Scholarlink

Background <p>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.</p> Objectives <p>To assess the prevalence and 30-day serious complication rates of SG and RYGB following fundoplication, and to identify independent predictors of adverse outcomes.</p> Methods <p>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.</p> Results <p>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%, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Mean BMI was higher in F-SG (42.4 vs. 40.1&#xa0;kg/m², <i>p</i> &lt; 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%, <i>p</i> = 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, <i>p</i> = 0.207).</p> Conclusions <p>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.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

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

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月22日

查看全文
  • Pattharasai Kachornvitaya,
  • Valentin Mocanu,
  • Mélissa V. Wills,
  • Juan S. Barajas-Gamboa,
  • Salvador Navarrete,
  • Ricard Corcelles,
  • Andrew Strong,
  • Suthep Udomsawaengsup,
  • Matthew Kroh,
  • Jerry Dang

摘要

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.