Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Masters Program designated bariatric surgery as a clinical pathway. Among the tiers of the Masters Program, revisional bariatric surgery is the highest tier of "mastery" within the pathway. This article presents the top 10 seminal studies representing the current landscape of revisional bariatrics. METHODS:The literature was systematically searched and seminal articles designated by consensus agreement of the SAGES Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery committee using multiple criteria, including impact on the field, citation frequency, and expert opinion. Articles were reviewed by committee members and presented in summarized fashion. RESULTS:The top 10 papers are presented in grouped thematic categories covering the early evolution of revisional bariatrics, changing criteria for reoperative bariatric surgery, divergence of revision versus conversion bariatric surgery, and recent technologic innovations in revisional bariatric surgery. Each summary is presented with expert appraisal and commentary. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:These seminal papers represent a snapshot of the dynamic field of revisional bariatric surgery and emphasize the need to not only remain current with contemporary trends but also keep a patient-oriented perspective on patient and intervention selection for optimal success.

Obesity is a chronic, relapsing disease that increases the risks of living kidney donation; at the same time, transplant centers have liberalized body mass index constraints for donors. With the increasing number of anti-obesity medications available, the treatment of obesity with anti-obesity medications may increase the pool of potential donors and enhance donor safety. Anti-obesity medications are intended for long-term use given the chronic nature of obesity. Cessation of treatment can be expected to lead to weight regain and increases the risk of comorbidity rebound/development. In addition, anti-obesity medications are meant to be used in conjunction with-rather than in replacement of-diet and physical activity optimization. Anti-obesity medication management includes selecting medications that may ameliorate any co-existing medical conditions, avoiding those that are contraindicated in such conditions, and being sensitive to any out-of-pocket expenses that may be incurred by the potential donor. A number of questions remain regarding who will and should shoulder the costs of long-term obesity treatment for donors. In addition, future studies are needed to quantify the degree of weight loss and duration of weight loss maintenance needed to normalize the risk of adverse kidney outcomes relative to comparable non-donors and lower weight donors.

OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to survey international experts in metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) to improve and consolidate the management of biliary disease in patients with severe obesity undergoing MBS. BACKGROUND:Obesity and rapid weight loss after MBS are risk factors for the development of gallstones. Complications, such as cholecystitis, acute cholangitis, and biliary pancreatitis, are potentially life-threatening, and no guidelines for the proper management of gallstone disease exist. METHODS:An international scientific team designed an online confidential questionnaire with 26 multiple-choice questions. The survey was answered by 86 invited experts (from 38 different countries), who participated from August 1, 2023, to September 9, 2023. RESULTS:Two-thirds of experts (67.4%) perform concomitant cholecystectomy in symptomatic gallstones during MBS. Half of experts (50%) would wait 6-12 weeks between both surgeries with an interval approach. Approximately 57% of the experts prescribe ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) prophylactically after MBS, and most recommend a 6-month course. More than the half of the experts (59.3%/53.5%) preferred laparoscopic assisted transgastric ERCP as the approach for treating CBD stones in patients who previously had RYGB/OAGB. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Concomitant cholecystectomy is preferred by the experts, although evidence in the literature reports an increased complication rate. Prophylactic UDCA should be recommended to every MBS patient, even though the current survey demonstrated that not all experts are recommending it. The preferred approach for treating common bile duct stones is a laparoscopic assisted transgastric ERCP after gastric bypass. The conflicting responses will need more scientific work and clarity in the future.

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is widely considered the most effective option for treating obesity, a chronic, relapsing, and progressive disease. Recently, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) and the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) issued new guidelines on the indications for MBS, which have superseded the previous 1991 National Institutes of Health guidelines. The aim of this study is to establish the first set of consensus guidelines for selecting procedures in Class I and II obesity, using an Expert Modified Delphi Method. In this study, 78 experienced bariatric surgeons from 32 countries participated in a two-round Modified Delphi consensus voting process. The threshold for consensus was set at an agreement or disagreement of ≥ 70.0% among the experts. The experts reached a consensus on 54 statements. The committee of experts reached a consensus that MBS is a cost-effective treatment option for Class II obesity and for patients with Class I obesity who have not achieved significant weight loss through non-surgical methods. MBS was also considered suitable for patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and a body mass index (BMI) of 30 kg/m² or higher. The committee identified intra-gastric balloon (IGB) as a treatment option for patients with class I obesity and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) as an option for patients with class I and II obesity, as well as for patients with T2DM and a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m². Sleeve gastrectomy (1) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) were also recognized as viable treatment options for these patient groups. The committee also agreed that one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is a suitable option for patients with Class II obesity and T2DM, regardless of the presence or severity of obesity-related medical problems. The recommendations for selecting procedures in Class I and II obesity, developed through an Expert Modified Delphi Consensus, suggest that the use of standard primary bariatric endoscopic (IGB, ESG) and surgical procedures (SG, RYGB, OAGB) are acceptable in these patient groups, as consensus was reached regarding these procedures. However, randomized controlled trials are still needed in Class I and II Obesity to identify the best treatment approach for these patients in the future.

Background: Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is the preferred method to achieve significant weight loss in patients with Obesity Class V (BMI > 60 kg/m²). However, there is no consensus regarding the best procedure(s) for this population. Additionally, these patients will likely have a higher risk of complications and mortality. The aim of this study was to achieve a consensus among a global panel of expert bariatric surgeons using a modified Delphi methodology. Methods: A total of 36 recognized opinion-makers and highly experienced metabolic and bariatric surgeons participated in the present Delphi consensus. 81 statements on preoperative management, selection of the procedure, perioperative management, weight loss parameters, follow-up, and metabolic outcomes were voted on in two rounds. A consensus was considered reached when an agreement of ≥ 70% of experts"™ votes was achieved. Results: A total of 54 out of 81 statements reached consensus. Remarkably, more than 90% of the experts agreed that patients should be notified of the greater risk of complications, the possibility of modifications to the surgical procedure, and the early start of chemical thromboprophylaxis. Regarding the choice of the procedure, SADI-S, RYGB, and OAGB were the top 3 preferred operations. However, no consensus was reached on the limb length in these operations. Conclusion: This study represents the first attempt to reach consensus on the choice of procedures as well as perioperative management in patients with obesity class V. Although overall consensus was reached in different areas, more research is needed to better serve this high-risk population. Graphical Abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.]

