Recent Submissions

  • The first modified Delphi consensus statement on sleeve gastrectomy.

    Mahawar, Kamal K; Omar, Islam; Singhal, Rishi; Aggarwal, Sandeep; Allouch, Mustafa Ismail; Alsabah, Salman K; Angrisani, Luigi; Badiuddin, Faruq Mohamed; Balibrea, Jose María; Bashir, Ahmad; et al. (Springer, 2021-01-12)
    Introduction: Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is the commonest bariatric procedure worldwide. Yet there is significant variation in practice concerning its various aspects. This paper report results from the first modified Delphi consensus-building exercise on SG. Methods: We established a committee of 54 globally recognized opinion makers in this field. The committee agreed to vote on several statements concerning SG. An agreement or disagreement amongst ≥ 70.0% experts was construed as a consensus. Results: The committee achieved a consensus of agreement (n = 71) or disagreement (n = 7) for 78 out of 97 proposed statements after two rounds of voting. The committee agreed with 96.3% consensus that the characterization of SG as a purely restrictive procedure was inaccurate and there was 88.7% consensus that SG was not a suitable standalone, primary, surgical weight loss option for patients with Barrett's esophagus (BE) without dysplasia. There was an overwhelming consensus of 92.5% that the sleeve should be fashioned over an orogastric tube of 36-40 Fr and a 90.7% consensus that surgeons should stay at least 1 cm away from the angle of His. Remarkably, the committee agreed with 81.1% consensus that SG patients should undergo a screening endoscopy every 5 years after surgery to screen for BE. Conclusion: A multinational team of experts achieved consensus on several aspects of SG. The findings of this exercise should help improve the outcomes of SG, the commonest bariatric procedure worldwide, and guide future research on this topic.
  • Perioperative mortality in bariatric surgery: meta-analysis

    Robertson, A G N; Wiggins, T; Robertson, F P; Huppler, L; Doleman, B; Harrison, E M; Hollyman, M; Welbourn, R; Wiggins, Tom; Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery; et al. (Oxford University PressBJS Foundation, 2021-07-16)
    Background: Bariatric surgery is an established treatment for severe obesity; however, fewer than 1 per cent of eligible patients undergo surgery. The perceived risk of surgery may contribute to the low uptake. The aim of this study was to determine perioperative mortality associated with bariatric surgery, comparing different operation types and data sources. Methods: A literature search of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted to identify studies published between 1 January 2014 and 31 July 2020. Inclusion criteria were studies of at least 1000 patients reporting short-term mortality after bariatric surgery. Data were collected on RCTs. Meta-analysis was performed to establish overall mortality rates across different study types. The primary outcome measure was perioperative mortality. Different operation types were compared, along with study type, in subgroup analyses. The study was registered at PROSPERO (2019: CRD 42019131632). Results: Some 4356 articles were identified and 58 met the inclusion criteria. Data were available on over 3.6 million patients. There were 4707 deaths. Pooled analysis showed an overall mortality rate of 0.08 (95 per cent c.i. 0.06 to 0.10; 95 per cent prediction interval 0 to 0.21) per cent. In subgroup analysis, there was no statistically significant difference between overall, 30-day, 90-day or in-hospital mortality (P = 0.29). There was no significant difference in reported mortality for RCTs, large studies, national databases or registries (P = 0.60). The pooled mortality rates by procedure type in ascending order were: 0.03 per cent for gastric band, 0.05 per cent for sleeve gastrectomy, 0.09 per cent for one-anastomosis gastric bypass, 0.09 per cent for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, and 0.41 per cent for duodenal switch (P < 0.001 between operations). Conclusion: Bariatric surgery is safe, with low reported perioperative mortality rates.
  • Remission of diabetes mellitus after bariatric surgery: the putative link with worsening diabetic retinopathy and a need for ongoing postoperative follow-up retinal screening

    Jacob, Sarita; Varughese, George I; Jacob, Sarita; Ophthalmology; Medical and Dental; University Hospitals of North Midlands NHS Trust; University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust (Elsevier, 2023-12-19)
    No abstract available.
  • How safe bariatric surgery is-an update on perioperative mortality for clinicians and patients.

    Huppler, Lucy; Robertson, Andrew G; Wiggins, Tom; Hollyman, Marianne; Welbourn, Richard; Wiggins, Tom; Surgery; Medical and Dental (Wiley-Blackwell, 2022-03-09)
    Bariatric, metabolic or weight loss surgery produces sustained weight loss and imporovement in obesity related diseases. Bariatric surgery has existed for decades but there is limited reliable data on the risk of perioperative mortality following the procedures. This commentary focuses on a recent meta-analysis which has produced contemporaneous mortality data, and the findings are significant. Utilising data from 3.6 million patients the study has shown an overall pooled perioperative mortality of 0.08%, a significantly reduced risk compared to previous, smaller studies. This finding increases our knowledge of surgical risk for these procedures and should now equip health care groups to challenge barriers to uptake of bariatric surgery. Barriers currently include a worldwide lack of focus on treating obesity, lack of funding and resource from commissioners, and a general public and professional view that bariatric surgery may be high risk. In reality, this figure equates to mortality risk for procedures generally considered 'safe' such as laparoscopic cholecystectomy and knee arthroplasty. Bariatric surgery is a safe option for achieving sustained weight-loss and the treatment of obesity related diseases, and refusing access to surgery on the grounds of perioperative safety should now be an outdated premise.
  • Cost-effectiveness of bariatric surgery versus community weight management to treat obesity-related idiopathic intracranial hypertension: evidence from a single-payer healthcare system.

