Resolution Of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Research Articles

Outcomes of primary versus conversional Roux-En-Y gastric bypass after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a retrospective propensity score–matched cohort study

BackgroundConversional surgery is common after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) because of suboptimal weight loss (SWL) or poor responders and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the most common conversional procedure after LSG.MethodsA retrospective cohort study analyzed patients who underwent primary RYGB (PRYGB) or conversional RYGB (CRYGB) at three specialized bariatric centers between 2008 and 2019 and tested for weight loss, resolution of GERD, food tolerance (FT), early and late complications, and the resolution of associated medical problems. This was analyzed by propensity score matching (PSM).ResultsIn total, 558 (PRYGB) and 155 (CRYGB) completed at least 2 years of follow-up. After PSM, both cohorts significantly decreased BMI from baseline (p < 0.001). The CRYGB group had an initially more significant mean BMI decrease of 6.095 kg/m2 at 6 months of follow-up (p < 0.001), while the PRYGB group had a more significant mean BMI decrease of 5.890 kg/m2 and 8.626 kg/m2 at 1 and 2 years, respectively (p < 0.001). Food tolerance (FT) improved significantly in the CRYGB group (p < 0.001), while CRYGB had better FT than PRYGB at 2 years (p < 0.001). A GERD resolution rate of 92.6% was recorded in the CRYGB (p < 0.001). Both cohorts had comparable rates of early complications (p = 0.584), late complications (p = 0.495), and reoperations (p = 0.398). Associated medical problems at 2 years significantly improved in both cohorts (p < 0.001).ConclusionsCRYGB is a safe and efficient option in non- or poor responders after LSG, with significant weight loss and improvement in GERD. Moreover, PRYGB and CRYGB had comparable complications, reoperations, and associated medical problem resolution rates.

Laparoscopic Toupet-Sleeve gastrectomy in morbid obese patients with preoperative gastro-esophageal reflux: a 4-year follow-up cohort study

Aim To assess the 4-year outcomes after Toupet-Sleeve (TS) gastrectomy in morbid obese patients with concomitant preoperative gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD). Material and methods The study group consisted of 19 consecutive patients operated on between August 2017 and February 2019. There were 5 men and 14 women with a mean body mass index (BMI) of 43 ± 5 kg/m2 and a mean age of 42 ± 15 years. A retrospective analysis of database and telephone interview of patients who defaulted clinic follow-up was conducted. The main study end-points were weight loss and success of surgery, defined as no need for conversion and %EWL > 50%. Resolution of GERD was a secondary end-point. Results No patient was lost for follow-up. Nadir weight loss was reached after a follow-up of one year: mean BMI was 32 ± 5 kg/m2, %EWL 61 ± 21% and %TWL 24 ± 7%. Thereafter, we observed a progressive weight regain over time. With a mean follow-up of 51 ± 6 months, mean BMI was 36 ± 8 kg/m2, %EWL 43 ± 35% and %TWL 16 ± 12%. Two patients were converted to another bariatric procedure because of dysphagia and fundus dilatation or because of insufficient weight loss. The overall surgical success rate was 32% (6/19). Resolution of GERD without any PPI treatment was noted in 88% (15/17) of the non-converted patients. Conclusion In our experience, with a 4-year follow-up, TS is associated with a significant risk of conversion, a moderate weight loss and a poor surgical success rate.

Effect of SASI procedure (Single Anastomosis Sleeve Ileal) on the symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease in bariatric patients - a review of the literature.

The problem of gastroesophageal reflux disease among bariatric patients is constantly growing. While bariatric surgery is the most effective method of treating obesity and related diseases, not all surgical procedures lead to improvement or resolution of gastroesophageal reflux disease. The search for the &quot;ideal&quot; surgical procedure for this group of patients is ongoing. The relatively recently introduced SASI procedure seems to have a beneficial effect on GERD symptoms and may be an alternative anti-reflux procedure in obese patients. The presented paper is a review of the latest literature on the impact of SASI procedure on the symptoms of gastroesophageal reflux disease.

Lansoprazole plus levosulpiride versus esomeprazole in participants with gastroesophageal reflux disease and erosive esophagitis: a double blinded randomized control trial.

