30-Day Outcomes of Revisional Bariatric Stapling Procedures: First Report Based on MBSAQIP Data Registry
Introduction The number of bariatric revisional cases has nearly doubled since 2011, and now comprises 13.6% of the total number of cases. The objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes and safety of the two most common stapling revisional procedures, namely, sleeve and gastric bypass in co...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Obesity surgery 2018-08, Vol.28 (8), p.2233-2240 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 2240 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 8 |
| container_start_page | 2233 |
| container_title | Obesity surgery |
| container_volume | 28 |
| creator | El Chaar, Maher Stoltzfus, Jill Melitics, Maureen Claros, Leonardo Zeido, Ahmad |
| description | Introduction
The number of bariatric revisional cases has nearly doubled since 2011, and now comprises 13.6% of the total number of cases. The objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes and safety of the two most common stapling revisional procedures, namely, sleeve and gastric bypass in comparison to primary stapling procedures using the MBSAQIP data registry.
Methods
We reviewed all the sleeve and gastric bypass cases entered between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015, in the MBSAQIP data registry. We, then, identified sleeve and bypass patients who have had a previous bariatric procedure. Demographics and 30 day outcomes of all sleeve and gastric bypass patients were analyzed. We conducted within group comparisons comparing primary sleeve gastrectomy (PS) and primary gastric bypass (PB) patients to revisional sleeve (RS) and revisional gastric bypass (RB) patients, respectively. We, then, conducted group comparisons comparing RS to RB patients.
Results
The total number of patients analyzed was 141,577 (98,292 or 69% sleeve patients and 43,285 or 31% gastric bypass patients). Among the sleeve patients, 92,666 (94%) had a PS and 5626 (6%) had RS. Among the bypass patients, 39,567 (91%) had a PB and 3718 patients (9%) had RB. 30-day readmission rate of RS was significantly higher as compared to PS (4.1 vs 0.4%,
p
|
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11695-018-3140-0 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2051656270</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2050759301</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-e631bce330b4a71cf48bfb379e1efc31b512acc2601d9e1832093115e8ac56c83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU1P3DAQhq2qqGxpf0AvyFIvvbjM2InjcOOjFCQQtLRny_E6i1E23tpOpf339Xb5kJA4jTTvM-9o5iXkE8JXBGgOEqJsawaomMAKGLwhM2xAMai4ektm0EpgquVil7xP6R6Ao-T8HdnlrWqkqmBG7gSwU7Om11O2YekSDT396f765MNoBnpsojc5ektvs1kNflzQmxism0_RpUN65mPKhV-FmAub3JyGkV4d3x79uLihpyabIi58ynH9gez0Zkju40PdI7_Pvv06OWeX198vTo4umRUNz8xJgZ11QkBXmQZtX6mu70TTOnS9LVqN3FjLJeC89JTg0ArE2ilja2mV2CNftr6rGP5MLmW99Mm6YTCjC1PSHGqUteQNFPTzC_Q-TLGc_Z-Cpm4FYKFwS9kYUoqu16volyauNYLexKC3MegSg97EoDfO-w_OU7d086eJx78XgG-BVKRx4eLz6tdd_wGi9JCQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2050759301</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>30-Day Outcomes of Revisional Bariatric Stapling Procedures: First Report Based on MBSAQIP Data Registry</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>El Chaar, Maher ; Stoltzfus, Jill ; Melitics, Maureen ; Claros, Leonardo ; Zeido, Ahmad</creator><creatorcontrib>El Chaar, Maher ; Stoltzfus, Jill ; Melitics, Maureen ; Claros, Leonardo ; Zeido, Ahmad</creatorcontrib><description><![CDATA[Introduction
The number of bariatric revisional cases has nearly doubled since 2011, and now comprises 13.6% of the total number of cases. The objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes and safety of the two most common stapling revisional procedures, namely, sleeve and gastric bypass in comparison to primary stapling procedures using the MBSAQIP data registry.
