Kees van Laarhoven

Secondary surgery after sleeve gastrectomy: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch

BACKGROUND Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has gained popularity as a stand-alone procedure with good short-term results for weight loss. However, in the long-term, weight regain and other complications are reported. Demand for secondary surgery is rising, partly for these reasons. OBJECTIVES To review the indications and effects of secondary surgery, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD/DS) versus laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB), after LSG. METHODS Data from all patients who underwent revision of LSG was retrospectively analyzed, concerning data on indications for secondary surgery, weight loss, and complications. RESULTS 43 Patients underwent secondary surgery after LSG; 25 BPD/DS and 18 LRYGB, respectively. Main indications for secondary surgery were inadequate weight loss (n = 17 [40%]) and weight regain (n = 8 [19%]). For these indications, the median excess weight loss was greater for BPD/DS (59% [range 15-113]) compared to LRYGB (23% [range -49-84]) (P = .008) after 34 months (range 14-79). In case of dysphagia or gastroesophageal reflux disease the complaints resolved after converting to LRYGB. BPD/DS patients were more likely to develop a short-term complication and vitamin deficiencies compared to LRYGB. CONCLUSIONS Secondary surgery of LSG to BPD/DS or LRYGB is feasible with slightly more complications after BPD/DS. Conversion to LRYGB is preferred in cases of dysphagia or gastroesophageal reflux disease. In cases of weight regain or insufficient weight loss after LSG, patients had better weight loss with a BPD/DS; however, this procedure has the risk of complications, such as severe vitamin deficiencies.

Optimization of Vitamin Suppletion After Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass Surgery Can Lower Postoperative Deficiencies: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Abstract Iron, vitamin B12, and folic acid deficiencies are among the most common deficiencies occurring after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB). The present study evaluates the effectiveness of a specially designed multivitamin supplement (WLS Forte, FitForMe, Rotterdam, the Netherlands) specifically developed for LRYGB patients. A triple-blind, randomized, 12-month study was conducted comparing WLS forte with a standard multivitamin supplement (sMVS) containing approximately 100% of the recommended daily allowance (RDA) for iron, vitamin B12, and folic acid. WLS Forte contains vitamin B12 14000% RDA, iron 500% RDA, and folic acid 300% RDA. In total, 148 patients (74 in each group) underwent a LRYGB procedure. Baseline characteristics were similar for both groups. Per protocol analysis demonstrated that sMVS treatment was associated with a decline in ferritin (−24.4 ± 70.1 &mgr;g/L) and vitamin B12 (−45.9 ± 150.3 pmol/L) over 12 months, whereas in WLS Forte patients, ferritin remained stable (+3.2 ± 93.2 &mgr;g/L) and vitamin B12 increased significantly (+55.1 ± 144.2 pmol/L). The number of patients developing ferritin or vitamin B12 deficiency was significantly lower with WLS Forte compared with sMVS (P < 0.05). Iron deficiency (ID) was reduced by 88% after WLS Forte compared with sMVS. Adverse events related to supplement use did not occur. An optimized multivitamin supplement is safe and reduces the development of iron and vitamin B12 deficiencies after LRYGB.

What is the evidence for the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum? A systematic review

BackgroundLaparoscopic surgery has several advantages when compared to open surgery, including faster postoperative recovery and lower pain scores. However, for laparoscopy, a pneumoperitoneum is required to create workspace between the abdominal wall and intraabdominal organs. Increased intraabdominal pressure may also have negative implications on cardiovascular, pulmonary, and intraabdominal organ functionings. To overcome these negative consequences, several trials have been performed comparing low- versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.MethodsA systematic review of all randomized controlled clinical trials and observational studies comparing low- versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.Results and conclusionsQuality assessment showed that the overall quality of evidence was moderate to low. Postoperative pain scores were reduced by the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum. With appropriate perioperative measures, the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum does not seem to have clinical advantages as compared to standard pressure on cardiac and pulmonary function. Although there are indications that low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is associated with less liver and kidney injury when compared to standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum, this does not seem to have clinical implications for healthy individuals. The influence of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum on adhesion formation, anastomosis healing, tumor metastasis, intraocular and intracerebral pressure, and thromboembolic complications remains uncertain, as no human clinical trials have been performed. The influence of pressure on surgical conditions and safety has not been established to date. In conclusion, the most important benefit of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is lower postoperative pain scores, supported by a moderate quality of evidence. However, the quality of surgical conditions and safety of the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum need to be established, as are the values and preferences of physicians and patients regarding the potential benefits and risks. Therefore, the recommendation to use low-pressure pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopy is weak, and more studies are required.

