Metabolic And Bariatric Surgery Accreditation And Quality Improvement Program Research Articles

Rates and Risk Factors for 30-Day Morbidity After One-Stage Vertical Banded Gastroplasty Conversions: A Retrospective Analysis.

Background: The vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) is a historic restrictive bariatric operation often requiring further surgery. In this investigation utilizing the 2021 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) national dataset, we aim to better define the outcomes of VBG conversions.Methods: We queried the 2021 MBSAQIP dataset for patients who underwent a conversion from a VBG to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy (SG). Demographics, comorbidities, laboratory values, and additional patient factors were examined. Rates of key consequential outcome measures 30-day readmission, reoperation, reintervention, mortality, and a composite endpoint (at least 1 of the 4) were further calculated.Results: We identified 231 patients who underwent conversion from VBG to SG (n = 23), RYGB (n = 208), or other anatomy (n = 6), of which 93% of patients were female, and 22% of non-white race. The median age was 56years and body-mass index (BMI) was 43kg/m2. The most common surgical indications included weight considerations (48%), reflux (25%), anatomic causes (eg, stricture, fistula, and ulcer; 10%), and dysphagia (6.5%). Thirty-day morbidity rates included reoperation (7.8%), readmission (9.1%), reintervention (4.3%), mortality (.4%), and the composite endpoint (15%). Upon bivariate analysis, we did not identify any specific risk factor for the 30-day composite endpoint.Discussion: One-stage VBG conversions to traditional bariatric anatomy are beset with higher 30-day morbidity relative to primary procedures. Additional MBSAQIP data will be required for aggregation, to better characterize the risk factors inherent in these operations.

Is conversion to duodenal switch after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass safe? Short-term outcomes review.

Weight regain after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) can be seen in approximately 20% of patients. Surgical management options include revision of RYGB and conversion to duodenal switch (DS). Using recently included revisional surgery variables in the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database, we compared the safety and efficacy of RYGB revision versus conversion to DS. An analysis of the 2020 MBSAQIP Participant Use Data File (PUF) revealed 1421 patients who underwent revision of RYGB (n = 1255) or conversion from RYGB to DS (n = 166) for inadequate weight loss or weight regain. Patient characteristics, preoperative body mass index (BMI), operating room (OR) time, and 30-day complications were compared between groups. When compared with the revision RYGB group, the DS group had higher mean BMI (47.5 vs 42.7, p < 0.001) and longer operative time (209.1 vs 133.4min, p < 0.001). DS had higher rates of any complication compared to revision RYGB (22.3 vs 5.58%, p < 0.001). DS had higher 30-day readmission rates (16.3 vs 5.50%, p < 0.001), reoperation within 30days (9.04 vs 2.87%, p < 0.001), venous thromboembolism (VTE) (3.01 vs 0.08%, p < 0.001), intensive care unit (ICU) admission (8.43 vs 0.72%, p < 0.001), anastomotic leak (7.83 vs 0.40%, p < 0.001), surgical site occurrence (SSO) (11.5 vs 2.71%, p < 0.001), and death (0.60 vs 0%, p < 0.001). This short-term data suggests that conversion of RYGB to DS is associated with higher rates of postoperative complications when compared with revision of RYGB. Given the complexity of the procedure, it is best performed by experienced surgeons with careful consideration given to appropriate patient selection and only after extensive patient counseling on associated risks and complications.

Development of venous thromboembolic event risk calculator for metabolic and bariatric surgery patients to reduce mortality

