Endoscopic Management of Bariatric Surgery Complications According to a Standardized Algorithm
- PMID: 34297256
- DOI: 10.1007/s11695-021-05577-6
Endoscopic Management of Bariatric Surgery Complications According to a Standardized Algorithm
Abstract
Background and aims: Endoscopy is effective in management of bariatric surgery (BS) adverse events (AEs) but a comprehensive evaluation of long-term results is lacking. Our aim is to assess the effectiveness of a standardized algorithm for the treatment of BS-AE.
Patients and methods: We retrospectively analyzed 1020 consecutive patients treated in our center from 2012 to 2020, collecting data on demographics, type of BS, complications, and endoscopic treatment. Clinical success (CS) was evaluated considering referral delay, healing time, surgery, and complications type. Logistic regression was performed to identify variables of CS.
Results: In the study period, we treated 339 fistulae (33.2%), 324 leaks (31.8%), 198 post-sleeve gastrectomy twist/stenosis (19.4%), 95 post-RYGB stenosis (9.3 %), 37 collections (3.6%), 15 LAGB migrations (1.5%), 7 weight regains (0.7%), and 2 hemorrhages (0.2%). Main endoscopic treatments were as follows: pigtail-stent positioning under endoscopic view for both leaks (CS 86.1%) and fistulas (CS 77.2%), or under EUS-guidance for collections (CS 88.2%); dilations and/or stent positioning for sleeve twist/stenosis (CS 80.6%) and bypass stenosis (CS 81.5%). After a median (IQR) follow-up of 18.5 months (4.29-38.68), complications rate was 1.9%. We found a 1% increased risk of redo-surgery every 10 days of delay to the first endoscopic treatment. Endoscopically treated patients had a more frequent regular diet compared to re-operated patients.
Conclusions: Endoscopic treatment of BS-AEs following a standardized algorithm is safe and effective. Early endoscopic treatment is associated with an increased CS rate.
Keywords: Adverse events; Bariatric surgery; Double pigtail; Endoscopic internal drainage; Endoscopy; Fistula; Gastric by-pass; LAMS; Lap band; Leak; SEMS; Sleeve gastrectomy; Stenosis; Stricture; Twist.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
References
-
- Ponce J, DeMaria EJ, Nguyen NT, et al. American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery estimation of bariatric surgery procedures in 2015 and surgeon workforce in the United States. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2016;12(9):1637–9. - DOI
-
- Buchwald H, Avidor Y, Braunwald E, et al. Bariatric surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA. 2004;292(14):1724–37. - DOI
-
- Altieri MS, Pryor A, Bates A, et al. Bariatric procedures in adolescents are safe in accredited centers. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2018;14(9):1368–72. - DOI
-
- Lainas P, Dammaro C, Gaillard M, et al. Safety and short-term outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy for patients over 65 years old with severe obesity. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2018;14(7):952–9. - DOI
-
- Jaruvongvanich V, Wongjarupong N, Vantanasiri K, et al. Midterm outcome of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in Asians: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Surg. 2020;30(4):1459–67. - DOI
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials