Clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative nutrition, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of patients undergoing bariatric procedures – 2019 update: cosponsored by american association of clinical endocrinologists/american college of endocrinology, the obesity society, american society for metabolic & bariatric surgery, obesity medicine association, and american society of anesthesiologists*

Clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative nutrition, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of patients undergoing bariatric procedures - 2019 update: cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic & Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists.

The International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) has played an integral role in educating both the metabolic surgical and the medical community at large about the role of innovative and new surgical and/or endoscopic interventions in treating adiposity-based chronic diseases. The mini gastric bypass is also known as the one anastomosis gastric bypass. The IFSO has agreed that the standard nomenclature should be the mini gastric bypass-one anastomosis gastric bypass (MGB-OAGB). The IFSO commissioned a task force (Appendix 1) to determine if MGB-OAGB is an effective and safe procedure and if it should be considered a surgical option for the treatment of obesity and metabolic diseases. The following position statement is issued by the IFSO MGB-OAGB task force and approved by the IFSO Scientific Committee and Executive Board. This statement is based on current clinical knowledge, expert opinion, and published peer-reviewed scientific evidence. It will be reviewed in 2 years.

Mini Gastric Bypass-One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (MGB-OAGB)-IFSO Position Statement

Objective The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists. Methods Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts. Results New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest). Conclusions Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Perioperative Nutrition, Metabolic, and Nonsurgical Support of Patients Undergoing Bariatric Procedures – 2019 Update: Cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists

Standardization of the key measurements of a procedure’s finished anatomic configuration strengthens surgical practice, research, and patient outcomes A consensus meeting was organized to define standard versions of 25 bariatric metabolic procedures A panel of experts in bariatric metabolic surgery from multiple continents was invited to present technique descriptions and outcomes for 4 classic, or conventional, and 21 variant and emerging procedures Expert panel and audience discussion was followed by electronic voting on proposed standard dimensions and volumes for each procedure’s key anatomic alterations Consensus was defined as ≥ 70% agreement The Bariatric Metabolic Surgery Standardization World Consensus Meeting (BMSS-WOCOM) was convened March 22–24, 2018, in New Delhi, India Discussion confirmed heterogeneity in procedure measurements in the literature A set of anatomic measurements to serve as the standard version of each procedure was proposed After two voting rounds, 22/25 (880%) configurations posed for consideration as procedure standards achieved voting consensus by the expert panel, 1 did not attain consensus, and 2 were not voted on All configurations were voted on by ≥ 50% of 50 expert panelists The Consensus Statement was developed from scientific evidence collated from presenters’ slides and a separate literature review, meeting video, and transcripts Review and input was provided by consensus panel members Standard versions of the finished anatomic configurations of 22 surgical procedures were established by expert consensus The BMSS process was undertaken as a first step in developing evidence-based standard bariatric metabolic surgical procedures with the aim of improving consistency in surgery, data collection, comparison of procedures, and outcome reporting

/pdf/standardization-of-bariatric-metabolic-procedures-world-490ay03m4j.pdf

Standardization of Bariatric Metabolic Procedures: World Consensus Meeting Statement

Purpose: Single anastomosis sleeve ileal bypass (SASI) procedure appears as a new metabolic and bariatric surgery based on Santoro's operation, in which a sleeve gastrectomy is followed by a side–to-side gastroileal anastomosis. The study is aimed to evaluate the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic single anastomosis sleeve ileal bypass with respect to postoperative weight loss and metabolic and nutritional effects on patients. Methods: Forty-five morbidly obese patients with a mean age of 31.2 years and a mean body mass index (BMI) of 43.2 kg/m2 underwent SASI bypass. Postoperatively, all patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, and during each visit data about their BMI, obesity-related comorbidities, and nutritional status were collected. Results: One year after the surgery, mean BMI decreased to 29.1 kg/m2 and there was significant decrease in plasma level of fasting blood glucose, insulin, and low-density lipoprotein. On the other hand, there was significant increase in high-densi...