The aim was to compare the efficacy and safety of lansoprazole plus levosulpiride over esomeprazole. This randomized control trial recruited 1000 participants having symptomatic gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and erosive esophagitis and they were blindly randomized into two groups in a 1:1 ratio with appropriate concealment. Group 1 was given lansoprazole plus levosulpiride combination twice daily whereas group 2 was prescribed only esomeprazole twice daily. The primary efficacy endpoint was the healing of erosive esophagitis and GERD at week 49. Secondary assessments included improvement in quality of life. Participants' quality of life was assessed before starting the treatment and post-treatment using a short-form health survey questionnaire (SF-36). The lansoprazole plus levosulpiride group had significantly lower rates of positive postintervention GERD and erosive esophagitis status, and higher rates of sustained resolution of heartburn compared to the esomeprazole alone group. However, the lansoprazole plus levosulpiride group also had a higher risk of nausea. Lansoprazole plus levosulpiride is a more effective and safe treatment for GERD than esomeprazole alone. Participants in the lansoprazole plus levosulpiride group showed a significantly higher rate of sustained resolution of GERD, lower rates of postintervention GERD and erosive esophagitis status, and a higher incidence of nausea compared to the esomeprazole alone group. Although quality of life worsened in both groups, adverse effects did not significantly differ. These findings strongly support the use of lansoprazole plus levosulpiride as a preferred treatment option for GERD and erosive esophagitis, which could have significant clinical implications for managing this common condition.

A prospective single-center study evaluating the efficacy of the stomach, intestinal, and pylorus-sparing procedure.

The stomach, intestinal, and pylorus-sparing (SIPS) procedure is a single-anastomosis duodeno-intestinal bypass used in obesity management. Weight and metabolic outcomes in patients with severe obesity who underwent the SIPS procedure were evaluated in a community hospital-based study. Community hospital. This single-site prospective study of patients who underwent the SIPS procedure evaluated outcomes at 12 and 24 months. Mean changes in total weight loss and body mass index (BMI) and resolution of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), hypertension, type 2 diabetes (T2D), and hyperlipidemia were evaluated. At baseline, 185 patients were enrolled; mean weight and BMI were 144.0 kg and 52.2 kg/m2, respectively. Data for 88 (47.6%) and 29 (15.7%) patients who completed follow-up at 12 and 24 months, respectively, were available. At 12 months, mean total weight loss was 35.6% (weight reduction of 51.3 kg) and BMI reduction of 17.8 points were achieved and were maintained for the 29 patients who completed 24-month follow-up. No leaks or infections occurred. Complications occurred in 8 patients (.4%) and were not serious. Resolution of GERD, OSA, hypertension, T2D, and hyperlipidemia achieved in 87.1%, 59.2%, 32.7%, 93.1%, and 87.6% of patients, respectively, at 12 months was maintained at 24 months. Nutritional deficiency was absent. Patients who underwent the SIPS procedure had meaningful reductions in weight and BMI, and many had resolution of metabolic co-morbidities; procedural complication rates were low. Our results support that the SIPS procedure is a safe and effective primary treatment for clinically severe obesity in a community-based hospital setting.

The Effect of Revisional One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass After Sleeve Gastrectomy on Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease, Compared with Revisional Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: Symptoms and Quality of Life Outcomes.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is common after sleeve gastrectomy (SG). We aimed to evaluate the effect of revisional one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) on GERD, compared with revisional Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) METHODS: A retrospective single-center study of a prospectively maintained patient registry (2018-2022). All patients with GERD undergoing OAGB and RYGB after SG were retrieved and included in the study. Seventy-eight SG patients had conversion to OAGB (n=31) and RYGB (n=47). Baseline characteristics were similar except age (43.8±11.5 vs. 50.3±13.4 years; p=0.03), body mass index (39.9±8.8 vs. 30.6±6 kg/m2; p<0.001), time interval (8±2.7 vs. 6.4±3.4 years; p=0.01), and sleep apnea (29% vs 8.5%; p=0.01), respectively. There was no significant difference between groups in number of patients consuming proton pump inhibitors (70.1% vs. 72.3%; p=0.66), GERD-health-related quality of life (HRQL) score (9.6±7.2 vs. 13.1±8; p=0.06), and pathological endoscopic findings (48.4% vs. 46.8%; p=0.89). Major complication rates were 0% vs. 8.5% (p=0.09). At 32.4 months follow-up, total weight loss was 22%±12.9 and 4.4%±14.6 (p<0.001), GERD resolution 77.4% and 91.9% (p=0.03), HRQL scoring improved to 1.7±4.5 and 1.7±2.7; p=0.94 for OAGB and RYGB, respectively. SG conversion to RYGB provides better chances for definitive treatment of GERD. OAGB results in good symptom resolution and improved quality of life and may be considered for post-SG GERD treatment. The most appropriate solution should be individualized to each patient.

