Background
Metabolic/bariatric procedures for the treatment of morbid obesity, as well as for type 2 diabetes, are among the most commonly performed gastrointestinal operations today, justifying periodic assessment of the numerical status of metabolic/bariatric surgery and its relative distribution of procedures.

Metabolic/Bariatric Surgery Worldwide 2011

Obesity and the risk of heart failure

The first global survey of bariatric/metabolic surgery based on data from the nations or national groupings of the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Diseases (IFSO) was published in 1998, followed by reports in 2003, 2009, 2011, and 2012. In this survey, we report a global overview of worldwide bariatric surgery in 2013. A questionnaire evaluating the number and the type of bariatric procedure performed in 2013 was emailed to all members of bariatric societies belonging to IFSO. Trend analyses from 2003 to 2013 were also performed. There were 49/54 (90.7 %) responders; 37 of the 49 with national registries. The total number of bariatric procedures performed worldwide in 2013 was 468,609, 95.7 % carried out laparoscopically. The highest number (n = 154,276) was from the USA/Canada region. The most commonly performed procedure in the world was Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), 45 %; followed by sleeve gastrectomy (SG), 37 %; and adjustable gastric banding (AGB), 10 %. Most significant were the rise in prevalence of SG from 0 to 37 % of the world total from 2003 to 2013, and the fall in AGB of 68 % from its peak in 2008 to 2013. SG is currently the most frequently performed procedure in the USA/Canada and in the Asia/Pacific regions, and second to RYGB in the Europe and Latin/South America regions. The accuracy of the IFSO-based world survey of procedures would be enhanced if each nation or national group would create a national registry.

/pdf/bariatric-surgery-worldwide-2013-142vq9l9a5.pdf

Bariatric Surgery Worldwide 2013.

Background: bariatric (weight loss) surgery for obesity is considered when other treatments have failed. The effects of the available bariatric procedures compared with medical management and with each other are uncertain. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2003 and most recently updated in 2009. Objectives: to assess the effects of bariatric surgery for overweight and obesity, including the control of comorbidities. Search methods: studies were obtained from searches of numerous databases, supplemented with searches of reference lists and consultation with experts in obesity research. Date of last search was November 2013. Selection criteria: randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgical interventions with non-surgical management of obesity or overweight or comparing different surgical procedures. Data collection and analysis: data were extracted by one review author and checked by a second review author. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and evaluated overall study quality utilising the GRADE instrument. Main results: twenty-two trials with 1798 participants were included; sample sizes ranged from 15 to 250. Most studies followed participants for 12, 24 or 36 months; the longest follow-up was 10 years. The risk of bias across all domains of most trials was uncertain; just one was judged to have adequate allocation concealment. All seven RCTs comparing surgery with non-surgical interventions found benefits of surgery on measures of weight change at one to two years follow-up. Improvements for some aspects of health-related quality of life (QoL) (two RCTs) and diabetes (five RCTs) were also found. The overall quality of the evidence was moderate. Five studies reported data on mortality, no deaths occurred. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported in four studies and ranged from 0% to 37% in the surgery groups and 0% to 25% in the no surgery groups. Between 2% and 13% of participants required reoperations in the five studies that reported these data. Three RCTs found that laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (L)(RYGB) achieved significantly greater weight loss and body mass index (BMI) reduction up to five years after surgery compared with laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB). Mean end-of-study BMI was lower following LRYGB compared with LAGB: mean difference (MD) -5.2 kg/m² (95% confidence interval (CI) -6.4 to -4.0; P Open RYGB, LRYGB and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) led to losses of weight and/or BMI but there was no consistent picture as to which procedure was better or worse in the seven included trials. MD was -0.2 kg/m² (95% CI -1.8 to 1.3); 353 participants; 6 trials; low quality evidence) in favour of LRYGB. No statistically significant differences in QoL were found (one RCT). Six RCTs reported mortality; one death occurred following LRYGB. SAEs were reported by one RCT and were higher in the LRYGB group (4.5%) than the LSG group (0.9%). Reoperations ranged from 6.7% to 24% in the LRYGB group and 3.3% to 34% in the LSG group. Effects on comorbidities, complications and additional surgical procedures were neutral, except gastro-oesophageal reflux disease improved following LRYGB (one RCT). One RCT of people with a BMI 25 to 35 and type 2 diabetes found laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass resulted in greater weight loss and improvement of diabetes compared with LSG, and had similar levels of complications. Two RCTs found that biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BDDS) resulted in greater weight loss than RYGB in morbidly obese patients. End-of-study mean BMI loss was greater following BDDS: MD -7.3 kg/m² (95% CI -9.3 to -5.4); P One RCT comparing laparoscopic duodenojejunal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy versus LRYGB found BMI, excess weight loss, and rates of remission of diabetes and hypertension were similar at 12 months follow-up (very low quality evidence). QoL, SAEs and reoperation rates were not reported. No deaths occurred in either group. One RCT comparing laparoscopic isolated sleeve gastrectomy (LISG) versus LAGB found greater improvement in weight-loss outcomes following LISG at three years follow-up (very low quality evidence). QoL, mortality and SAEs were not reported. Reoperations occurred in 20% of the LAGB group and in 10% of the LISG group. One RCT (unpublished) comparing laparoscopic gastric imbrication with LSG found no statistically significant difference in weight loss between groups (very low quality evidence). QoL and comorbidities were not reported. No deaths occurred. Two participants in the gastric imbrication group required reoperation. Authors' conclusions: surgery results in greater improvement in weight loss outcomes and weight associated comorbidities compared with non-surgical interventions, regardless of the type of procedures used. When compared with each other, certain procedures resulted in greater weight loss and improvements in comorbidities than others. Outcomes were similar between RYGB and sleeve gastrectomy, and both of these procedures had better outcomes than adjustable gastric banding. For people with very high BMI, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch resulted in greater weight loss than RYGB. Duodenojejunal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy and laparoscopic RYGB had similar outcomes, however this is based on one small trial. Isolated sleeve gastrectomy led to better weight-loss outcomes than adjustable gastric banding after three years follow-up. This was based on one trial only. Weight-related outcomes were similar between laparoscopic gastric imbrication and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in one trial. Across all studies adverse event rates and reoperation rates were generally poorly reported. Most trials followed participants for only one or two years, therefore the long-term effects of surgery remain unclear.