Methods
We reviewed all the sleeve and gastric bypass cases entered between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015, in the MBSAQIP data registry. We, then, identified sleeve and bypass patients who have had a previous bariatric procedure. Demographics and 30 day outcomes of all sleeve and gastric bypass patients were analyzed. We conducted within group comparisons comparing primary sleeve gastrectomy (PS) and primary gastric bypass (PB) patients to revisional sleeve (RS) and revisional gastric bypass (RB) patients, respectively. We, then, conducted group comparisons comparing RS to RB patients.
Results
The total number of patients analyzed was 141,577 (98,292 or 69% sleeve patients and 43,285 or 31% gastric bypass patients). Among the sleeve patients, 92,666 (94%) had a PS and 5626 (6%) had RS. Among the bypass patients, 39,567 (91%) had a PB and 3718 patients (9%) had RB. 30-day readmission rate of RS was significantly higher as compared to PS (4.1 vs 0.4%,
p
< 0.05). The incidence of at least one complication requiring reoperation or reintervention within 30 days following RS was twice as high as compared to PS (1.9 and 2% for RS vs 0.9 and 1.1% for PS respectively,
p
< 0.05). Length of stay and 30 day mortality rates for PS and RS were the same. 30-day readmission rate of RB as compared to PB was 8.3 vs 6.3% (
p
< 0.05). Also, the incidence of at least one complication requiring reoperation or reintervention following RB was 3.9 and 4%, respectively vs 2.4 and 2.7% for PB (
p
< 0.05). In addition, readmission rates and unplanned admission rates to the ICU were significantly higher for RB compared to RS (8.3 and 2% for RB vs 4.1 and 0.9% for RS respectively,
p
< 0.05). The incidence of at least one reoperation or one intervention following RB were also significantly higher compared to RS (3.9 vs 1.9% and 4 vs 2% respectively,
p
< 0.05).
Conclusion
Revisional stapling procedures are safe but the rates of complications following RS and RB are twice as high compared to PS and PB. Also, RB are more likely to develop complications compared to RS.]]></description><identifier>ISSN: 0960-8923</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1708-0428</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11695-018-3140-0</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29876840</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Gastrointestinal surgery ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Obesity ; Original Contributions ; Patient admissions ; Patient safety ; Surgery ; Surgical outcomes</subject><ispartof>Obesity surgery, 2018-08, Vol.28 (8), p.2233-2240</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018</rights><rights>Obesity Surgery is a copyright of Springer, (2018). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-e631bce330b4a71cf48bfb379e1efc31b512acc2601d9e1832093115e8ac56c83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-e631bce330b4a71cf48bfb379e1efc31b512acc2601d9e1832093115e8ac56c83</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-5143-9257</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11695-018-3140-0$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11695-018-3140-0$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,41487,42556,51318</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29876840$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>El Chaar, Maher</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stoltzfus, Jill</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melitics, Maureen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Claros, Leonardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zeido, Ahmad</creatorcontrib><title>30-Day Outcomes of Revisional Bariatric Stapling Procedures: First Report Based on MBSAQIP Data Registry</title><title>Obesity surgery</title><addtitle>OBES SURG</addtitle><addtitle>Obes Surg</addtitle><description><![CDATA[Introduction
The number of bariatric revisional cases has nearly doubled since 2011, and now comprises 13.6% of the total number of cases. The objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes and safety of the two most common stapling revisional procedures, namely, sleeve and gastric bypass in comparison to primary stapling procedures using the MBSAQIP data registry.
Methods
We reviewed all the sleeve and gastric bypass cases entered between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015, in the MBSAQIP data registry. We, then, identified sleeve and bypass patients who have had a previous bariatric procedure. Demographics and 30 day outcomes of all sleeve and gastric bypass patients were analyzed. We conducted within group comparisons comparing primary sleeve gastrectomy (PS) and primary gastric bypass (PB) patients to revisional sleeve (RS) and revisional gastric bypass (RB) patients, respectively. We, then, conducted group comparisons comparing RS to RB patients.