Efficacy of Sleeve Gastrectomy with Concomitant Hiatal Hernia Repair versus Sleeve-Fundoplication on Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Resolution: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

(1) Background: There is still disagreement over how sleeve gastrectomy (SG) affects gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The debate regarding the best option for patients undergoing bariatric surgery who are also affected by GERD and/or hiatal hernia continues to divide the community of bariatric surgeons. While concomitant hiatal hernia repair (SG + HHR) has been proposed as a means of reducing the risk of GERD following SG with varying degrees of success, the addition of a fundoplication (SG + FP) has been suggested in recent years as a way to improve the lower esophageal sphincter's competency. The aim of this study is to systematically review and meta-analyze the efficacy of SG + HHR versus SG + FP on GERD remission in patients with obesity. (2) Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted, and studies analyzing the effects of SG + HHR versus SG + FP on postoperative GERD were included. The methodological quality of included trials was evaluated. The primary outcome was postoperative GERD rate, erosive esophagitis, and 12-month weight loss. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications and mortality. The PRISMA guidelines were used to carry out the present systematic review (PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42023405600). (3) Results: Fifteen articles with a total of 1164 patients were included in the meta-analysis; 554 patients underwent SG + HHR while 610 underwent SG + FP. In the SG + HHR group, 58.5 ± 28.9% of subjects presented clinical GERD symptoms compared to 20.4 ± 17.5% postoperatively (p < 0.001). In the SG + FP group, 64.8 ± 39.4% were affected by GERD preoperatively compared to only 5 ± 8.1% postoperatively (p < 0.001). SG + FP patients had a significantly greater GERD remission compared to SG + HHR (p < 0.001). Weight loss was similar between groups (p = 0.125). The rate of leaks was 0.18% and 0.33% in the SG + HHR and SG + FP, respectively (p = 0.657), while perforations were significantly higher after SG + FP compared to the SG + HHR group (3.1% versus 0%, p = 0.002). The mortality rate was significantly greater in the SG + FP group (0.5% versus 0%, p = 0.002). (4) Conclusions: This study revealed that both SG with concomitant HHR and sleeve-fundoplication are effective in terms of reflux resolution and weight outcomes, with superiority of SG + FP in terms of GERD control, despite a greater overall complication rate. Both strategies can therefore be suggested as a suitable alternative variant to a conventional SG in subjects with obesity and concomitant hiatal hernia and/or GERD. Studies with extended follow-up and direct comparisons of these surgical approaches to conventional SG are warranted.

