Search

Introduction: Endoscopy prior to bariatric surgery is not always performed, and in sleeve gastrectomy (SG), the surgical specimen is not always sent for pathological examination. There is limited data on the frequency of clinically significant findings in SG specimens or correlation with preoperative endoscopy., Methods: We reviewed 426 consecutive SG patients to determine the concordance of preoperative endoscopy findings in patients with clinically significant postoperative pathology., Results: Preoperative endoscopy was performed on 397 patients (93.2%). Three hundred seventy-three patients had preoperative endoscopy and surgical pathology results available. Then, 20/373 (5.4%) patients had potentially significant postoperative pathology, including intestinal metaplasia, autoimmune metaplastic atrophic gastritis (AMAG), gastrointestinal stromal tumors, and/or gastric cancer. The overall incidence of AMAG in the entire cohort was 2.3%. Preoperative gastric biopsies (to include gastric body) identified AMAG in nearly 1/2 of patients. Patients with clinically significant postoperative pathology results had a median [interquartile range] of 3 [3-5] tissue blocks examined as compared to 3 [1-3] for the remainder of the cohort (p < 0.001)., Conclusion: This is one of the largest studies describing clinically significant postoperative pathology after SG. AMAG, in particular, is of particular importance as it is associated with a 3-fivefold increase in risk for gastric cancer. The incidence of significant postoperative pathology in this population is small but potentially clinically significant and requires validation in larger studies. We recommend wider sampling in preoperative endoscopy (body and antrum), especially in patients being planned for gastric bypass, consideration for routine pathological examination of SG surgical specimens, with careful gross examination and targeted sampling., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Objective: Report the 2-year outcomes of a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing robotic versus laparoscopic intraperitoneal onlay mesh ventral hernia repair., Background: Ventral hernia repair is one of the most common operations performed by general surgeons. To our knowledge, no studies have been published to date comparing long-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus robotic ventral hernia repair., Methods: The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03490266). Clinical outcomes included surgical site infection, surgical site occurrence, hernia occurrence, readmission, reoperation, and mortality., Results: A total of 175 consecutive patients were approached that were deemed eligible for elective minimally invasive ventral hernia repair. In all, 124 were randomized and 101 completed follow-up at 2 years. Two-year follow-up was completed in 54 patients (83%) in the robotic arm and 47 patients (80%) in the laparoscopic arm. No differences were seen in surgical site infection or surgical site occurrence. Hernia recurrence occurred in 2 patients (4%) receiving robotic repair versus in 6 patients (13%) receiving laparoscopic repair (relative risk: 0.3, 95% CI: 0.06-1.39; P =0.12). No patients (0%) required reoperation in the robotic arm whereas 5 patients (11%) underwent reoperation in the laparoscopic arm ( P =0.019, relative risk not calculatable due to null outcome)., Conclusions: Robotic ventral hernia repair demonstrated at least similar if not improved outcomes at 2 years compared with laparoscopy. There is potential benefit with robotic repair; however, additional multi-center trials and longer follow-up are needed to validate the hypothesis-generating findings of this study., Competing Interests: S.S. receives a research grant and consulting fees paid to the institution from Activ Surgical. The original study was supported by a research grant from Intuitive. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The field of bariatric surgery has seen peaks and troughs in the types of metabolic procedures performed. Our primary aim was to evaluate bariatric case volumes among fellows enrolled in bariatric Fellowship Council (FC)-accredited programs. Our secondary aim was to assess trends in revisional case volumes., Methods: We reviewed de-identified FC case logs for all bariatric surgery-accredited programs from 2010 through 2019. The number of primary sleeve gastrectomy, gastric band, gastric bypass, biliopancreatic diversion, and major revisional bariatric surgical procedures (defined as a revision with creation of a new anastomosis) were graphed for each academic year. Fellows were stratified into quartiles based on the number of revisional operations per year and graphed over ten years. Volumes of primary gastric bypass, major revisions, and total anastomotic cases were compared over time using ANOVA with p < 0.05 considered significant., Results: Case volumes for 822 fellows were evaluated. Sleeve gastrectomy had a significant surge in 2010 and plateaued in 2016. The fellows' number of primary gastric bypasses had a non-significant decrease from 84 to 75 cases/fellow from 2010 to 2019. This decrease was offset by a significant increase in major revisional surgery from 8 to 19 cases/fellow. As a result, the number of anastomotic cases did not change significantly over the study time period. Interestingly, as revisional volume has grown, the gap between quartiles of fellowship programs has widened with the 95th percentile growing at a much faster rate than lower quartiles., Conclusion: The volume of bariatric procedures performed in the last decade among FC fellows follows similar trends to national data. Major revisional cases have doubled with the most robust growth isolated to a small number of programs. As revisional surgery continues to increase, applicants interested in a comprehensive bariatric practice should seek out training programs that offer strong revisional experience., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Utility and usability of laser speckle contrast imaging (LSCI) in detecting real-time tissue perfusion in robot-assisted surgery (RAS) and