IntroductionVenous thromboembolic events (VTEs) after Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (MBS) result in significant morbidity and are the leading cause of mortality. The objective of this study was to identify patients who are at a high risk for developing VTE and who may benefit from extended chemoprophylaxis following MBS. MethodsUsing the 2015-2019 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) participant user file (PUF), we identified 696,069 patients who completed 30-day follow-up data and met the inclusion criteria. Using logistic regression analysis, we identified preoperative and postoperative risk factors associated with VTE and validated our model externally using the MBSAQIP 2020-2021 datasets (N = 273,692). The Hosmer–Lemeshow test was used for goodness of fit and calibration. We also compared our model’s discriminatory capability with that of other VTE risk assessment tools. We then used these risk factors to create an online open source application. ResultsThe overall incidence of VTE after MBS in the 696,069 (MBSAQIP 2015-2019 database) patients included in our analysis was .40% (2759 patients). Our model had a good predictive capability, with a C-statistic of .66. Our model also demonstrated good fit with a Hosmer–Lemeshow chi-square of 11.06 (P = .198). A cut-off point of .4% resulted in a sensitivity of 48.28%, with 24% of patients having a VTE risk greater than .4% within the 2015-2019 MBSAQIP dataset. Among all the perioperative factors selected in the PUF, high risk for VTE included African American race (AOR 1.625, P < .0001), operation length in minutes (AOR: 1.003, P < .0001), preop functional status (AOR 1.012, P = .007), procedure type (RYGB; AOR .768, P < .0001 and RBS; AOR .758, P = .019 with respect to sleeve), preop body mass index (BMI) (AOR 1.012, P < .001), history of pre-op vein thrombosis requiring therapy (AOR 5.041, P < .0001), post-op superficial or organ space surgical site infection (AOR 2.713, P < .0001), preop venous stasis (AOR 1.425, P = .019),at least one readmission within 30 days(AOR 1.583, P < .0001), or at least one reoperation within 30 days (AOR 4.399, P < .0001). ConclusionVTE after MBS can result in increased mortality rates. High-risk patients might benefit from extended chemoprophylaxis. Our model suggests that patients with a VTE risk ≥ .4% in the first 30 days following surgery may benefit from extended chemoprophylaxis.

"Metabolic Bridge Therapy Prior to Microvascular Breast Reconstruction in the Morbidly Obese: A Proof-of-Concept Risk Analysis".

Obese patients experience more complications after autologous breast reconstruction. This study evaluates how bariatric surgery modulates risk of complications in the setting of microvascular breast reconstruction. Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) databases were queried for patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥35 kg/m2 undergoing bariatric surgery from 2017-2022. Outcomes included BMI and obesity-related comorbidities before and 1 year after bariatric surgery. Paired Breast Reconstruction Risk Assessment (BRA) scores were analyzed to evaluate risk modulation before and after bariatric surgery in the setting of microvascular breast reconstruction. A total of 1,026 patients were included with an average age of 47 and BMI of 44.7 kg/m2. Comorbidities included hypertension (601, 59%), type 2 diabetes (291, 28%), and cardiovascular disease (10, 1%). One-year outcomes after bariatric surgery included an average BMI of 32.7 kg/m2, with remission of type 2 diabetes in 29% of patients. Paired BRA risk analysis for microvascular breast reconstruction before and after bariatric surgery showed reduction in 30-day surgical complications (40.4% vs. 24.8%, P<0.0001), with an absolute risk reduction (ARR) of 15%, relative risk reduction (RRR) of 36%, and a number needed to treat (NNT) of 7. Each 1 kg/m2 reduction in preoperative BMI was associated with a 3.4% reduction in surgical complications (P<0.0001). There is potential efficacy for metabolic bridge therapy in reducing complications for obese patients undergoing microvascular breast reconstruction.

Advanced Non-linear Modeling and Explainable Artificial Intelligence Techniques for Predicting 30-Day Complications in Bariatric Surgery: A Single-Center Study.

Metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) became integral to managing severe obesity. Understanding surgical risks associated with MBS is crucial. Different scores, such as the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP), aid in patient selection and outcome prediction. This study aims to evaluate machine learning (ML) models performance in predicting 30-day post-operative complications and compare them with the MBSAQIP risk score. We retrospectively evaluated 424 consecutive patients (2006-2020) who underwent MBS, analyzing 30-day surgical complications according to Clavien-Dindo Classification. ML models, including logistic regression, support vector machine, random forest, k-nearest neighbors, multi-layer perceptron, and extreme gradient boosting, were analyzed and compared to MBSAQIP risk score. Performance was measured by area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) analysis. Random forest showed the highest AUROC in the training (AUROC = 0.94) and the validation set (AUROC = 0.88). ML algorithms, particularly random forest, outperformed MBSAQIP in predicting negative 30-day outcomes in both the training and validation sets (AUROC = 0.64, DeLong's Test p < 0.001). The five features that were more relevant for the prediction of the random forest model were serum alkaline phosphatase, platelet count, triglycerides, glycated hemoglobin, and albumin. We developed several ML model that identifies patients at risk for 30-day complications after MBS. Among these, random forest is the most performing one and outperforms the already established MBSAQIP score. This model could increase the identification of high-risk patients before MBS.

Comparison of Postoperative Bleed Rates and Location of Bleed Between Vessel Sealing Devices after Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy.