S482 Evaluating Multiple Dosing Regimens for Proton Pump Inhibitors (PPI) for the Treatment of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Although once-daily dosing of PPI therapy for GERD is standard of practice, clinicians often use twice daily dosing. It remains unclear if this common practice meaningfully improves GERD symptoms of heartburn and/or regurgitation. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing for resolution of GERD, heartburn, and esophageal healing with regards to various PPI dosages and frequencies. Methods: A search of EMBASE and PubMed in October 2021 yielded 1381 unique records. Abstract/title screening and full-text review were completed by two independent reviewers, where 51 studies were included in the systematic review and 37 RCTs were included in the quantitative analysis; all included studies compared different doses within PPI. Data abstraction was performed in duplicate using Systematic Review Data Repository+, with discrepancies resolved by a third reviewer. The outcomes were resolution of GERD, heartburn, and esophageal healing within 12 weeks. Risk of bias was independently assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (v2). Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted in Stata. Studies were excluded from quantitative review if they did not report outcomes of interest, only assessed outcomes after 12 weeks, or compared out-of-practice dosages (quarter and quadruple standard dose). Results: A total of 51 RCTs conducted across 27 countries (n=20,226 patients, 55% male, mean age 50 years) were included in the systematic review. Among 37 RCTs included in the quantitative analysis, most compared double standard dose daily vs. standard dose daily or standard dose daily vs. half standard dose daily; few studies compared daily vs. twice daily dosing. Table shows odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for outcomes among the various dosing comparisons. For example, when compared to standard dose daily, double standard dose daily led to improved outcomes for GERD (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.01-1.75) and esophageal healing (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.27-2.07), but not for heartburn (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.94-1.24) (Figure). Conclusion: Our meta-analysis revealed, in general, that increasing PPI daily dosages was associated with improved outcomes. However, few studies compared daily vs. twice daily PPI. As twice daily PPI usage is common in clinical practice, further studies are needed to determine whether twice daily dosing actually improves clinical outcomes.Figure 1.: Forest plot comparison for Standard dose, QD vs. Double Standard dose, QD in resolution of GERD symptoms (1A) and Heartburn (1B). Table 1 - Dosing Comparisons across Randomized Controlled Trials (≤12 weeks) Dosing Comparison Total Number of RCTs Total Number of Patients Outcome OR (95% Cl) Standard dose BID vs.Standard dose QD (ref) 1 202 Esophageal healing 2.34 (1.27, 4.31) * 1 202 Heartburn 3.03 (1.62, 5.68) * Double standard dose QD vs.Standard dose QD (ref) 7 2408 Esophageal healing 1.62 (1.27, 2.07) * 6 1312 GERD 1.35 (1.05, 1.75) * 5 3433 Heartburn 1.08 (0.94, 1.24) Double standard dose, BID vs.Standard dose QD (ref) 1 197 Heartburn 0.77 (0.44, 1.35) Standard dose QD vs.Half standard dose QD (ref) 9 1762 Esophageal healing 1.79 (1.44, 2.22) * 8 1718 GERD 1.42 (1.15, 1.76) * 14 3327 Heartburn 1.41 (1.17, 1.69) * Standard dose QD vs.Half standard dose BID (ref) 2 411 Esophageal healing 1.94 (1.15, 3.26) * 1 205 Heartburn 2.14 (1.19, 3.85) * Double standard dose BID vs.Double standard dose QD (ref) 1 190 Heartburn 0.90 (0.51, 1.60) 1 200 GERD 2.63 (1.30, 5.35) * Standard dose BID vs.Half standard dose BID (ref) 1 202 Esophageal Healing 0.92 (0.47, 1.79) 1 203 Heartburn 1.42 (0.74, 2.74) Half Standard dose, BID vs.Half standard dose QD (ref) 1 324 Esophageal Healing 7.43 (3.81, 14.49) * *p< 0.05.QD=daily, BID=twice daily

Role of Non-pharmacological Interventions and Weight Loss in the Management of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in Obese Individuals: A Systematic Review.

With the increasing prevalence of obesity, the worldwide risk of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has also increased. Abdominal obesity increases intragastric pressure, disturbing the integrity of the gastroesophageal junction, thus facilitating reflux. Other than obesity, some lifestyle factors also cause GERD, including smoking, consumption of alcohol and caffeine, late-night meals, and high fat intake. This review study aimed to assess the impact of weight loss and lifestyle modifications on GERD. In this systematic review, the databases used were PubMed, PubMed Central (PMC), Science Direct, and Google Scholar. Boolean system and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) strategy were used to form suitable keywords. Patients from the pediatric and geriatric populations were excluded from the study and quality assessment was done using different assessment tools. A positive association between obesity and GERD was found. It was also found that the long-term use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) causes complications, so lifestyle interventions should be used more than PPIs for treating GERD, especially in obese patients. We concluded that weight loss could lead to the resolution of gastroesophageal reflux disease, and therefore, conservative measures, including dietary modifications such as reducing the consumption of alcohol, caffeine, and chocolate, behavioral changes such as smoking cessation and elevation of the head of the bed, and weight loss, should be used as first-line management for GERD. Although awareness has increased regarding the adverse effects of proton pump inhibitors, future studies are required to assess these negative effects.

The Effect of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy With Concomitant Hiatal Hernia Repair on Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease.

