Faculty Bibliography

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE), including Portomesenteric vein thrombosis (PMVT), is a major complication of sleeve gastrectomy (SG). We changed our practice in July 2021 to routinely discharge all SG patients postoperatively with extended chemoprophylaxis for 30 days. Objectives: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of routine extended chemoprophylaxis compared to 2 prior timeframes using selective extended chemoprophylaxis. Setting: University Hospital. Methods: Between 2012"“2018, SG patients were discharged on extended chemoprophylaxis for patients deemed "high-risk" for VTE, including patients with body mass index (BMI) >50, and previous VTE. Between 2018"“2021, extended chemoprophylaxis was broadened to include patients with positive preoperative thrombophilia panels (including Factor VIII). After 2021, all SG were routinely discharged on extended chemoprophylaxis. The typical regimen was 30 days Lovenox BID (40-mg twice daily for BMI> 40, 60-mg twice daily for BMI >60). Outcomes evaluated were rate of VTE/PMVT and postoperative bleed, including delayed bleed. Results: A total of 8864 patients underwent SG. Average age and BMI were 37.5 years and 43.0 kg/m², respectively. The overall incidence of PMVT was 33/8864 (.37%). Converting from selective extended chemoprophylaxis (Group 1) to routine extended chemoprophylaxis (Group 3) decreased the rate of PMVT from .55% to .21% (P = .13). There was a significantly higher overall bleeding rate (.85%), including delayed bleeds (.34%) in the routine extended chemoprophylaxis patients (P < .05). These bleeds were mainly managed nonoperatively. Conclusions: Routine extended (30 day) chemoprophylaxis for all SG may reduce PMVT rate but lead to a higher bleeding rate post-operatively. The vast majority of the increased bleeds are delayed and can be managed non-operatively.

BACKGROUND:Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is now the most performed bariatric surgery, though gastric bypass (GB) and duodenal switch (DS) remain common, especially as conversion/revision (C/R) procedures. This analysis compared early postoperative outcomes of primary and C/R laparoscopic SG to DS and GB; and primary procedures of each vs C/R counterparts. METHODS:The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) dataset was queried for SG, GB, and DS cases from 2015 to 2019. Multivariable logistic regression calculated crude and adjusted odds ratios for surgical site infection (SSI), reoperation, and readmission at 30 days in two initial comparisons: (1) primary SG vs DS or GB and (2) C/R SG vs DS or GB. A secondary analysis compared primary GS, GB, or DS with C/R counterparts. Models were adjusted for confounding demographics and comorbidities. RESULTS:Of 755,968 primary cases, most were SG (72.8%), followed by GB (26.3%), then DS (0.9%). Compared to SG, GB and DS demonstrated higher odds of SSI (aOR 3.02 [2.84, 3.2]), readmission (aOR 1.97 [1.92, 2.03]), and reoperation (aOR 2.74 [2.62, 2.86]), respectively. Of 68,716 C/R cases, SG was most common (43.2%), followed by GB (37.5%), then DS (19.2%). C/R GB and DS demonstrated greater risk of SSI (aOR 2.28 [1.98, 2.62]), readmission (aOR 2.10 [1.94, 2.27]), and reoperation (aOR 2.3 [2.04, 2.59]) vs SG, respectively. C/R SG and DS demonstrated greater risk of SSI (OR 2.09 [1.66, 2.63]; 1.63 [1.24, 2.14), readmission (OR 1.13 [1.02, 1.26]), and reoperation (OR 1.27 [1.06, 1.52]; 1.58 [1.24, 2.0]), vs primary procedures. C/R DS demonstrated greater risk of SSI (OR 1.23 [1.66, 2.63]). CONCLUSIONS:Early complications are comparable between GB and DS, and greater than SG. In C/R procedures, GB and DS demonstrate greater risk than SG. Overall, C/R procedures demonstrate greater risk of most, but not all, early postoperative complications.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the association between the CT rim sign and gangrenous cholecystitis (GC) and increased surgical difficulty. METHOD/METHODS:Patients who had a contrast enhanced CT of the abdomen and pelvis, followed by non-elective cholecystectomy were analyzed. The scans were reviewed for the CT rim sign by radiologists blinded to the pathologic and clinical outcomes. Demographic and clinical characteristics were compared between patients with and without GC using t-tests or Wilcoxon ranked sum test for continuous variables, and Fishers' exact test for categorical variables, when appropriate. A logistic regression model was fitted with multiple risk factors. Odds ratios as well as 95% confidence intervals were then calculated for the risk factors. A secondary analysis predicting increased surgical difficulty, defined as an operative time of greater than 2 h or increased conversion rate to open surgery, was also examined. RESULTS:A total of 100 patients were included; 20 of which had GC. On imaging, patients with GC were more likely to have a CT rim sign (65% vs 32.5%, OR = 3.80, 95% CI: 1.24-12.7, p = 0.011). The presence of the CT rim sign did not reach a statistically significant association with an operative time >2 h or conversion to open case (56.52% vs 33.77%, OR = 2.55, p = 0.056). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The CT rim sign can be utilized to raise the possibility of GC, however the presence of the CT rim sign does not demonstrate an association with increased surgical difficulty.