Background: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is a commonly performed bariatric procedure. At our institution, two vessel sealing devices, Thunderbeat® (Olympus) and Maryland LigaSure™ (Covidien) are utilized for intraoperative dissection. Methods: A retrospective review of all patients who underwent primary SG from July 2013 through August 2022 was performed to evaluate postoperative bleeding (POB) rates between the two devices. The primary outcome measured was POB as defined by the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP), with secondary outcomes including reoperation, source of bleed, and overall safety. Results: A total of 8157 underwent SG. Average BMI and age were 43.2 kg/m2 and 37.1 years, respectively. A total of 6600 (80.9%) were female. Thunderbeat® was utilized in 5143 (63%) cases and Maryland LigaSure™ was used in 3014 (37%) cases. There was no significant difference in overall bleeding between the Thunderbeat® (18/5143, .35%) and the Maryland LigaSure™ (19/3014, .63%; P = .0689). However, there was a difference noted when comparing reoperation for bleeding between Thunderbeat® (9/5143, .17%) and Maryland LigaSure™ (13/3014, .43%; P = .0291). Furthermore, the location of bleeding in the reoperations was more common from the cut edge of the mesentery compared to the staple line with the Maryland LigaSure™ versus the Thunderbeat® (P = .038). Conclusions: The Thunderbeat® device is comparatively more hemostatic than the Maryland LigaSure™ for SG. The location of postoperative bleed may be related to vessel sealing devices used.

Bariatric surgery in patients with preoperative therapeutic anticoagulation: a 2015–2021 MBSAQIP database study

BackgroundThe link between obesity and adverse cardiovascular events is well-established. With the rising prevalence of metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), a greater number of patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) may present with preoperative therapeutic anticoagulation (AC). ObjectivesThis study evaluated perioperative outcomes of SG and RYGB in patients on preoperative AC. SettingPatients reported to the 2015–2021 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. MethodsAdults undergoing primary SG or RYGB with and without preoperative anticoagulation (SG-AC or RYGB-AC and non-SG-AC or non-RYGB-AC, respectively) were analyzed from the 2015–2021 MBSAQIP database. Differences in baseline characteristics by AC status for each MBS were adjusted using entropy-balanced weights. Multivariable logistic and linear regressions were developed to analyze the independent association between AC and outcomes of interest. ResultsOf 1,178,090 patients included, 72.0% (n = 850,682) had SG and 28.0% (n = 327,408) had RYGB, of which 1.8% (n = 15,021) and 1.9% (n = 6201) had AC, respectively. Compared to non-SG-AC and non-RYGB-AC, both SG-AC and RYGB-AC encountered higher absolute 30-day rates of anastomotic leak, deep vein thrombosis and gastrointestinal bleeding. Following multivariable adjustment, SG-AC was associated with significantly greater odds of adverse cardiovascular events, anastomotic leak, gastrointestinal bleeding, and greater operative length and length of stay. RYGB-AC was associated with higher odds of readmission, unplanned ICU admission, and ED visit. ConclusionsWhile preoperative AC may confer distinct outcomes between SG and RYGB, this 7-year study of MBSAQIP demonstrated an overall association with greater postoperative morbidity. Management of MBS patients with preoperative AC requires consideration of thrombohemorrhagic risks.

Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Outcomes in African American Patients: a Single Institution Experience.

The incidence of obesity in African Americans (AAs) is higher than in non-AA in the USA. Previous studies using large national databases report that AA patients have worse outcomes than non-AA patients. To assess perioperative outcomes among AA patients after MBS at a center of excellence (COE) that serves a large, diverse patient population. University Hospital METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on patients undergoing MBS between 2010 and 2020 at our two accredited MBSAQIP (Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program) COEs where the AA population makes up over 35% of the population. Preoperative variables were compared using unpaired t-test or chi-squared test where appropriate. Thirty-day outcomes were compared following propensity score matching (exact algorithm) of demographics and comorbidities. Overall, 5742 patients (AA = 2058, 36%) had Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (AA = 1028, 26%) or sleeve gastrectomy (AA = 1030, 27%). AA patients were more often female (90.2% vs. 80.2%, p < 0.001) and had higher rates of hypertension (56.3% vs. 47.8%, p < 0.001), while non-AA patients had higher rates of hyperlipidemia (27.3% vs. 20.7%, p < 0.001) and obstructive sleep apnea (41.2% vs. 37.1%, p = 0.0024). Matched data showed that AA patients had higher rates of pulmonary embolism (PE) (0.3% vs. 0.1%, p = 0.020) and more emergency department visits (7.0% vs. 5.1%, p = 0.012) but no differences in mortality, readmission, reintervention, or reoperation rates. In a diverse area, AA patients who underwent MBS had similar perioperative outcomes compared to non-AA patients except that they experienced higher rates of PE. They also experienced higher rates of emergency department visits but had similar readmission rates.

