Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy Risk-Adjusted Safety Profiles after Previous Fundoplication: A 499-Patient MBSAQIP Analysis

既往行胃底折叠术后行 Roux-en-Y 胃旁路术和袖状胃切除术的风险调整安全性分析:一项纳入 499 例患者的 MBSAQIP 分析

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) frequently coexist and may necessitate surgical intervention when conservative management fails. While fundoplication is effective for GERD, many patients ultimately require metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) for obesity. The safety and prevalence of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) after prior fundoplication remains poorly characterized. OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence and 30-day serious complication rates of SG and RYGB following fundoplication, and to identify independent predictors of adverse outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the 2022–2023 MBSAQIP database identified 499 patients undergoing primary SG or RYGB after fundoplication. Outcomes assessed included leak, bleeding, reoperation, reintervention, cardiac events, pneumonia, kidney injury, thromboembolism, infection, or sepsis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for baseline differences. RESULTS: Of 499 patients, 126 (25.3%) underwent SG (F-SG) and 373 (74.7%) underwent RYGB (F-RYGB). Concomitant paraesophageal hernia repair was more common in the F-RYGB group (54.2% vs. 26.2%, p < 0.001). Mean BMI was higher in F-SG (42.4 vs. 40.1 kg/m², p < 0.001). Weight gain and GERD were the leading indications for revisional bariatric surgery. F-RYGB was associated with longer operative times, hospital stay, and higher rates of reoperation, readmission, bowel obstruction, and serious complications (9.6% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.045). Rates of anastomotic leak, postoperative bleeding, and composite wound complications were low but numerically higher in F-RYGB, without statistical significance. In multivariate analysis, procedure type was not significantly associated with serious complications (OR 2.03, 95% CI 0.68–6.09, p = 0.207). CONCLUSIONS: Both SG and RYGB appear to be safe and effective revisional options, and a history of fundoplication should not be considered a contraindication. Although RYGB was associated with longer operative times and higher early complication rates, multivariable analysis showed no significant difference in serious complications between the two procedures.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。