Surgery for weight loss in adults

American association of clinical endocrinologists and american college of endocrinology comprehensive clinical practice guidelines for medical care of patients with obesity.

Bariatric Surgery Worldwide

https://www.soard.org/article/S1550-7289(13)00371-7/pdf

Comparative use of different techniques for leak and bleeding prevention during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: A multicenter study

https://www.soard.org/article/S1550-7289(13)00301-8/pdf

The effect of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with or without hiatal hernia repair on gastroesophageal reflux disease in obese patients

During the past decade, the concept of complete mesocolic excision (CME) has emerged as a possible strategy to minimize recurrence for right colon cancers The purpose of this study was to compare robotic versus laparoscopic CME in performing right colectomy for cancer Pertinent data of all patients who underwent robotic or laparoscopic right colectomy with CME using a Pfannenstiel incision and intracorporeal anastomosis performed between October 2005 and November 2015 were entered in a prospectively maintained database A total of 202 patients underwent robotic (n = 101) or laparoscopic (n = 101) right colectomy within the study period Patient characteristics were equivalent between groups The robotic group showed a statistically significant reduction in conversion rate (0% vs 69%, p = 001) but a longer operative time (279 min vs 236 min, p < 0001) compared with the laparoscopic group There were no other differences in perioperative clinical or pathological outcomes Five-years overall survival was 77 versus 73 months for the robotic versus laparoscopic groups (p = 064) The disease-free survival (DFS) rates were 85% and 83% for the robotic versus laparoscopic groups (p = 058) Among UICC stage III patients, there was a slight but not significant difference in 5-year DFS for the robotic group (81 vs 68 months; p = 0122) Both approaches for right colectomy with CME were safe and feasible and resulted in excellent survival Robotic assistance was beneficial for performing intracorporeal anastomosis and dissection as evidenced by the lower conversion rates Further robotic experience may shorten the operative time

/pdf/robotic-versus-laparoscopic-right-colectomy-with-complete-3xpspk3fuf.pdf

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Right Colectomy with Complete Mesocolic Excision for the Treatment of Colon Cancer: Perioperative Outcomes and 5-Year Survival in a Consecutive Series of 202 Patients.

Giampaolo Formisano

Papers

Bariatric Surgery Worldwide 2013.

Bariatric Surgery Worldwide

Comparative use of different techniques for leak and bleeding prevention during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: A multicenter study

The effect of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy with or without hiatal hernia repair on gastroesophageal reflux disease in obese patients

Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Right Colectomy with Complete Mesocolic Excision for the Treatment of Colon Cancer: Perioperative Outcomes and 5-Year Survival in a Consecutive Series of 202 Patients.