Rare events model of the MBSAQIP database: risk of early bowel obstruction following metabolic surgery

BackgroundEarly small bowel obstruction (eSBO) (within 30-days) is a rare but important complication that is associated with high rates of morbidity, including readmission, reintervention, and reoperation. ObjectivesTo identify patient-specific and operation-specific characteristics that predispose patients to eSBO and to identify at-risk individuals preoperatively. Setting2015-2021 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP). MethodsUtilizing the 2015-2021 MBSAQIP PUF, 1,016,484 records were analyzed. Pediatric, revisional, open-conversion, and cases with incomplete data in sex, body mass index, operative-time, 30-day-follow-up variables were excluded. Case details were compared using Fisher’s exact & Wilcoxon -Mann -Whitney tests to identify at-risk patients. The likelihood of eSBO was modeled with rare event logistic regression. ResultsIncidence of eSBO was .40%. Of the 4103 occurrences of eSBO, RYGB (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass), SG (sleeve gastrectomy), and DS (duodenal switch) accounted for 79.4%, 19.3%, and 1.3%, respectively. Many patient-specific characteristics were significantly associated with eSBO. History of prior foregut surgery, a non-metabolic surgery trained operator, and longer operative times were all associated with increased eSBO (P < .0001). While simultaneously controlling for these factors, eSBO remained higher in DS (OR 9.55, P < .0001) and RYGB (OR 5.18, P < .0001) compared to SG. Increased length of operation (OR 1.03, P < .0001) and non -MS-trained operators (OR 1.33, P < .0001) remained highly significant. Male-sex (OR .70, P < .0001) and diabetes (OR .78, P < .0001) were both protective. ConclusionsIn the largest analysis to date, eSBO remains a rare event. RYGB accounts for the largest proportion of eSBO, however, DS has a higher risk adjusted rate of eSBO.

Identifying the optimal STOP-Bang screening score for obstructive sleep apnea among bariatric surgery patients

BackgroundUndiagnosed obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) increases the risk of perioperative complications in bariatric patients. Validated screening methods exist, but are not specific to patients with severe obesity. ObjectivesDetermine the ideal OSA screening tool for bariatric surgery patients balancing accuracy and cost-effectiveness. SettingUniversity Hospital. MethodsBariatric surgery patients from January 2018 to September 2023 were identified from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. For patients with a STOP-Bang score of ≥4 referred for polysomnogram additional variables were collected from the electronic medical record. The Berlin Score was retrospectively calculated. ResultsOut of 484 patients who underwent bariatric surgery, 167 (34.5%) had a STOP-Bang score ≥4. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for STOP-Bang scores ≥4 had an area under the curve (AUC) of 78.5% for predicting OSA and 83.7% for OSA requiring treatment (Apnea Hypopnea Index [AHI] ≥ 15), compared to Berlin Scores’ AUC of 80.7% and 88.6%, respectively. A STOP-Bang score of 4 had a sensitivity of 55.6% and specificity of 36.8%, while a score of 5 had 29.3% and 66.2%, respectively. A Berlin Score of 3 had a sensitivity of 47.5% and specificity of 69.1%, with 30 patients (44.1%) starting OSA treatment. Thirty-five patients (21%) experienced a delay in insurance submission, averaging 41.5 days, related to OSA workup. ConclusionThe Berlin questionnaire outperforms STOP-Bang in predicting OSA requiring treatment. Raising the polysomnography referral score from STOP-Bang ≥4 to ≥5 or utilizing a Berlin Score of ≥3, may alleviate resource burden, reduce costs, and expedite medical optimization for bariatric surgery.