    Elliot, Laura; Frew, Emma; Mollan, Susan P; Mitchell, James L; Yiangou, Andreas; Alimajstorovic, Zerin; Ottridge, Ryan S; Wakerley, Ben R; Thaller, Mark; Grech, Olivia; et al. (Elsevier, 2021-03-30)
    Background: Idiopathic intracranial hypertension (IIH) is associated with significant morbidity, predominantly affecting women of childbearing age living with obesity. Weight loss has demonstrated successful disease-modifying effects; however, the long-term cost-effectiveness of weight loss interventions for the treatment of IIH has not yet been established. Objectives: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of weight-loss treatments for IIH. Setting: Single-payer healthcare system (National Health Service, England). Methods: A Markov model was developed comparing bariatric surgery with a community weight management intervention over 5-, 10-, and 20-year time horizons. Transition probabilities, utilities, and resource use were informed by the IIH Weight Trial (IIH:WT), alongside the published literature. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to characterize uncertainty within the model. Results: In the base case analysis, over a 20-year time horizon, bariatric surgery was "dominant," led to cost savings of £49,500, and generated an additional 1.16 quality-adjusted life years in comparison to the community weight management intervention. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis indicated a probability of 98% that bariatric surgery is the dominant option in terms of cost-effectiveness. Conclusion: This economic modeling study has shown that when compared to community weight management, bariatric surgery is a highly cost-effective treatment option for IIH in women living with obesity. The model shows that surgery leads to long-term cost savings and health benefits, but that these do not occur until after 5 years post surgery, and then gradually increase over time.
  • Global variations in preoperative practices concerning patients seeking primary bariatric and metabolic surgery (PACT Study): A survey of 634 bariatric healthcare professionals.

    Yang, Wah; Abbott, Sally; Borg, Cynthia-Michelle; Chesworth, Paul; Graham, Yitka; Logue, Jennifer; Ogden, Jane; O'Kane, Mary; Ratcliffe, Denise; Sherf-Dagan, Shiri; et al. (Nature Publishing Group, 2022-04-11)
    Background: Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery (BMS) is a popular weight loss intervention worldwide, yet few scientific studies have examined variations in preoperative practices globally. This study aimed to capture global variations in preoperative practices concerning patients planned for BMS. Methods: A 41-item questionnaire-based survey was designed and the survey link was freely distributed on social and scientific media platforms, email groups and circulated through personal connections of authors. The survey included eight parts: basic information; criteria for BMS; preoperative nutritional screening; preoperative weight loss; preoperative diets for liver size reduction; preoperative glycemic control; other laboratory investigations and preparations; decision making, education, and consents. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse data and graphs were used for representation where applicable. Results: Six hundred thirty-four bariatric healthcare professionals from 76 countries/regions completed the survey. Of these, n = 310 (48.9%) were from public hospitals, n = 466 (73.5%) were surgeons, and the rest were multidisciplinary professionals. More than half of respondents reported using local society/association guidelines in their practice (n = 310, 61.6%). The great majority of respondents routinely recommend nutritional screening preoperatively (n = 385, 77.5%), mandatory preoperative diets for liver size reduction (n = 220, 53.1%), routine screening for T2DM (n = 371, 90.7%), and mandate a glycemic control target before BMS in patients with T2DM (n = 203, 55.6%). However, less than half (n = 183, 43.9%) recommend mandatory preoperative weight loss to all patients. Most respondents (n = 296, 77.1%) recommend psychological intervention before surgery for patients diagnosed with psychological conditions. Variations were also identified in laboratory investigations and optimisation; and in the aspects of decision making, education and consent. Conclusions: This survey identified significant global variations in preoperative practices concerning patients seeking primary BMS. Our findings could facilitate future research for the determination of best practice in these areas of variations, and consensus-building to guide clinical practice while we wait for that evidence to emerge.
  • Safety and feasibility of revisional bariatric surgery following Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Band - Outcomes from a large UK private practice

    Super, Jonathan; Charalampakis, Vasileios; Tahrani, Abd; Kumar, Sajith; Bankenahally, Rajneesh; Raghuraman, Govindan; Jambulingam, P. S.; Kelly, Jamie; Ammori, Basil J.; Singhal, Rishi; et al. (Elsevier, 2021-07)
    Abstract Background: Revisional bariatric surgery is unavoidable in a proportion of patients. Despite its need, the development of this speciality has been hampered by its complexity and preferred delivery in institutional set ups. Although primary bariatric surgery can be delivered in the private sector; safety and feasibility of revisional bariatric surgery remains unexplored in this setting. Materials and methods: Patients undergoing revisional bariatric surgery following previous Laparoscopic Adjustable Gastric Band (LAGB) between 2008 and 2019 at a single private bariatric unit with a minimum follow up of at least 6 months were included. The primary aim was safety outcomes and 30-day morbidity. Results: 178 patients with BMI of 45.6 ± 8.2 kg/m2 underwent revisional bariatric surgery. One stage conversion was performed for 86.5% of the cases. At 9.5 ± 5.3 months follow up, BMI and percentage excess BMI loss were 31.8 ± 6.2 kg/m2 and 62.6 ± 40% respectively. There was no mortality, and the major complication rate was 2.8%. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of complications based on one-stage vs. two-stage conversion (p = 0.52). There were no differences in weight loss outcomes post-revisional surgery according to the indication for revision (p = 0.446) or weight loss following primary surgery (p = 0.12). Conclusion: Revisional bariatric surgery can be delivered safely in the private sector with good outcomes. One-stage conversions are feasible and do not detrimentally affect the morbidity of the procedure or the weight loss outcomes. More importantly, success following revisional surgery is independent of the indication for revision and weight loss outcomes following primary surgery.