The aim of this study is to reveal incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and to determine the effect of LSG with hiatal hernia repair on GERD. A total of 440 patients, 395 of them underwent primary LSG (group A) and 45 of them underwent LSG with concomitant hiatal hernia repair (group B) between March 2018 and September 2020 were included in the study. Presence of hiatal hernia was evaluated with endoscopy and confirmed intraoperatively. Patients were evaluated for GERD symptoms in the pre and postoperative period. Two groups' data were compared. Mean age of the 440 patients was 38.4±11 years (56% female) and mean body mass index was 44.2±7 kg/m 2 . Symptomatic GERD was detected in 103 (23.4%) and hiatal hernia was detected in 45 (10.2%) patients. İn the preoperative assessment there was no difference with regard to demographics and symptomatic GERD between the 2 groups. Mean duration of follow-up was 17±5.7 (12 to 28) months in the overall study population. Mean body mass index decreased to 28.3±4.9 kg/m 2 at 12 months after LSG. Excess weight loss ratio was found to be 81±20.4%. The rate of symptomatic GERD after LSG in group A was found to be 20% (n=79/395). Of these patients, 46 (11.6%) had de novo GERD and 33 (38%) had persistent GERD. GERD resolved completely in 54 (62%) patients. In the group B, the rate of symptomatic GERD was detected as 33% (n=15/45) ( P =0.04). The rate of de novo GERD (20%) was also higher in group B ( P =0.03). The rate of persistent GERD (37%) and GERD resolution (62%) were similar in both groups. İn our study, symptomatic and de novo GERD rates were detected to be higher in the LSG+HH group than LSG alone.

Total Esophagogastric and Cologastric Dissociation in Neurologically Normal Children: Systematic Review.

Total esophagogastric dissociation (TEGD) was first described by Bianchi as a definitive procedure for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) in neurologically impaired children. In the last 20 years, different centers extended the indication to neurologically normal (NN) patients with GERD associated with congenital or acquired esophageal anomalies. The aim of this paper is to analyze the role of TEGD in this cluster of patients. A PubMed and Google Scholar search was conducted. All cases of NN children who underwent TEGD for GERD were collected. Patient characteristics and outcomes were analyzed. Complications were classified according to Clavien–Dindo classification. Forty-eight children were identified. In 56.25%, TEGD was the first anti-reflux procedure, while in 43.75% it was performed after failed fundoplications. Mean follow-up was 5.5 years. Mortality related to surgery was 2.08%. All of the survivors improved their condition, with resolution of GERD and weight gain. In addition, 50% of children weaned off enteral nutrition, with 14.6% having their gastrostomy removed, while 41.67% maintained partial enteral supplementation. Respiratory symptoms almost disappeared in 54.17% of patients. This review suggests that TEGD can also be considered for NN children where conventional methods seem insufficient to control reflux and preserve pulmonary function. Nevertheless, long-term follow-up is still required.

Massive Paraesophageal Hernia Repair in the Obese Patient Population: Antireflux Gastric Bypass Versus Fundoplication.

Introduction: Obesity is a risk factor for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and hiatal hernia (HH). Fundoplication is the standard operation for GERD with HH. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the procedure of choice for obese patients with either GERD or a large HH, but neither are indications for RYGB. To delineate bypass surgery as a treatment option for obese patients with HH and GERD, we propose new terminology, antireflux gastric bypass (ARGB). ARGB differs from RYGB by utilizing varying efferent limb lengths for GERD treatment. We hypothesized that ARGB would have higher GERD resolution, lower HH recurrence, and improves weight loss when compared with fundoplication. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was performed, evaluating patients undergoing repair of large HH (>5 cm) with obesity from January 2013 to February 2021. The primary outcome was GERD resolution, secondary outcomes include HH recurrence and weight loss. Multivariate logistic regression adjusted for age, body mass index (BMI), and hernia size by nonlinear mixed modeling. Results: Forty patients underwent fundoplication, and 16 patients underwent ARGB. Fundoplication patients had a larger mean hernia size (8.7 × 6.3 cm versus 6.6 × 6.4 cm), whereas ARGB patients had a higher BMI (39.2 versus 34.2 kg/m2). Recurrence showed nonstatistically significant lower incidence with ARGB and no significant difference in GERD resolution. Weight (P < .0001) and excess body weight (P < .0001) loss were superior with ARGB. Conclusions: Obese patients with large HHs and GERD treated with ARGB had similar GERD resolution, lower HH recurrence, and improved weight loss when compared with fundoplication. ARGB is an acceptable treatment option for obese patients with a massive paraesophageal hernia in the setting of GERD.

Safety and Efficacy of One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass on Patients with Severe Obesity Aged 65 Years and Above.