Safety of redo sleeve gastrectomy as a primary revisional procedure

BackgroundInsufficient weight loss after primary laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) occasionally requires revisional surgery. A few single-institution studies have examined the safety of redo LSG (RSG) and have shown mixed results. ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of RSG compared with LSG over a period of 30 days. SettingUniversity of Southern California, United States; Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. MethodsThe 2020–2021 MBSAQIP registry was used to evaluate patients who underwent RSG. Thirty-day outcomes were evaluated using univariable analysis and multivariable logistic and linear regression. ResultsA total of 226,029 patients were reviewed, of whom 1454 (.7%) underwent RSG and 224,575 (99.3%) underwent initial LSG. Patients who underwent RSG were older (45 versus 42 yr), predominantly female (86.2% versus 81.3%), had a lower body mass index (40.0 versus 43.4), fewer co-morbidities, and greater rates of gastroesophageal reflux (38.7% versus 25.1%). They demonstrated increased overall complications (3.6% versus 2.1%, P < .001) and a longer operative time (81 versus 62 min, P < .001), but there was no difference in mortality. On multivariable analysis, patients who underwent RSG were independently associated with an increased risk of overall postoperative complications (odds ratio [OR]: 1.493, P = .018), organ space infection (OR: 6.231, P < .001), staple line leak (OR: 12.838, P < .001), pneumonia (OR: 3.85, P = .013), ventilator requirement over 48 hours (OR: 6.404, P = .035), sepsis (OR: 4.397, P = .010), septic shock (OR: 8.669, P < .001), reoperation (OR: 1.808, P = .013), readmission (OR: 2.104, P < .001), reintervention (OR: 4.435, P < .001), and longer operative times (β = 12.790, P < .001). ConclusionsIn this national database study, RSG was associated with increased rates of postoperative complications and a longer operative time. Although these results are concerning, further studies are required to examine long-term outcomes.

Don't Fear the Bleed: Assessing Postoperative Bleeding Incidence After Instituting a Standardized Prophylactic Heparin Protocol in Bariatric Patients.

Background: Bariatric surgery is a frequently performed procedure in the United States, accounting for ∼40,000 procedures annually. Patients undergoing bariatric surgery are at high risk for postoperative thrombosis, with a venous thromboembolism (VTE) rate of up to 6.4%. Despite this risk, there is a lack of guidelines recommending postoperative VTE prophylaxis and it is not routine practice at most hospitals. The postoperative bleeding rate after bariatric surgery is only 1.5%; however, the risk of bleeding may lead to hesitancy for more liberal VTE prophylaxis. Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of bariatric surgeries at a single institution in 2019 and 2021. Data were obtained from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) and electronic medical record review for all patients undergoing sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), or conversion to RYGB. The primary outcomes were composite bleeding events, which included postoperative transfusion, postoperative endoscopy or return to operating room (OR) (for bleeding), intra-abdominal hematoma, gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, or incisional hematoma. Results: There were a total of 2067 patients in the cohort, with 1043 surgeries in 2019 and 1024 surgeries in 2021. There was no difference between bleeding events after instituting a deep venous thrombosis (DVT) prophylaxis protocol in 2021 (27 versus 28 events, P = .76). There was no difference in individual bleeding events between 2019 and 2021. Additionally, there was no significant difference in the rate of VTE between 2019 and 2021 (2 versus 5 events, P = .28). Conclusions: After instituting a standard protocol of prophylactic heparin postdischarge, we did not find an increased rate of bleeding events in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Thus, surgeons can consider prescribing postdischarge chemical VTE prophylaxis without concern for bleeding.

From database to practice: the MBSAQIP in the surgical literature

BackgroundThe Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) has been a game changer for metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), with continuous improvements in safety and outcomes throughout the years of its usage. It allows in-depth evaluations of MBS procedures, presenting practitioners and researchers with unparalleled opportunities for quality assessment, research and clinical advancement. ObjectivesTo offer an updated overview of MBSAQIP-related publications. SettingUnited States. MethodsPubMed was queried using keywords “MBSAQIP” and “Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program.” Letters to editors, duplicates, commentaries, and retracted articles were excluded. Studies that mentioned MBSAQIP but did not use the data within were also excluded. ResultsA total of 400 search items were returned as of August 2023. After exclusions, 289 studies were reviewed. Articles were published in a total of 28 unique journals, the majority of which were featured in Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases (SOARD), with 114 articles (39.4%). Sixty-one articles were focused on creating predictive models or risk calculators, 58 on investigating the safety of procedures, and 52 on exploring complications. Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) were the 2 most commonly discussed procedures, at 80.3% and 80% respectively. Forty-three studies included patients who underwent robotic-assisted MBS. ConclusionsThe MBSAQIP is a valuable resource that has generated a wealth of studies in the literature. It has allowed for intense analysis of clinical issues and fostered a culture of safety and quality improvement. Participating surgeons must pledge commitment to extended follow-up periods to maximize its effectiveness.