Results
The total number of patients analyzed was 141,577 (98,292 or 69% sleeve patients and 43,285 or 31% gastric bypass patients). Among the sleeve patients, 92,666 (94%) had a PS and 5626 (6%) had RS. Among the bypass patients, 39,567 (91%) had a PB and 3718 patients (9%) had RB. 30-day readmission rate of RS was significantly higher as compared to PS (4.1 vs 0.4%,
p
< 0.05). The incidence of at least one complication requiring reoperation or reintervention within 30 days following RS was twice as high as compared to PS (1.9 and 2% for RS vs 0.9 and 1.1% for PS respectively,
p
< 0.05). Length of stay and 30 day mortality rates for PS and RS were the same. 30-day readmission rate of RB as compared to PB was 8.3 vs 6.3% (
p
< 0.05). Also, the incidence of at least one complication requiring reoperation or reintervention following RB was 3.9 and 4%, respectively vs 2.4 and 2.7% for PB (
p
< 0.05). In addition, readmission rates and unplanned admission rates to the ICU were significantly higher for RB compared to RS (8.3 and 2% for RB vs 4.1 and 0.9% for RS respectively,
p
< 0.05). The incidence of at least one reoperation or one intervention following RB were also significantly higher compared to RS (3.9 vs 1.9% and 4 vs 2% respectively,
p
< 0.05).
Conclusion
Revisional stapling procedures are safe but the rates of complications following RS and RB are twice as high compared to PS and PB. Also, RB are more likely to develop complications compared to RS.]]></description><subject>Gastrointestinal surgery</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Obesity</subject><subject>Original Contributions</subject><subject>Patient admissions</subject><subject>Patient safety</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical outcomes</subject><issn>0960-8923</issn><issn>1708-0428</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU1P3DAQhq2qqGxpf0AvyFIvvbjM2InjcOOjFCQQtLRny_E6i1E23tpOpf339Xb5kJA4jTTvM-9o5iXkE8JXBGgOEqJsawaomMAKGLwhM2xAMai4ektm0EpgquVil7xP6R6Ao-T8HdnlrWqkqmBG7gSwU7Om11O2YekSDT396f765MNoBnpsojc5ektvs1kNflzQmxism0_RpUN65mPKhV-FmAub3JyGkV4d3x79uLihpyabIi58ynH9gez0Zkju40PdI7_Pvv06OWeX198vTo4umRUNz8xJgZ11QkBXmQZtX6mu70TTOnS9LVqN3FjLJeC89JTg0ArE2ilja2mV2CNftr6rGP5MLmW99Mm6YTCjC1PSHGqUteQNFPTzC_Q-TLGc_Z-Cpm4FYKFwS9kYUoqu16volyauNYLexKC3MegSg97EoDfO-w_OU7d086eJx78XgG-BVKRx4eLz6tdd_wGi9JCQ</recordid><startdate>20180801</startdate><enddate>20180801</enddate><creator>El Chaar, Maher</creator><creator>Stoltzfus, Jill</creator><creator>Melitics, Maureen</creator><creator>Claros, Leonardo</creator><creator>Zeido, Ahmad</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5143-9257</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20180801</creationdate><title>30-Day Outcomes of Revisional Bariatric Stapling Procedures: First Report Based on MBSAQIP Data Registry</title><author>El Chaar, Maher ; Stoltzfus, Jill ; Melitics, Maureen ; Claros, Leonardo ; Zeido, Ahmad</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c372t-e631bce330b4a71cf48bfb379e1efc31b512acc2601d9e1832093115e8ac56c83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Gastrointestinal surgery</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Obesity</topic><topic>Original Contributions</topic><topic>Patient admissions</topic><topic>Patient safety</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical outcomes</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>El Chaar, Maher</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stoltzfus, Jill</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melitics, Maureen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Claros, Leonardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zeido, Ahmad</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Obesity surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>El Chaar, Maher</au><au>Stoltzfus, Jill</au><au>Melitics, Maureen</au><au>Claros, Leonardo</au><au>Zeido, Ahmad</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>30-Day Outcomes of Revisional Bariatric Stapling Procedures: First Report Based on MBSAQIP Data Registry</atitle><jtitle>Obesity surgery</jtitle><stitle>OBES SURG</stitle><addtitle>Obes Surg</addtitle><date>2018-08-01</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>2233</spage><epage>2240</epage><pages>2233-2240</pages><issn>0960-8923</issn><eissn>1708-0428</eissn><abstract><![CDATA[Introduction
The number of bariatric revisional cases has nearly doubled since 2011, and now comprises 13.6% of the total number of cases. The objective of this study is to evaluate the outcomes and safety of the two most common stapling revisional procedures, namely, sleeve and gastric bypass in comparison to primary stapling procedures using the MBSAQIP data registry.
