Search

The prevalence of obesity continues to escalate in the USA; however, there is no consensus regarding the optimal therapy for obesity. For the vast majority of severely obese patients, conventional medical therapies (i.e., diet, exercise, behavioral counseling) often fail over the long term. Existing pharmacotherapy adjunctive to behavioral therapy has limited effectiveness and an imperfect safety record. In contrast, bariatric surgery has a high degree of weight loss efficacy, yet only a small fraction of the qualifying obese population undergoes these procedures because of the associated perioperative risks and potential late complications. In addition, the role of bariatric surgery is unclear in certain patient populations, such as patients with lower body mass index (BMI, 30-35 kg/m), the high-risk super-super obese patients (BMI > 60), the morbidly obese adolescent, and obese patients requiring weight reduction in preparation for other procedures, such as orthopedic, transplant, or vascular surgeries. In these circumstances, there is a need for an effective but less invasive treatment to bridge the gap between medical and surgical therapy. This review examines current treatment outcomes, identifies prominent areas of unmet clinical needs, and provides an overview of two minimally invasive 'temporary procedures for weight loss' that may eventually address some of the unmet needs in obesity management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The increasing prevalence of morbid obesity together with the development of laparoscopic approaches has led to a steep rise in the number of bariatric operations. These guidelines intend to define the comparative effectivness and surrounding circumstances of the various types of obesity surgery. Method: A consensus panel representing the fields of general endoscopic surgery, nutrition and epidemiology convened to agree on specific questions in obesity surgery. Databases were systematically searched for clinical trial results in order to produce evidence-based recommendations. Following two days of discussion by the experts and a plenary discussion, the final statements were issued. RecommendationsAfter the patient's multidisciplinary evaluation, obesity surgery should be considered in adults with a documented BMI greater than or equal to 35 and related comorbidity, or a BMI of at least 40. In addition to standard laboratory testing, chest radiography, electrocardiography, spirometry, and abdominal ultrasonography, the preoperative evaluation of obesity surgery patients also includes upper gastrointestinal endoscopy or radiologic evaluation with a barium meal. Psychiatric consultation and polysomnography can safely be restricted to patients with clinical symptoms on preoperative screening. Adjustable gastric banding (GB), vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG). Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and biliopancreatic diversion (BPD) are all effective in the treatment of morbid obesity, but differ in degree of weight loss and range of complications. The choice of procedure therefore should be tailored to the individual situation. There is evidence that a laparoscopic approach is advantageous for LAGB. VBG, and GB (and probably also for BPD). Antibiotic and antithromboembolic prophylaxis should be used routinely. Patients should be seen 3 to 8 times during the first postoperative year, 1 to 4 times during the second year and once or twice a year thereafter. Outcome assessment after surgery should include weight loss and maintainance, nutritional status, comorbidities and quality-of-life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Lap-Band System® is the most common bariatric operation world-wide. Current selection criteria do not include patients with BMI ≤ 35. We report the Italian multicentre experience with BMI ≤ 35 kg/m2 over the last 5 years. Patients and Methods: Data were obtained from 27 centres involved in the Italian Collaborative Study Group for Lap-Band System®. Detailed information was collected on a specially created electronic data sheet (MS Access 2000) on patients operated in Italy since January 1996. Items regarding patients with BMI ≤ 35 were selected. Data were expressed as mean ± SD except as otherwise indicated. Results: 225 (6.8%) out of 3,319 Lap-Band® patients were recruited from the data-base. 15 patients, previously submitted to another bariatric procedure (BIB =14; VBG= 1) were excluded. 210 patients were eligible for study (34M/176F, mean age 38.19±11.8, range 17-66 years, mean BMI 33.9±1.1, range 25.1-35 kg/m2, mean excess weight 29.5±7.1, range 8-41). 199 comorbidities were diagnosed preoperatively in 55/210 patients (26.2%). 