laparoscopic surgery are not known. LSCI displays a color heatmap of real-time tissue blood flow by capturing the interference of coherent laser light on red blood cells. LSCI has advantages in perfusion visualization over indocyanine green imaging (ICG) including repeat use on demand, no need for dye, and no latency between injection and display. Herein, we report the first-in-human clinical comparison of a novel device combining proprietary LSCI processing and ICG for real-time perfusion assessment during RAS and laparoscopic surgeries., Methods: ActivSight™ imaging module is integrated between a standard laparoscopic camera and scope, capable of detecting tissue blood flow via LSCI and ICG in laparoscopic surgery. From November 2020 to July 2021, we studied its use during elective robotic-assisted and laparoscopic cholecystectomies, colorectal, and bariatric surgeries (NCT# 04633512). For RAS, an ancillary laparoscope with ActivSight imaging module was used for LSCI/ICG visualization. We determined safety, usability, and utility of LSCI in RAS vs. laparoscopic surgery using end-user/surgeon human factor testing (Likert scale 1-5) and compared results with two-tailed t tests., Results: 67 patients were included in the study-40 (60%) RAS vs. 27 (40%) laparoscopic surgeries. Patient demographics were similar in both groups. No adverse events to patients and surgeons were observed in both laparoscopic and RAS groups. Use of an ancillary laparoscopic system for LSCI/ICG visualization had minimal impact on usability in RAS as evidenced by surgeon ratings of device usability (set-up 4.2/5 and form-factor 3.8/5). LSCI ability to detect perfusion (97.5% in RAS vs 100% in laparoscopic cases) was comparable in both RAS and laparoscopic cases., Conclusions: LSCI demonstrates comparable utility and usability in detecting real-time tissue perfusion/blood flow in RAS and laparoscopic surgery., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Robotic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RRYGB) is performed in an increasing number of bariatric centers worldwide. Previous studies have identified a number of demographic and clinical variables as predictors of postoperative complications after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). Some authors have suggested better early postoperative outcomes after RRYGB compared to LRYGB. The objective of the present study was to assess potential predictors of early postoperative complications after RRYGB., Methods: A retrospective analysis of two prospective databases containing patients who underwent RRYGB between 2006 and 2019 at two high volumes, accredited bariatric centers was performed. Primary outcome was rate of 30 day postoperative complications. Relevant demographic, clinical and biological variables were entered in a multivariate, logistic regression analysis to identify potential predictors., Results: Data of 1276 patients were analyzed, including 958 female and 318 male patients. Rates of overall and severe 30 day complications were 12.5% (160/1276) and 3.9% (50/1276), respectively. Rate of 30 day reoperations was 1.6% (21/1276). The overall gastrointestinal leak rate was 0.2% (3/1276). Among various demographic, clinical and biological variables, male sex and ASA score >2 were significantly correlated with an increased risk of 30 day complication rates on multivariate analysis (OR 1.68 and 1.67, p=0.005 and 0.005, respectively)., Conclusion: This study identified male sex and ASA score >2 as independent predictors of early postoperative complications after RRYGB. These data suggest a potentially different risk profile in terms of early postoperative complications after RRYGB compared to LYRGB. The robotic approach might have a benefit for patients traditionally considered to be at higher risk of complications after LRYGB, such as those with BMI >50. The present study was however not designed to assess this hypothesis and larger, prospective studies are necessary to confirm these results., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Postoperative morbidity after laparoscopic bariatric surgery is considered higher for patients undergoing revisional versus primary procedures. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to compare outcomes between patients undergoing primary versus revisional robotically assisted laparoscopic (RAL) Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB)., Methods: Data of all patients who underwent RAL primary and revisional RYGB between 2009 and 2019 at two accredited, high-volume bariatric surgery centers-the Memorial Hermann - Texas Medical Center, Houston, TX, and the Tower Health, Reading Hospital, Reading, PA, were analyzed. Primary outcomes were early (< 30 days) and overall postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative complications, operative times, conversions to laparotomy, length of hospital stay, early (< 30 days) postoperative readmissions and deaths., Results: Data of 1072 patients were analyzed, including 806 primary and 266 revisional RAL RYGB procedures. Longer operative times (203 versus 154 min, P < 0.001), increased number of readmissions for oral intolerance (10.5% versus 6.7%, P = 0.046) and higher rate of gastrojejunal stricture (6.4% versus 2.7%, P = 0.013) were found in the revisional group. Gastrointestinal leak rates were 0.2% for the primary versus 1.1% for the revisional group (P = 0.101). Early (< 30 days) reoperations rates were 2.2% for the primary versus 1.1% for the revisional group (P = 0.318). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in overall and severe complication rates., Conclusion: Patients undergoing RAL primary and revisional RYGB had comparable overall outcomes, with a non-significant higher early complication rate in the revisional group. Despite the study being underpowered to detect differences in specific complication rates, the morbidity seen in the revisional RYGB group remains markedly below literature reports of revisional laparoscopic RYGB and might suggest a benefit of robotic assistance. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these results., (© 2020. The Author(s).)