With the global increase in life expectancy and the subsequent impaired quality of life in older obese adults, modalities such as bariatric surgery become crucial to help lose excess weight. This study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) in patients 65years old and above. This retrospective cohort study was conducted on 61 patients with severe obesity aged ≥ 65years through Iran National Obesity Surgery Database. The patients had undergone OAGB and were followed up for 12 to 60months. The required data was extracted through national database. Mean age and BMI of the patients were 67.62 ± 2.03years and 46.42 ± 5.46kg/m2, respectively. Regarding gender, 90.1% of the participants were female. Mean operative time and length of hospital stay were 41.37 ± 13.91min and 1.16 ± 0.61days, respectively. Five patients (8.19%) required ICU admission. The changes in %TWL after 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48, and 60month follow-up was 18.62%, 25.51%, 32.84%, 35.86%, 38.49%, 31.41%, and 29.52%, respectively. The resolution of gastroesophageal reflux disease, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, obstructive sleep apnea, and hypertension after 24month was about 100%, 65%, 73.33%, 100%, and 76%, respectively. The postoperative early and late complications were 6.53% and 11.46%, respectively. We did not find significant difference in above results between two age groups of 65-70 and > 70years. OAGB can be a good choice in older obese adults because of its shorter operative time, higher potency, and low complication rate.

Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Versus Sleeve Gastrectomy in Young Adults: a Dutch Registry Study.

The most commonly performed bariatric procedures worldwide are Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG), yet outcomes following these procedures in young adults are limited. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare weight loss outcomes between RYGB and SG in young adults. This is a nationwide retrospective cohort study of young adults, aged 18-25years, who underwent RYGB or SG between 2015 and 2019, with data from the Dutch Audit Treatment of Obesity (DATO). The primary outcome was weight loss expressed as percentage total weight loss (%TWL) in a period of 3years after surgery. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of complications (< 30days) and progression of obesity-related comorbidities. In total, 2313 patients were included, 1246 in the RYGB group and 1067 in the SG group. Percentage TWL was significantly higher in the RYGB group compared to the SG group at 1, 2, and 3years after surgery (respectively 2.4%, 2.9%, and 3.3% higher, p < 0.001). RYGB was associated with an on-average 2.75 higher %TWL compared to SG in females (p < 0.001), although this was not seen in males (β = 0.63, p = 0.514). No differences were found in the incidence of complications, nor the progression of obesity-related comorbidities except for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). There was more improvement or resolution of GERD in the RYGB group (95.2% vs. 56.3%, p < 0.001). Similar numbers of RYGB and SG were performed in young adults, whereas RYGB was associated with greater weight loss in the short- and midterm, particularly in females.

Gerd symptoms after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: an emerging scenario.

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the second most performed bariatric procedure and it is considered the procedure of choice to treat patients with severe obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, some authors described the new onset or the recurrence of GERD symptoms after RYGB, and data at follow-up were scanty. In our center, we evaluated trend in weight, GERD symptoms and obesity-related comorbidities in 45 patients undergone RYGB at least 60 months before (mean follow-up 99.9 ± 22.9 months). At RYGB 51.1% patients referred preoperative GERD symptoms; among them, 47.8% showed an intraoperative hiatal hernia (HH). At medium-term follow-up mean BMI was significantly lower compared to baseline (p < 0.001). Among patients with preoperative GERD, 69.6% had GERD resolution and 30.4% reported postoperative GERD symptoms. Furthermore, 18.2% without preoperative GERD referred postoperative GERD new onset. We confirmed that RYGB as primary intervention provides satisfactory weight loss and a high percentage of GERD symptoms resolution. However, about 24.4% of patients complained of GERD symptoms at medium-term follow-up. The pathophysiology of GERD after RYGB, de novo or persistence, is not completely understood and several hypotheses could be drawn; however, further studies focusing the pathophysiology of these symptoms are needed.

The Outcomes of Laparoscopic Biliopancreatic Diversion with Duodenal Switch on Gastro-esophageal Reflux Disease: the Mayo Clinic Experience.

