Caroline E. Sheppard

The Economic Impact of Weight Regain

Background. Obesity is well known for being associated with significant economic repercussions. Bariatric surgery is the only evidence-based solution to this problem as well as a cost-effective method of addressing the concern. Numerous authors have calculated the cost effectiveness and cost savings of bariatric surgery; however, to date the economic impact of weight regain as a component of overall cost has not been addressed. Methods. The literature search was conducted to elucidate the direct costs of obesity and primary bariatric surgery, the rate of weight recidivism and surgical revision, and any costs therein. Results. The quoted cost of obesity in Canada was

Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery: a strategy to transform surgical care across a health system

2.0 billion–

A comparison of revisional and primary bariatric surgery

6.7 billion in 2013 CAD. The median percentage of bariatric procedures that fail due to weight gain or insufficient weight loss is 20% (average: 21.1% ± 10.1%, range: 5.2–39, n = 10). Revision of primary surgeries on average ranges from 2.5% to 18.4%, and depending on the procedure accounts for an additional cost between

Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy with Tri-Staple ™ Reinforcement for Severe Obesity

14,000 and

A Case Study of Severe Esophageal Dysmotility following Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

50,000 USD per patient. Discussion. There was a significant deficit of the literature pertaining to the cost of revision surgery as compared with primary bariatric surgery. As such, the cycle of weight recidivism and bariatric revisions has not as of yet been introduced into any previous cost analysis of bariatric surgery.

Cost of Obesity Recurrence

BackgroundEnhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs have been shown to have a positive impact on outcome. The ERAS care system includes an evidence-based guideline, an implementation program, and an interactive audit system to support practice change. The purpose of this study is to describe the use of the Theoretic Domains Framework (TDF) in changing surgical care and application of the Quality Enhancement Research Initiative (QUERI) model to analyze end-to-end implementation of ERAS in colorectal surgery across multiple sites within a single health system. The ultimate intent of this work is to allow for the development of a model for spread, scale, and sustainability of ERAS in Alberta Health Services (AHS).MethodsERAS for colorectal surgery was implemented at two sites and then spread to four additional sites. The ERAS Interactive Audit System (EIAS) was used to assess compliance with the guidelines, length of stay, readmissions, and complications. Data sources informing knowledge translation included surveys, focus groups, interviews, and other qualitative data sources such as minutes and status updates. The QUERI model and TDF were used to thematically analyze 189 documents with 2188 quotes meeting the inclusion criteria. Data sources were analyzed for barriers or enablers, organized into a framework that included individual to organization impact, and areas of focus for guideline implementation.ResultsCompliance with the evidence-based guidelines for ERAS in colorectal surgery at baseline was 40%. Post implementation compliance, consistent with adoption of best practice, improved to 65%. Barriers and enablers were categorized as clinical practice (22%), individual provider (26%), organization (19%), external environment (7%), and patients (25%). In the Alberta context, 26% of barriers and enablers to ERAS implementation occurred at the site and unit levels, with a provider focus 26% of the time, a patient focus 26% of the time, and a system focus 22% of the time.ConclusionsUsing the ERAS care system and applying the QUERI model and TDF allow for identification of strategies that can support diffusion and sustainment of innovation of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery across multiple sites within a health care system.

Rates of Reflux Before and After Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy for Severe Obesity