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes of robotic versus laparoscopic ventral hernia repair (LVHR) at 1-year postoperative., Summary of Background Data: Despite a relative lack of research at low risk for bias assessing robotic ventral hernia repair (RVHR), the growth of RVHR has been rapid. We previously reported short-term results of the first randomized control trial comparing RVHR versus LVHR; there was no clear difference in clinical outcomes but increased operative time and cost with robotic repair., Methods: Patients from a multicenter, blinded randomized control trial comparing RVHR versus LVHR were followed at 1 year. Outcomes included wound complication (surgical site infection, surgical site occurrence, wound dehiscence), hernia occurrence including recurrence and port site hernia, readmission, reoperation, and patient-reported outcomes (functional status, pain, and satisfaction with repair and cosmesis)., Results: A total of 124 patients were randomized and 113 patients (91%; 60 robot, 53 laparoscopic) completed 1-year follow-up. Baseline demographics were similar in both groups. No differences were seen in wound complication (15% vs 15%; P = 0.899), hernia recurrence (7% vs 9%; P = 0.576), or readmission (2% vs 6%; P = 0.251). No patients underwent reoperation in the robotic arm, whereas 5 (9%) did in the laparoscopic arm (P = 0.020). No differences were seen in patient-reported outcomes. Both arms reported clinically significant improvements in functional status, low pain scores, and high satisfaction scores at 1-year post repair., Conclusion: This study confirms that robotic ventral hernia repair is safe when compared to laparoscopy. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings., Competing Interests: SKS reports grants/payments from C-SATS and Activ Surgical. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is a common bariatric procedure. Its configuration creates an excluded gastric remnant, which is subject to potential acute complications such as bleeding, perforation, and necrosis., Material and Methods: A retrospective analysis of a prospective database including all patients presenting between 2007 and 2019 to our institution with acute gastric remnant complications after RYGB was performed., Results: Seven patients were included, including 3 hemorrhages, two of which were treated with double-balloon enteroscopy, as well as 3 perforations and 1 necrosis, all of which required emergent surgery. Overall gastric remnant complication rate was 0.3% in this series., Conclusion: Acute gastric remnant complications after RYGB are infrequent, but their diagnosis and management can be challenging. Double-balloon enteroscopy has diagnostic and therapeutic value for selected patients. Emergent surgery remains the standard of care for unstable patients and should not be delayed.

Background: The utilization of robotic platforms for general surgery procedures such as hernia repair is growing rapidly in the United States. A limited amount of data are available evaluating operative outcomes in comparison to standard laparoscopic surgery. We completed a retrospective review comparing robotic and laparoscopic ventral hernia repair to provide safety and outcomes data to help design a future prospective trial design., Methods: A retrospective review of 215 patients undergoing ventral hernia repair (142 robotic and 73 laparoscopic) was completed at two large academic centers. Primary outcome measure evaluated was recurrence. Secondary outcomes included incidence of primary fascial closure, and surgical site occurrences., Results: Propensity for treatment match comparison demonstrated that robotic repair was associated with a decreased incidence of recurrence (2.1 versus 4.2%, p < 0.001) and surgical site occurrence (4.2 versus 18.8%, p < 0.001). This may be because robotic repair was associated with increased incidence of primary fascial closure (77.1 versus 66.7%, p < 0.01). Analysis of baseline patient populations showed that robotic repairs were completed on patients with lower body mass index (28.1 ± 3.6 versus 34.2 ± 6.4, p < 0.001) and fewer comorbidities., Conclusions: Our retrospective data show that robotic repair was associated with decreased recurrence and surgical site occurrence. However, the differences noted in the patient populations limit the interpretability of these results. As adoption of robotic ventral hernia repair increases, prospective trials need to be designed in order to investigate the efficacy, safety, and cost effectiveness of this evolving technique.