Characterization of Early Small Bowel Obstructions Following Elective Bariatric Surgery.

Small bowel obstruction (SBO) after bariatric surgery is an uncommon but important complication. We sought to characterize bariatric surgery patients who developed SBO, to compare 30-day complications, and to determine the influence of patient and procedure factors on the development of SBO. All data was extracted from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database using the 2020 operative year. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to determine the influence of patient and operative factors on the development of SBO. Of a total of 142 111 patients, 408 (0.3%) were identified as having developed an SBO. SBO patients were older (45.7 ± 11.5 vs. 43.5 ± 11.9years; p = 0.0002), of reduced BMI (43.6 ± 6.8 vs. 45.1 ± 7.7; p = 0.0001), and more likely to be of female sex (92.2% vs. 81.1%; p < 0.0001). At 30days post-operation, serious complications were increased in SBO patients. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) was the largest independent predicator of the development of SBO (OR 11.91; 95% CI 8.92-15.90; p < 0.0001). With regard to patient factors, COPD (OR 2.60; 95% CI 1.54-4.38; p < 0.0001) and prior DVT (OR 2.37; 95% CI 1.49-3.77; p < 0.0001) were found to be independently predictive of the development of SBO. Additionally having a lower BMI and being of female sex were found to be independently predictive. SBO occurred in approximately 0.3% of MBSAQIP cases. SBO is associated with serious outcome measures and patients of female sex and reduced index BMI, and those undergoing RYGB may be at an increased risk.

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.

Updates in Bariatric Surgery.

Bariatric surgery is currently the most effective long-term treatment for morbid obesity as well as type-2 diabetes mellitus. The field of metabolic and bariatric surgery has seen tremendous growth over the past decade with dramatically reduced risks. This article aims to provide an update on bariatric surgery, highlighting the latest outcomes, improvements, and challenges in the field. Recently, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) released a major update to the indications for bariatric surgery at BMI ≥35kg/m2 regardless of co-morbidities and 30-34.9kg/m2 with obesity-related comorbidities. Sleeve gastrectomy has emerged as the most popular bariatric procedure in the last 10years with its remarkable efficacy and safety profile. The implementation of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) and Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols have significantly improved the quality of care for all bariatric patients. The recent introduction and FDA approval of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists for chronic obesity has garnered significant media coverage and popularity, but no guidelines exist regarding its use in relation to bariatric surgery. This update underscores the need for tailored approaches, ongoing research, and the integration of evidence-based medicine and innovations to enhance patient care.

Adolescent Bariatric Surgery Programs: Progress in Pennsylvania

Objective: In 2019 the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) called for increased access to Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (MBS). To understand adolescent weight loss programs offering MBS in Pennsylvania, a survey was completed. Methods: Adolescent weight loss centers in Pennsylvania offering MBS were identified using the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) on-line directory and Google search. Phone interviews were conducted with the director of each program. Results: Eight programs were identified. Operations were performed in seven adult hospitals. Six had Comprehensive Adolescent Accreditation through the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP). A total of 92 adolescents were operated on in the year from June 2021 to July 2022 which is an 84% increase from the preceding year. Ninety patients received a sleeve gastrectomy. Adult bariatric surgeons were involved in all operations. Six of the programs were led by diplomates of the American Board of Obesity Medicine. Each clinic had a psychologist. No program had all eight of the health care professionals recommended by the authors, but two programs had seven of the eight. In addition, three included a social worker, two an exercise physiologist and two had pediatric subspecialists incorporated into the clinic. Two programs had the operating surgeon caring for patients in the multidisciplinary clinic. Conclusion: This survey of programs across Pennsylvania shows an increase in the number of bariatric operations. More progress is necessary to improve access to this service and improve the quality of programs in Pennsylvania.