Single Anastomosis Sleeve Ileal Bypass: New Step in the Evolution of Bariatric Surgeries.

Background. Long-term studies have reported that the rate of conversion surgeries after open VBG ranged from 49.7 to 56%. This study is aiming to compare between LMGB and LRYGB as conversion surgeries after failed open VBG with respect to indications and operative and postoperative outcomes. Methods. Sixty patients (48 females and 12 males) presenting with failed VBG, with an average BMI of 39.7 kg/m2 ranging between 26.5 kg/m2 and 53 kg/m2, and a mean age of 38.7 ranging between 24 and 51 years were enrolled in this study. Operative and postoperative data was recorded up to one year after the operation. Results. MGB is a simple procedure that is associated with short operative time and low rate of complications. However, MGB may not be applicable in all cases with failed VBG and therefore RYGB may be needed in such cases. Conclusion. LMGB is a safe and feasible revisional bariatric surgery after failed VBG and can achieve early good weight loss results similar to that of LRYGP. However, the decision to convert to lap RYGB or MGB should be taken intraoperatively depending mainly on the actual intraoperative pouch length.

/pdf/redo-surgery-after-failed-open-vbg-laparoscopic-minigastric-4lmalhx1ap.pdf

Redo Surgery after Failed Open VBG: Laparoscopic Minigastric Bypass versus Laparoscopic Roux en Y Gastric Bypass-Which Is Better?

Background: Omega loop gastric bypass is a successful bariatric surgery with numerous favorable circumstances as being basic, effective on weight reduction and treatment of obesity associated metabolic disorder, the short expectation to learn and adapt, and the simplicity of correction and inversion. However, there are arguments about the possibility of biliary reflux and/or the potential danger of gastroesophageal malignancy after the procedure. Methods: Fifty patients experiencing morbid obesity with body mass index >40 or >35 kg/m2 with two related comorbidities, for example, diabetes type II, hypertension, or dyslipidemia, underwent omega loop gastric bypass with a follow-up period up to 18 months, investigating for any symptom of reflux infection by upper gastrointestinal tract endoscopy and pH metry. Results: Reflux esophagitis (a gastroesophageal reflux disease) was detected in 3 patients (6%); 2 cases (4%) showed (Grade A) acidic reflux esophagitis at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Just...

Incidence of Biliary Reflux Esophagitis After Laparoscopic Omega Loop Gastric Bypass in Morbidly Obese Patients.

Results: Mean age at operation was 32 years (18–60) and preoperative BMI 44.31 kg/m2. The mean operative time was 95 (± 18 min), Mean % EWL was 81.2% at 12 months. Complete resolution occurred of hypertension in 8 patients (80%) and of Diabetes type 2 in 11 patients (84.2%). Level of bilirubin in gastric aspirate was elevated in 8 patients (20%) all of them had different levels pouch gastritis confi rmed by histopathological examination.

/pdf/biliary-reflux-gastritis-after-mini-gastric-bypass-the-2x9gc7f8i7.pdf

Biliary reflux gastritis after Mini Gastric Bypass: The effect of Bilirubin level

•Conservative breast surgery is the standard technique in breast cancer.•Multifocal breast cancer is a risk factor for involved margins.•Positive margins are considered one of the predictors for local recurrence.•Preoperative wire mapping after breast marking by the surgeon increase the chance to have negative margins.

Tamer M Said Salama

Papers

Single Anastomosis Sleeve Ileal Bypass: New Step in the Evolution of Bariatric Surgeries.

Redo Surgery after Failed Open VBG: Laparoscopic Minigastric Bypass versus Laparoscopic Roux en Y Gastric Bypass-Which Is Better?

Incidence of Biliary Reflux Esophagitis After Laparoscopic Omega Loop Gastric Bypass in Morbidly Obese Patients.

Biliary reflux gastritis after Mini Gastric Bypass: The effect of Bilirubin level

Mapping of multifocal breast cancer to achieve negative margins: A new step in the evolution of conservative breast surgery(A cohort study)