Background: Patients with obesity have a higher risk of trocar site hernia. The objective of the present study was to compare a standard suture passer versus the neoClose® device for port site fascial closure in patients with obesity undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery.Methods: This is a randomized, controlled trial with two parallel arms. Thirty five patients with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 and undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass were randomized to each group. Port site fascial closure for trocars ≥ 10 mm was performed with the neoClose® device in the study group and the standard suture passer in the control group. Primary outcomes were time required to complete closure and intensity of postoperative pain at the fascial closure sites. Secondary outcomes were intraabdominal needle depth and incidence of trocar site hernia.Results: The use of the neoClose® device resulted in shorter closure times (20.2 vs 30.0 s, p = 0.0002), less pain (0.3 vs 0.9, p = 0.002) at port closure sites, and decreased needle depth (3.3 cm vs 5.2 cm, p < 0.0001) compared to the standard suture passer. There was no trocar site hernia at the one-year follow-up in either group.Conclusions: Use of the neoClose® device resulted in faster fascial closure times, decreased intraoperative needle depth, and decreased postoperative abdominal pain at 1 week as compared to the standard suture passer. These data need to be confirmed on larger cohorts of patients with longer follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bouveret syndrome is a rare complication of cholelithiasis that usually presents with signs and symptoms of gastric outlet obstruction. Given the relative rarity of this condition, there are no standardized guidelines for the management of this condition. In this paper, we review the diagnosis and management options (endoscopic, laparoscopic, and open approaches) of patients with Bouveret syndrome, including a report of one case to illustrate some of the endoscopic and surgical principles of management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Novel trocar closure devices using subperitoneal anchor placement avoid the need for a closed loop suture, and could allow faster trocar site closure with less risk derived from less instrument penetration into the abdominal cavity while decreasing fascial ischemia and tension. We completed a series of animal experiments to compare the Carter-Thomason® suture closure device and neoClose® AnchorGuide device in order to evaluate device safety, efficacy, and ease of utilization. Methods: A porcine model was utilized where 12 mm port sites were closed with either the Carter-Thomason® device or neoClose® AnchorGuide device. Animals were sacrificed at 14 and 56 days after trocar site closure followed by macroscopic and microscopic wound examination. A second group of animals underwent video analysis to evaluate the time required for fascial closure as well as depth of needle passage into the abdomen. Results: All animals survived to the endpoints (14 and 56 days) without mortality or trocar site hernia. A trend towards decreased closure times was identified when using the neoClose® device (t=18.5±2.3 seconds) compared to closure with the Carter-Thomason® device (t=32.0±8.9 seconds) (P=0.153). A signifcant decrease in the depth of needle pen- etration was seen with the neoClose® device (t=31.22±1.45 mm) compared to closure with the Carter-Thomason device (t=51.0±3.1 mm) (P,0.001). Microscopic analysis showed subperitoneal anchor location at 56 days with minimal fibrosis (neoClose® device) compared to nearly complete suture degradation with deep intramuscular location (Carter-Thomason device). Conclusion: Novel trocar closure devices could offer decreased deployment times while improving closure safety. Initial animal studies have shown that the neoClose® device yields a durable fascial closure that is easy to adopt from a technical standpoint. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Complications of the laparoscopic adjustable gastric band, including erosion, have been well described. Increasingly, endoscopic techniques are being utilized to manage complications of this and other weight loss procedures. The authors presented what was believed to be one of the first reported cases of successful endoscopic removal of an eroded gastric band during pregnancy. A complete description of the case and review of the relevant literature is provided. Endoscopy for management of eroded adjustable gastric bands needs to be part of the armamentarium of surgeons and endoscopists who deal with complications of weight loss surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]