Methods
We reviewed all the sleeve and gastric bypass cases entered between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2015, in the MBSAQIP data registry. We, then, identified sleeve and bypass patients who have had a previous bariatric procedure. Demographics and 30 day outcomes of all sleeve and gastric bypass patients were analyzed. We conducted within group comparisons comparing primary sleeve gastrectomy (PS) and primary gastric bypass (PB) patients to revisional sleeve (RS) and revisional gastric bypass (RB) patients, respectively. We, then, conducted group comparisons comparing RS to RB patients.
Results
The total number of patients analyzed was 141,577 (98,292 or 69% sleeve patients and 43,285 or 31% gastric bypass patients). Among the sleeve patients, 92,666 (94%) had a PS and 5626 (6%) had RS. Among the bypass patients, 39,567 (91%) had a PB and 3718 patients (9%) had RB. 30-day readmission rate of RS was significantly higher as compared to PS (4.1 vs 0.4%,
p
< 0.05). The incidence of at least one complication requiring reoperation or reintervention within 30 days following RS was twice as high as compared to PS (1.9 and 2% for RS vs 0.9 and 1.1% for PS respectively,
p
< 0.05). Length of stay and 30 day mortality rates for PS and RS were the same. 30-day readmission rate of RB as compared to PB was 8.3 vs 6.3% (
p
< 0.05). Also, the incidence of at least one complication requiring reoperation or reintervention following RB was 3.9 and 4%, respectively vs 2.4 and 2.7% for PB (
p
< 0.05). In addition, readmission rates and unplanned admission rates to the ICU were significantly higher for RB compared to RS (8.3 and 2% for RB vs 4.1 and 0.9% for RS respectively,
p
< 0.05). The incidence of at least one reoperation or one intervention following RB were also significantly higher compared to RS (3.9 vs 1.9% and 4 vs 2% respectively,
p
< 0.05).
Conclusion
Revisional stapling procedures are safe but the rates of complications following RS and RB are twice as high compared to PS and PB. Also, RB are more likely to develop complications compared to RS.]]></abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>29876840</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11695-018-3140-0</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5143-9257</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0960-8923 |
| ispartof | Obesity surgery, 2018-08, Vol.28 (8), p.2233-2240 |
| issn | 0960-8923 1708-0428 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2051656270 |
| source | SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Gastrointestinal surgery Medicine Medicine & Public Health Obesity Original Contributions Patient admissions Patient safety Surgery Surgical outcomes |
| title | 30-Day Outcomes of Revisional Bariatric Stapling Procedures: First Report Based on MBSAQIP Data Registry |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T19%3A25%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=30-Day%20Outcomes%20of%20Revisional%20Bariatric%20Stapling%20Procedures:%20First%20Report%20Based%20on%20MBSAQIP%20Data%20Registry&rft.jtitle=Obesity%20surgery&rft.au=El%20Chaar,%20Maher&rft.date=2018-08-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=2233&rft.epage=2240&rft.pages=2233-2240&rft.issn=0960-8923&rft.eissn=1708-0428&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11695-018-3140-0&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2050759301%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2050759301&rft_id=info:pmid/29876840&rfr_iscdi=true |