Does the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program bariatric risk/benefit calculator hold its weight? An assessment of its accuracy

BackgroundBariatric clinical calculators have already been implemented in clinical practice to provide objective predictions of complications and outcomes. The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Surgical Risk/Benefit Calculator is the most comprehensive risk calculator in bariatric surgery. ObjectivesEvaluate the accuracy of the calculator predictions regarding the 30-day complication risk, 1-year weight loss outcomes, and comorbidity resolution. SettingMBSAQIP-accredited center. MethodsAll adult patients who underwent primary laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) or sleeve gastrectomy at our institution between 2012 and 2019 were included. Baseline characteristics were used to generate the individualized outcome predictions for each patient through the bariatric risk calculator and were compared to actual patient outcomes. Statistical analysis was performed using c-statistics, linear regression models, and McNemmar chi-square test. ResultsOne thousand four hundred fifty-three patients with a median age of 45 (37, 55) and consisting of 80.1% females were included in the study. The c-statistics for the complications and comorbidity resolution ranged from .533 for obstructive sleep apnea remission to .675 for 30-day reoperation. The number of comorbidity resolutions predicted by the calculator was significantly higher than the actual remissions for diabetes, hyperlipidemia, hypertension and obstructive sleep apnea (P < .001). On average, the calculator body mass index (BMI) predictions deviated from the observed BMI measurement by 3.24 kg/m2. The RYGB procedure (Coef −.89; P = .005) and preoperative BMI (Coef −.4; P = .012) were risk factors associated with larger absolute difference between the predicted and observed BMI. ConclusionsThe MBSAQIP Surgical Risk/Benefit Calculator prediction models for 1-year BMI, 30-day reoperation, and reintervention risks were fairly well calibrated with an acceptable level of discrimination except for obstructive sleep apnea remission. The 1-year BMI estimations were less accurate for RYGB patients and cases with very high or low preoperative BMI measurements. Therefore, the bariatric risk calculator constitutes a helpful tool that has a place in preoperative counseling.

Third time's a charm: band to sleeve to bypass.

Adjustable gastric bands (AGB) are frequently converted to sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) due to weight recurrence or band complications. Such conversions carry a higher-risk than primary procedures. Some patients undergo two conversions-from AGB to SG, and subsequently from SG to RYGB. This presents a unique situation with limited literature on indications and complication rates associated with these double conversions. We examined the 2020-2021 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) Participant Use File to evaluate conversions from AGB to SG and then to RYGB. Patient and operative characteristics, along with outcomes, were evaluated. Descriptive statistics were applied. We identified 276 patients who underwent a conversion from AGB to SG and then to RYGB. The primary reason for the second conversion (SG to RYGB) was gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) at 55.1%, followed by inadequate weight loss or weight regain (IWL/WR) at 36.9%. The remaining reasons included dysphagia, nausea, vomiting, or others. Patients converted for IWL/WR demonstrated a higher baseline body mass index and prevalence of sleep apnea compared to other cohorts (both p < 0.001). Meanwhile, patients in the "other reasons" group had the highest rate of open surgical approaches (9.1%) and concurrent lysis of adhesions (p = 0.001 and p = 0.022), with correspondingly higher rates of anastomotic leak, reoperations, serious complications, and mortality. Patients undergoing double conversions (AGB to SG to RYGB) do so primarily for GERD or IWL/WR. Further research is required to better define the optimal primary operation for each patient, aiming to reduce the necessity for multiple conversions.

National usage of bariatric surgery for class I obesity: an analysis of the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program.

National and international consensus statements, as well as the National Institutes of Health (NIH), support the use of bariatric surgery for the treatment of class I obesity. Despite this, most payors within the United States limit reimbursement to the outdated 1991 NIH guidelines or a similar adaptation. This study aimed to determine the safety of bariatric surgery in patients with lower BMI compared with standard patients, as well as determine U.S. utilization of bariatric surgery in class I obesity in 2015-2019. A retrospective analysis was performed of the 2015-2019 Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass patients were divided into body mass index cohorts: class I obesity (<35 kg/m2) and severe obesity (≥35 kg/m2). Differences in preoperative patient selection and postoperative outcomes were established, and frequency trends were delineated. Analysis included 760,192 surgeries with 8129 (1%) for patients with class I obesity. The patients with class I obesity were older, more commonly female, and with lower American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, but with higher rates of type 2 diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and gastroesophageal reflux disease (P < .05). Variation was found for operative time, length of stay, 30-day readmission, and composite morbidity. Minimal annual variation was found for bariatric surgeries performed for patients with class I obesity. The short-term safety of bariatric surgery in patients with class I obesity was corroborated by this study. Despite consensus statements and robust support, rates of bariatric surgery in patients with class I obesity have failed to increase and remain limited to 1%. This demonstrates the impact of the outdated 1991 NIH guidelines regarding access to care for these potentially life-saving surgeries.