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 and Objective: The use of robot technology has greatly expanded the field of general surgery. While robot technology has become almost standard for many general surgeons, there is an increasing interest in how this same technology may be utilized within more specialized fields. We sought to explore the advances and current uses of robot technology within the field of vascular surgery. We evaluated this topic broadly in the context of both the open and endovascular approach. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was employed using the following search strategy on PubMed: ("Robotic Surgical Procedures"[Mesh]) AND ("Vascular Surgical Procedures"[Mesh]). A total of 381 articles were identified. No filters were applied. All articles were then screened manually for applicability. Articles relating to cardiothoracic and neurosurgery were excluded (n=366), as the authors were most interested in performing this literature review from the focus of the vascular surgeon, and procedures involving the heart and brain are outside his or her scope of practice. The remaining (n=15) articles were then utilized to provide a synopsis of the advances made in robotic-assisted procedures within the field of vascular surgery. Key Content and Findings: Robot technology is currently being utilized by vascular surgeons to assist in both open and endovascular procedures. Some typical open procedures wherein the robot has shown to be most effective are in complex aortic reconstruction, first rib resection, venous thrombectomy and venous reconstruction following oncologic resection. In addition to open procedures, there is also evidence that robot technology may offer some benefits in purely endovascular ones, such as in inferior vena cava (IVC) filter retrieval and in standard angiograms. Conclusions: This work highlights that robot technology is greatly expanding the field of vascular surgery. In addition to offering a less invasive approach for both major and minor procedures, robot technology has also led to significant increases in team members"™ safety by decreasing radiation exposure. This review will hopefully act as a catalyst to further expand the use of robot technology in vascular procedures, and by effect increase the value that the vascular surgeon brings to the health care system.

BACKGROUND:New York University Langone Health has three accredited bariatric centers, with 10 different bariatric surgeons. This retrospective analysis compares surgeon techniques in laparoscopic or robotic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) to identify associations with perioperative morbidity and mortality. METHODS:All adults who underwent SG between 2017 and 2021 at NYU Langone Health were evaluated via EMR and MBSAQIP 30-day data. We also surveyed all 10 bariatric surgeons and compared their techniques and total adverse outcomes. Bleeding, SSI, mortality, readmission, and reoperation were specifically sub-analyzed via logistic regression. RESULTS:86 (2.77%) out of 3,104 patients who underwent SG encountered an adverse event. Lower adverse outcomes were observed with a laparoscopic approach, 40-Fr bougie, buttressing, not oversewing the staple line, using hemostatic agents, stapling 3-cm from pylorus, and no routine UGI series. Lower bleeding rates were observed in a laparoscopic approach, 40-Fr bougie, buttressing, not oversewing the staple line, using hemostatic agents, stapling 3-cm from pylorus, no routine UGI series, and not proceeding with SG if hiatal hernia is present. Lower SSI rates were observed with ViSiGi™ bougie, no hemostatic agents, and routine EGD. Lower readmission rates were observed with 40-Fr bougie, buttressing, not oversewing, and stapling 3-cm from pylorus. Hemostatic agents had higher reoperation rates. It was not feasible to test for mortality given the low incidence. CONCLUSION:Certain surgical techniques in SG among our bariatric surgeons had a significant effect on the rates of adverse outcomes, bleeding, readmission, reoperation, and SSI. Our findings warrant further investigation into these techniques via multivariate regression or prospective design. LIMITATIONS:This study was limited by its retrospective and univariate design. We did not account for interaction. The sample size was small, and follow-up of 30 days was relatively short. We did not include patient characteristics in the model or control for surgeon skill.

INTRODUCTION:Obesity is an increasingly prevalent public health problem often associated with poorly controlled gastroesophageal reflux disease. Fundoplication has been shown to have limited long-term efficacy in patients with morbid obesity and does not address additional weight-related co-morbidities. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the gold standard operation for durable resolution of GERD in patients with obesity, and is also used as a salvage operation for GERD after prior foregut surgery. Surgeons report access to RYGB as surgical treatment for GERD is often limited by RYGB-specific benefit exclusions embedded within insurance policies, but the magnitude and scope of this problem is unknown. METHODS:A 9-item survey evaluating surgeon practice and experience with insurance coverage for RYGB for GERD was developed and piloted by a SAGES Foregut Taskforce working group. This survey was then administered to surgeon members of the SAGES Foregut Taskforce and to surgeons participating in the SAGES Bariatrics and/or Foregut Facebook groups. RESULTS:respectively as cutoff for the RYGB. 89% viewed RYGB as the procedure of choice for GERD after bariatric surgery. 69% reported using RYGB to address recurrent reflux secondary to failed fundoplication. 74% of responders experienced trouble with insurance coverage at least half the time RYGB was offered for GERD, and 8% reported they were never able to get approval for RYGB for GERD indications in their patient populations. CONCLUSION:For many patients, GERD and obesity are related diseases that are best addressed with RYGB. However, insurance coverage for RYGB for GERD is often limited by policies which run contrary to evidence-based medicine. Advocacy is critical to improve access to appropriate surgical care for GERD in patients with obesity.