The outcomes of laparoscopic biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD-DS) on gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) are not well elucidated. This retrospective review included patients undergoing laparoscopic primary BPD-DS at Mayo Clinic from 2009 to 2019. GERD parameters analyzed included subjective symptom report/anti-reflux medication intake and/or endoscopic findings. GERD-HRQL questionnaire was also utilized post-operatively. Three subgroups were employed to stratify patients depending on GERD outcomes: the "No-effect" subgroup included patients where surgery did not affect either positively (GERD resolution) or negatively (de novo GERD) GERD outcome, "De novo GERD" subgroup, and "GERD-resolved" subgroup. Multinomial logistic modeling was used to examine associations with the 3-level GERD subgroup (p<0.05). Seventy-six patients were included in the analysis. Thirty-four (44.7%) patients were found to be in the "GERD-resolved" subgroup, 28 (36.8%) patients in the "No-effect" subgroup, and 14 (18.4%) patients in the "De novo GERD" subgroup. Multinomial logistic modeling showed that patients with pre-surgery diabetes mellitus (DM) had lesser odds (OR= 0.248, (95% CI: 0.085-0.724, p=0.0108)) of GERD resolution than patients without pre-surgery DM. An association was also established between %TWL at 6 and 12 months following the procedure and GERD outcome (p=0.017 and 0.008, respectively). Finally, the mean (SD) post-operative GERD-HRQL score was 8.7 (8.1) points, and 69 (91%) patients were currently satisfied with their post-operative condition. Laparoscopic BPD-DS appears to have a satisfactory GERD outcome in most patients undergoing the operation. There appears to be an association between pre-operative DM, %TWL at 6 and 12 months, and GERD prognosis in this population.

Effect of Concomitant Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy and Hiatal Hernia Repair on Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease in Patients with Obesity: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Hiatal hernia repair (HHR) during sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is recommended when hiatal hernia (HH) is found intraoperatively. However, its effect on gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) remains controversial. To evaluate the effect of concomitant SG and HHR on GERD in patients with obesity. Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for all studies reporting the efficacy of SG+HHR for patients with obesity and GERD up to March 2021. A total of 18 studies totaling 937 patients met the inclusion criteria. The results of meta-analysis showed that after SG+HHR, there was a significant reduction in GERD symptoms (OR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.41; P < 0.00001), improvement in esophagitis (OR: 0.12, 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.26, P < 0.001), and decrease in GERD-HRQL (MD: 19.13, 95% CI: -3.74 to 34.51; P=0.01). The incidence of GERD remission after SG+HHR was 68.0% (95% CI: 55.0-80.9%), de novo GERD was 12% (95% CI: 8-16%), and HH recurrence was 11% (95% CI: 4 to 19%). SG+HHR was superior to SG alone in GERD remission (OR: 2.97, 95% CI: 1.78 to 4.95, P < 0.0001). However, there was no significant difference in de novo GERD after SG+HHR compared with SG alone. SG+HHR can positively affect weight loss, GERD resolution, esophagitis reduction, and GERD-HRQL improvement. SG+HHR seems to have a promising future in patients with obesity and GERD. However, further studies based on objective assessment are warranted to evaluate these results better.

Laparoscopic Sleeve-Fundoplication for Morbidly Obese Patients with Gastroesophageal Reflux: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IntroductionLaparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has rapidly become popular with excellent results. However, LSG may exacerbate or increase the risk of “de novo” gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Adding a fundoplication has been proposed to increase the lower esophageal sphincter competency. The aim of this study was to examine the current evidence and outcomes of sleeve-fundoplication (Sleeve-F).Materials and MethodsSystematic review and meta-analysis. Web of Science, PubMed, and Embase data sets were consulted.ResultsSix studies (485 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The age of the patient population ranged from 17 to 72 years old and 82% were females. All patients underwent sleeve-fundoplication. Rossetti, Collis-Nissen, and Nissen were the most commonly performed fundoplications. The estimated pooled prevalence of postoperative leak, gastric perforation, and overall complications were 1.0% (95% CI = 0.0–2.0%), 2.9% (95% CI = 0.0–8.3%), and 9.8% (95% CI = 6.7–13.4%), respectively. The pooled reoperation rate was 4.1% (95% CI = 1.3–10%). There was no mortality. At 12-month follow-up, the estimated pooled BMI and %EWL were 29.9 kg/m2 (95% CI = 28.5–31.2) and 66.2% (95% CI = 59.3–71.1), respectively, while esophagitis, PPI consumption, and GERD rates were 8.0% (95% CI 3–21%), 7.8% (95% CI 5–13%), and 11% (95% CI 4–26%).ConclusionsThis systematic review and meta-analysis shows that current evidence for Sleeve-F is limited with high postoperative gastric perforation and overall complication rates. Weight loss and GERD resolution seem promising in the short term; however, further studies are warranted to explore long-term effects with instrumental investigations. Sleeve-F should be considered cautiously while future well-structured randomized trials are warranted.