1 patient (0.4%) (35 F) died 20 months postoperatively from sepsis following perforation of dilated gastric pouch. There were no conversions to laparotomy. Postoperative complications presented in 17/210 patients (8.1%). Follow-up was obtained at 6, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months. At these time periods, mean BMI was 31.1±2.15, 29.7±2.19, 28.7±3.8, 26.7±4.3, 27.9±3.2, and 28.2±0.9 kg/m2 respectively. Co-morbidities completely resolved 1 year postoperatively in 49/55 patients (89.1%). At 60 months follow-up, only 1 patient (0.4%) has a BMI >30. Conclusions: Although surgical indications for BMI ≤ 35 remain questionable, the Lap-Band® in this study demonstrated that all but 1 patient achieved normal weight, and most lost their co-morbidities with a very low mortality rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: An increasing number of surgeons with different levels of experience with laparoscopic surgery and open obesity surgery have started to perform laparoscopic implantation of the Lap-Band®. Methods: An electronic patient data sheet was created and was mailed and e-mailed to all surgeons performing laparoscopic adjustable silicone gastric banding (LASGB) in Italy. Patients were recruited since January 1996. Data on 1,265 Lap-Band System® operated patients (258 M / 1,007 F; mean BMI 44.1, range 27.0-78.1; mean age 38, range 17-74 years) were collected from 23 surgeons performing this operation. Results: Intra-operative mortality was absent. Post-operative mortality was 0.55% (7 patients) for causes not specifically related to LASGB implantation. The laparotomic conversion rate was 1.7% (22 patients). LASGB related complications occured in 143 patients (11.3%). Pouch dilatation was diagnosed in 65 (5.2%), and 28 (2.2%) of these underwent re-operation. Band erosion was observed in 24 patients (1.9%). Port or connecting tube-port complications occurred in 54 patients (4.2%), 12 of whom required revision under general anesthesia. Follow-up was obtained at 6, 12, 18, 24, 36 and 48 months, and mean BMI was respectively 38.4, 35.1, 33.1, 30.2, 32.1 and 31.5. The percentage of patients observed at each follow-up was >60%. There was no intra-operative mortality and no complication-related mortality, with acceptable weight loss. Conclusion: The LASGB operation is safe and effective, and deserves wider use for treatment of morbid obesity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this prospective, randomized, controlled clinical study was to compare laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) hernia repair with a standard tension-free open mesh repair (open).Methods: A total of 108 low-risk patients with unilateral (primary or recurrent) or bilateral hernias were randomized to TAPP (group 1 = 52 cases) or open (group 2 = 56 cases). The outcome measures included operating time, complications, postoperative pain, return to normal activity, operating theater costs, and recurrences.Results: The mean operative time was longer for the TAPP than for the open group only in unilateral primary hernias. At rest, the median Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score was higher for group 1 than group 2 at 48 h postoperatively. Mild to discomforting pain in the inguinal region after 7 days, night pain after 30 days, and inguinal hardening after 3 months were more frequent in group 2 than group 1. No significant differences were observed in return to normal activities between the groups. One hernia recurrence was observed after 1 month in group 1. TAPP was significantly more expensive than open.Conclusions: TAPP was associated with less postoperative pain than open. The increase in operating theater costs, however, was dramatic and was not compensated by shorter time away from work. TAPP should not be adopted routinely unless its costs can be drastically reduced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a public health problem with a prevalence of 345 million people worldwide that it may double by the year 2030 and have a high costs and mortality. Gastrointestinal surgery is accepted as a form of treatment that was already suggested for obese in 1987 by Pories, confirmed for obese patients by the meta-analysis of Buchwald and the direct comparison of gastric bypass with medical treatment in the study of Schauer that demonstrate a 4 fold greater resolution rate of DM with surgery. Improvement occurs immediately after surgery, before the patients lose weight in with BMI > 35; but there is doubt if the existent evidence is enough to extrapolate these results to patients with BMI < 35 and especially with BMI < 30, in spite that four reviews in patients with this BMI and DM2 demonstrated the same results when stomach, duodenum and part of jejunum is bypassed as happen gastric bypass (better results with this of one anastomosis than of two anastomosis, Rouxen-Y) BPD. For patients with a BMI between 30 and 35 restrictive techniques: LAGB and SGL are good but not better than the mixed: RYGB, BAGUA, or SG-DJB with remission from 60 to 100%, minor in the derivative: BPD and above on the IID with a 81% of remission. There are no differences in the metabolic control in comparison to the obese, It is progressively better with DJB, SDS, IID and BAGUA especially in patients who do not require insulin, have less time with disease, have normal C peptide levels, and not so much relation with the initial BMI that is only important to decide the degree of restriction. Although several mechanisms has been suggesed for explaining these results such as caloric intake, hormonal changes, bypass of the anterior or early stimulation of posterior intestine, fundectomy, intestinal gluconeogenesis and others, new ones will appear in the near future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]