Background Revisional surgery is an important component of addressing weight regain and complications following primary bariatric surgery. Owing to provincial need and the complexity of this patient population, a specialized multidisciplinary revision clinic was developed. We sought to characterize patients who undergo revision surgery and compare their outcomes with primary bariatric surgery clinic data. Methods We completed a retrospective chart review of bariatric revision clinic patients compared with primary bariatric surgery patients from December 2009 to June 2014. Results We reviewed the charts of 2769 primary bariatric clinic patients, 886 of whom had bariatric surgery, and 534 revision bariatric clinic patients, 83 of whom had revision surgery. Fewer revision clinic patients underwent surgery than primary clinic patients (22% v. 32%). The mean preoperative body mass index (BMI) was 44.7 ± 9.5 in revision patients compared with 45.7 ± 7.6 in primary bariatric surgery patients. Most revision patients had a prior vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG; 48%) or a laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB; 24%). Bands were removed in 36% of all LAGB patients presenting to clinic. Of the 134 procedures performed in the revision clinic, 83 were bariatric weight loss surgeries, and 51 were band removals. Revision clinic patients experienced a significant decrease in BMI (from 44.7 ± 9.5 to 33.8 ± 7.5, p < 0.001); their BMI at 12-month follow-up was similar to that of primary clinic patients (34.5 ± 7.0, p = 0.7). Complications were significantly more frequent in revision patients than primary patients (41% v. 15%, p < 0.001). Conclusion A bariatric revision clinic manages a wide variety of complex patients distinct from those seen in a primary clinic. Operative candidates at the revision clinic are chosen based on favourable medical, anatomic and psychosocial factors, keeping in mind the resource constraints of a public health care system.

Medical tourism and bariatric surgery: who pays?

Background: Obesity is a chronic disease that affects over 500 million adults globally. Bariatric surgery is the only evidence-based treatment to achieve sustainable weight loss. Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG) is a restrictive procedure with important physiologic changes. Staple line dehiscence and hemorrhage represent two of the major complications associated with this procedure. Respectively, surgeons have attempted numerous modalities to avert these issues by using various stapling products, buttresses and hemostatic adjuncts. The purpose of this study is to analyze the utility of a Tri-staple non-buttressed stapler on the incidence of postoperative leakage and hemorrhage post LSG. Methods: A retrospective review of medical records was performed for 97 consecutive patients that underwent LSG with the Tri-Staple™ between July 2011 and October 2012. Results: The mean age of patients was 44.4 ± 9.2 years, with mean preoperative BMI of 48.5±10.6kg/m2. Preoperative comorbidities included Type 2 diabetes (34%), hypertension (42%), dyslipidemia (28%), and obstructive sleep apnea (43%). The mean operative time was 80.0 ± 22.0min. There were no intraoperative leaks identified. There were no documented postoperative leaks or bleeds after a median follow up of 12 months. At 12 months following surgery, BMI had significantly decreased to 33.9 ± 6.6 kg/m2 (p<0.05), corresponding to a EWL% of 54.8% ± 24.2%. HbA1c was significantly reduced after 1 year (6.7 ± 1.2 vs 5.6 ± 0.7, P<0.05). Conclusion: The Tri-Staple™ configuration used in LSG seems to mitigate staple line failures. Furthermore, weight loss and co morbidity reduction was determined to be acceptable and equivalent to LSG using other staplers

The cost of bariatric medical tourism on the Canadian healthcare system.

Following bariatric surgery, a proportion of patients have been observed to experience reflux, dysphagia, and/or odynophagia. The etiology of this constellation of symptoms has not been systematically studied to date. This case describes a 36-year-old female with severe esophageal dysmotility following LSG. Many treatments had been used over a course of 3 years, and while calcium channel blockers reversed the esophageal dysmotility seen on manometry, significant symptoms of dysphagia persisted. Subsequently, the patient underwent a gastric bypass, which seemed to partially relieve her symptoms. Her dysphagia was no longer considered to be associated with a structural cause but attributed to a “sleeve dysmotility syndrome.” Considering the difficulties with managing sleeve dysmotility syndrome, it is reasonable to consider the need for preoperative testing. The question is whether motility studies should be required for all patients planning to undergo a LSG to rule out preexisting esophageal dysmotility and whether conversion to gastric bypass is the preferred method for managing esophageal dysmotility after LSG.

Financial costs and patients' perceptions of medical tourism in bariatric surgery.

Bariatric surgery allows patients to lose a substantial proportion of their excess body weight; however, over time this weight may slowly return. This chapter will discuss the financial impact of obesity and its management through surgical intervention, as well as the rate of weight recurrence after bariatric surgery. The mechanistic and patient behavioural causes of this weight regain will be discussed. Revisional procedures are the current approach to modifying obesity recurrence, and various management options will be reviewed. Additionally, the costs of this endeavour, as well as the tools for evaluating costs and the economic impact of bariatric surgical revision, will be explored.