A comparison of technique modifications in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective To compare the effectiveness of different technique modifications in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Design Systematic review and meta-analyses. Data Sources Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Central from January 1st 1997 until April 1st 2014. Study Design All cohort studies and randomized clinical trials comparing fully laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with modifications of the standard technique including hand-assisted, retroperitoneoscopic and single port techniques, were included. Data-Extraction and Analysis The primary outcome measure was the number of complications. Secondary outcome measures included: conversion to open surgery, first warm ischemia time, estimated blood loss, graft function, operation time and length of hospital stay. Each technique modification was compared with standard laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Data was pooled with a random effects meta-analysis using odds ratios, weighted mean differences and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals. To assess heterogeneity, the I2 statistic was used. First, randomized clinical trials and cohort studies were analyzed separately, when data was comparable, pooled analysis were performed. Results 31 studies comparing laparoscopic donor nephrectomy with other technique modifications were identified, including 5 randomized clinical trials and 26 cohort studies. Since data of randomized clinical trials and cohort studies were comparable, these data were pooled. There were significantly less complications in the retroperitoneoscopic group as compared to transperitoneal group (OR 0.52, 95%CI 0.33–0.83, I2 = 0%). Hand-assisted techniques showed shorter first warm ischemia and operation times. Conclusions Hand-assistance reduces the operation and first warm ischemia times and may improve safety for surgeons with less experience in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. The retroperitoneoscopic approach was significantly associated with less complications. However, given the, in general, poor to intermediate quality and considerable heterogeneity in the included studies, further high-quality studies are required. Trial Registration The review protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database before the start of the review process (CRD number 42013006565).

Assessment of available evidence in the management of gallbladder and bile duct stones: a systematic review of international guidelines

BACKGROUND Gallstone disease is a frequent disorder in the Western world with a prevalence of 10-20%. Recommendations for the assessment and management of gallstones vary internationally. The aim of this systematic review was to assess quality of guideline recommendations for treatment of gallstones. METHODS PubMed, EMBASE and websites of relevant associations were systematically searched. Guidelines without a critical appraisal of literature were excluded. Quality of guidelines was determined using the AGREE II instrument. Recommendations without consensus or with low level of evidence were considered to define problem areas and clinical research gaps. RESULTS Fourteen guidelines were included. Overall quality of guidelines was low, with a mean score of 57/100 (standard deviation 19). Five of 14 guidelines were considered suitable for use in clinical practice without modifications. Ten recommendations from all included guidelines were based on low level of evidence and subject to controversy. These included major topics, such as definition of symptomatic gallstones, indications for cholecystectomy and intraoperative cholangiography. CONCLUSION Only five guidelines on gallstones are evidence-based and of a high quality, but even in these controversy exists on important topics. High quality evidence is needed in specific areas before an international guideline can be developed and endorsed worldwide.

Comparison of the effectiveness of low pressure pneumoperitoneum with profound muscle relaxation during laparoscopic donor nephrectomy to optimize the quality of recovery during the early post-operative phase: study protocol for a randomized controlled clinical trial

BackgroundSince technique modifications of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy, e.g. retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy or hand-assistance, have not shown significant benefit regarding safety or improvement of recovery, further research should focus on improving postoperative recovery. The use of low pressure pneumoperitoneum has shown to significantly reduce postoperative pain after laparoscopy. To facilitate the use of low pressure pneumoperitoneum, deep neuromuscular block will be used.Methods/DesignThis trial is a phase IV, single center, double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial in which 64 patients will be randomized to: low pressure pneumoperitoneum (6 mmHg) and deep neuromuscular block or normal pressure pneumoperitoneum (12 mmHg) and deep neuromuscular block. Deep neuromuscular block is defined as post tetanic count < 5. Primary outcome measurement will be Quality of Recovery-40 questionnaire (overall score) on day 1.DiscussionThis study is the first randomized study to assess the combination of low pressure pneumoperitoneum in combination with deep neuromuscular block from a patients’ perspective. The study findings may also be applicable for other laparoscopic procedures.Trial registrationThe trial was registered at trials.gov (NCT02146417) in July 2014.