Impact of Feeding Strategies With Acid Suppression on Esophageal Reflexes in Human Neonates With Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: A Single-Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION:Aims were to test hypothesis that esophageal provocation-induced reflexes are superior with acid suppression plus feeding modifications vs acid suppression alone among infants treated for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD).METHODS:Infants (N = 49, 41.3 ± 2.6 of postmenstrual age) with acid reflux index >3% underwent longitudinal motility testing (weeks 0 and 5) with graded midesophageal provocation to test randomly allocated therapies (4 weeks' proton pump inhibitor [PPI] ± feeding modifications) on sensory-motor aerodigestive reflexes. Feeding modification included restricted fluid volume <140 mL/kg per day, fed over 30 minutes in right lateral position and supine postprandial position. Primary motility outcome was frequency-occurrence of peristaltic reflex. Secondary outcomes included upper esophageal sphincter contractile reflex, lower esophageal sphincter (LES) relaxation reflex, respiratory change, and symptom characteristics.RESULTS:Treatment groups did not differ for primary outcome (odds ratio = 0.8, 95% confidence interval 0.4–1.6, P = 0.99) or secondary outcomes (all P > 0.05). For both treatment groups at follow-up, distal esophageal contraction and LES tone decreased, and LES relaxation reflex occurrence is less frequent (all P < 0.05). In a subgroup analysis, comparing infants with PPI washout (N = 40) vs with continued (N = 9) PPI therapy, no differences were noted for aerodigestive reflex response frequency-occurrence (all P > 0.05).DISCUSSION:In infants with GERD, feeding modification with acid suppression is not superior to acid suppression alone in modifying aerodigestive reflexes (frequency, sensation, or magnitude). Contiguous areas targeted by GER, i.e., LES and distal esophageal functions, worsened at follow-up for both groups despite PPI therapy. Maturation is likely the key factor for GERD resolution in infants, justifying the use of placebo in clinical trials for objectively determined GERD.

Standardized reporting of co-morbidity outcome after bariatric surgery: low compliance with the ASMBS outcome reporting standards despite ease of use.

Despite the publication of the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) Outcome Reporting Standards in 2015, there is still a great variety in definitions used for reporting remission of co-morbidities after bariatric surgery. This hampers meaningful comparison of results. To assess compliance with the ASMBS standards in current literature, and to evaluate use of the standards by applying them in a report on the outcomes of 5 co-morbidities after bariatric surgery. Two clinics of the Dutch Obesity Clinic, location Den Haag and Velp, and three affiliated hospitals: Haaglanden Medical Center in Den Haag, Groene Hart Hospital in Gouda, and Vitalys Clinic in Velp. A systematic search in PubMed was conducted to identify studies using the ASMBS standards. Besides, the standards were applied to a cohort of patients who underwent a primary bariatric procedure between November 2016 and June 2017. Outcomes of co-morbidities were determined at 6 and 12 months after surgery. Ten previous studies applying ASMBS definitions were identified by the search, including 6 studies using portions of the definitions, and 4 using complete definitions for 3 co-morbidities or in a small population. In this study, the standards were applied to 1064 patients, of whom 796 patients (75%) underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and 268 patients (25%) underwent sleeve gastrectomy. At 12 months, complete remission of diabetes (glycosylated hemoglobin <6%, off medication) was reached in 63%, partial remission (glycosylated hemoglobin 6%-6.4%, off medication) in 7%, and improvement in 28% of patients (n = 232/248, 94%). Complete remission of hypertension (normotensive, off medication) was noted in 8%, partial remission (prehypertensive, off medication) in 23% and improvement in 63% (n = 397/412, 96%). Remission rate for dyslipidemia (normal nonhigh-density lipoprotein, off medication) was 57% and improvement rate was 19% (n = 129/133, 97%). Resolution of gastroesophageal reflux disease (no symptoms, off medication) was observed in 54% (n = 265/265). Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome improved in 90% (n = 157/169, 93%). Compliance with the ASMBS standards is low, despite ease of use. Standardized definitions provided by the ASMBS guideline could be used in future research to enable comparison of outcomes of different studies and surgical procedures.