Alana Gebhart

Changes in the Makeup of Bariatric Surgery: A National Increase in Use of Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

BACKGROUND Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is gaining popularity in the US; however, there has been no study examining the use of sleeve gastrectomy at a national level and its impact on the use of other bariatric operations. The aim of this study was to examine contemporary changes in use and outcomes of bariatric surgery performed at academic medical centers. METHODS Using ICD-9 diagnosis and procedure codes, clinical data obtained from the University HealthSystem Consortium database for all bariatric procedures performed for the treatment of morbid obesity between October 1, 2008 and September 30, 2012 were reviewed. Quartile trends in use for the 3 most commonly performed bariatric operations were examined, and a comparison of perioperative outcomes between procedures was performed within a subset of patients with minor severity of illness. RESULTS A total of 60,738 bariatric procedures were examined. In 2008, the makeup of bariatric surgery consisted primarily of gastric bypass (66.8% laparoscopic, 8.6% open), followed by laparoscopic gastric banding (23.8%). In 2012, there was a precipitous increase in use of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (36.3 %), with a concurrent reduction in the use of laparoscopic (56.4%) and open (3.2%) gastric bypass, and a major reduction in laparoscopic gastric banding (4.1%). The length of hospital stay, in-hospital morbidity and mortality, and costs for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy were found to be between those of laparoscopic gastric banding and laparoscopic gastric bypass. CONCLUSIONS Within the context of academic medical centers, there has been a recent change in the makeup of bariatric surgery. There has been an increase in the use of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, which has had an impact primarily on reducing the use of laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding.

Bariatric surgery in the elderly: 2009–2013

BACKGROUND Ample evidence supports the safety and effectiveness of bariatric surgery in the general adult population but more information is needed in patients age 60 years and older (elderly). We previously examined the outcome of bariatric surgery performed in the elderly between 1999 and 2005 using the University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC) Clinical Database. The aim of this study was to analyze contemporary outcomes of bariatric surgery in the elderly and to compare them to previous data from 1999-2005. METHODS Using International Classification of Diseases, 9(th) Revision diagnosis and procedure codes, we obtained data from the UHC database for all elderly (age >60 yr) and adult nonelderly (age 19-60 yr) patients who underwent bariatric surgery for the treatment of morbid obesity between 2009 and 2013. Outcome measures, such as patient characteristics, LOS, morbidity, and observed-to-expected (risk-adjusted) mortality ratio were compared between elderly and nonelderly patients. RESULTS Bariatric surgery in the elderly made up 2.7% of all bariatric operations in 1999-2005. This represents an increase to 10.1% of all bariatric operations in 2009-2013. In-hospital mortality was .30% for the nonelderly and .70% for the elderly in 1999-2005, whereas contemporary in-hospital mortality has decreased to .11% for the nonelderly and .05% for the elderly. CONCLUSION Our results show that the number of bariatric procedures performed in the elderly is increasing and now represents 10% of all bariatric operations performed at academic centers. In-hospital mortality in bariatric surgery in the elderly has improved so much that it is now even better than in-hospital mortality in the nonelderly in 1999-2005.

Impact of accreditation in bariatric surgery

BACKGROUND Several studies have shown improved outcomes associated with accredited bariatric centers. The aim of our study was to examine the outcomes of bariatric surgery performed at accredited versus nonaccredited centers using a nationally representative database. Additionally, we aimed to determine if the presence of bariatric surgery accreditation could lead to improved outcomes for morbidly obese patients undergoing other general laparoscopic operations. METHODS Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, for data between 2008 and 2010, clinical data of morbidly obese patients who underwent bariatric surgery, laparoscopic antireflux surgery, cholecystectomy, and colectomy were analyzed according to the hospitals bariatric accreditation status. RESULTS A total of 277,068 bariatric operations were performed during the 3-year period, with 88.4% of cases performed at accredited centers. In-hospital mortality was significantly lower at accredited compared to nonaccredited centers (.08% versus .19%, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that nonaccredited centers had higher risk-adjusted mortality for bariatric procedures compared to accredited centers (odds ratio [OR] 3.1, P<.01). Post hoc analysis showed improved mortality for patients who underwent gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy at accredited centers compared to nonaccredited centers (.09% versus .27%, respectively, P<.01). Patients with a high severity of illness who underwent bariatric surgery also had lower mortality rates when the surgery was performed at accredited versus nonaccredited centers (.17% versus .45%, respectively, P<.01). Multivariate analysis showed that morbidly obese patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (OR 2.4, P<.05) and antireflux surgery (OR 2.03, P<.01) at nonaccredited centers had higher rates of serious complications. CONCLUSION Accreditation in bariatric surgery was associated with more than a 3-fold reduction in risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality. Resources established for bariatric surgery accreditation may have the secondary benefit of improving outcomes for morbidly obese patients undergoing general laparoscopic operations.

Su1849 Managing Complications After Bariatric Surgery: A Decade of Outcomes After Laparoscopic Intervention

S A T A b st ra ct s endophytic or in anatomically difficult locations. This technique allowed patients to avoid an extensive resection. Endoscopic resection alone was associated with a positive deep margin, which the push-pull technique managed with a laparoscopic, full-thickness, R0 resection site resection. In highly selected populations, this hybrid push pull technique may represent an improvement over standard endoscopic or laparoscopic management for gastric GISTs.