because MABS is an evolving practice with changing surgical platforms and approaches, it is important to evaluate outcomes between different specialists performing these procedures. To compare perioperative practice pattern variations and outcomes of MABS performed by GSs versus MBSs. University Hospital, United States. Using the 2017 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program database, we identified Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) cases and stratified them by specialization (GSs versus MBSs). Patient characteristics, practice patterns and outcomes, complications, and 30-day outcomes were compared between cohorts. Matched procedure-specific analyses were performed. Of 172,430 MABS procedures, 4394 (2.5%) were performed by GSs and 168,036 (97.4%) by MBSs. At baseline, patients of GSs had fewer co-morbidities. GSs more commonly used the robotic platform for SG cases and performed interventions such as staple line reinforcement and staple line check with provocative testing. MBSs more commonly performed robotic (versus laparoscopic) RYGB. Overall complications were low in both study cohorts. After propensity matching, transfusion and venous thromboembolism were higher in SG performed by GSs, while surgical site infection was higher in SG and RYGB performed by MBSs. These findings were not reproduced after case-control matching. In matched analyses, there were no mortality or morbidity differences between study cohorts. MABS is performed safely by both GSs and MBSs, with no difference in morbidity andmortality.

Ambulatory bariatric surgery: does it really lead to higher rates of adverse events?

Correlating patient outcomes with length of stay (LoS) is an important consideration in metabolic and bariatric surgery. At present, conflicting data exists regarding patient safety for ambulatory (AMB) metabolic and bariatric surgery. Outcomes for AMB-metabolic and bariatric surgery patients (LoS <1 d) undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG) were compared with matched patients with LoS ≥1 day (non-AMB) using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) registry. MBSAQIP national database. The MBSAQIP registry was queried for patients undergoing SG or RYGB (2015-2017) and patients grouped as AMB/non-AMB. Exclusion criteria included LoS >4 days, age <18 or >75 years, revision surgery, gastric banding, body mass index <35 kg/m2, and day of surgery mortality. Variables were combined into major/minor complications and 30-day mortality. Analysis was performed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression and propensity matching. After exclusions were applied 408,895 patients remained (9973 AMB). Overall, 111,279 patients underwent RYGB (1032 AMB) and 297,616 underwent SG (8941 AMB), with similar demographic characteristics and co-morbidities between groups. For AMB patients, there was no increase in 30-day mortality, reoperation, or readmission, and fewer drains were placed versus matched non-AMB patients. In AMB-SG patients more surgical site infections were reported versus non-AMB-SG, although AMB-SG patients had fewer intensive care unit admissions. For AMB-RYGB, no differences in complications were detected versus non-AMB-RYGB. Based on our analysis of the MBSAQIP database, patients undergoing laparoscopic RYGB or SG procedures can be safely discharged on the day of their procedure without increased incidence of mortality, reoperation, or readmission.