BACKGROUND: The goals were to compare the morbidity and mortality between primary and revisional bariatric surgery and to identify the clinical predictors of adverse outcomes among patients undergoing revisional surgery in the Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery consortium. The study was multi-institutional at university hospitals in the United States. METHODS: Data from the LABS-1 (safety) cohort were analyzed, excluding primary gastric banding patients. A total of 3802 LABS-1 patients were included: 3577 who underwent primary surgery and 225 who underwent revisional surgery. The demographic, clinical, operative, and 30-day outcome data were compared between the 2 groups. A nonlinear mixed effects logit model was used to identify independent risk factors for adverse outcomes (death, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, reintubation, reoperation, or discharge after 30 days). RESULTS: Compared with those undergoing revisional surgery, the primary surgery patients were younger (median age 44 versus 49 years, P <.0001) and more likely to be male (20.5% versus 12.7%, P = .006) and heavier (median body mass index 47.3 versus 41.2 kg/m(2), P <.0001) and to have more co-morbidities (P <.0001), including hypertension (56.0% versus 46.0%, P = .0044), diabetes (35.7% versus 20.0%, P <.0001), and sleep apnea (50.3% versus 27.2%, P <.0001). The operative time for the revisional procedures was longer (median 181 versus 135 min, P <.0001) and associated with greater blood loss (median 100 versus <50 mL, P <.0001). Adverse outcomes were more likely after revisional surgery (15.1% versus 5.3%, P <.0001, odds ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.6-3.6). After adjusting for patient characteristics previously shown to be associated with adverse outcomes, this difference remained statistically significant (odds ratio 2.3, 95% confidence interval 1.5-3.8). The 30-day mortality rate was similar in the 2 groups (.4%). CONCLUSION: Revisional surgery was performed without substantial mortality but with a greater incidence of adverse outcomes than was primary bariatric surgery. 2010 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: The goals were to compare the morbidity and mortality between primary and revisional bariatric surgery and to identify the clinical predictors of adverse outcomes among patients undergoing revisional surgery in the Longitudinal Assessment of Bariatric Surgery consortium. The study was multi-institutional at university hospitals in the United States. METHODS: Data from the LABS-1 (safety) cohort were analyzed, excluding primary gastric banding patients. A total of 3802 LABS-1 patients were included: 3577 who underwent primary surgery and 225 who underwent revisional surgery. The demographic, clinical, operative, and 30-day outcome data were compared between the 2 groups. A nonlinear mixed effects logit model was used to identify independent risk factors for adverse outcomes (death, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, reintubation, reoperation, or discharge after 30 days). RESULTS: Compared with those undergoing revisional surgery, the primary surgery patients were younger (median age 44 versus 49 years, P <.0001) and more likely to be male (20.5% versus 12.7%, P = .006) and heavier (median body mass index 47.3 versus 41.2 kg/m(2), P <.0001) and to have more co-morbidities (P <.0001), including hypertension (56.0% versus 46.0%, P = .0044), diabetes (35.7% versus 20.0%, P <.0001), and sleep apnea (50.3% versus 27.2%, P <.0001). The operative time for the revisional procedures was longer (median 181 versus 135 min, P <.0001) and associated with greater blood loss (median 100 versus <50 mL, P <.0001). Adverse outcomes were more likely after revisional surgery (15.1% versus 5.3%, P <.0001, odds ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.6-3.6). After adjusting for patient characteristics previously shown to be associated with adverse outcomes, this difference remained statistically significant (odds ratio 2.3, 95% confidence interval 1.5-3.8). The 30-day mortality rate was similar in the 2 groups (.4%). CONCLUSION: Revisional surgery was performed without substantial mortality but with a greater incidence of adverse outcomes than was primary bariatric surgery. 2010 American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. All rights reserved.
Authors: Ninh T Nguyen; Jeffrey Root; Kambiz Zainabadi; Allen Sabio; Sara Chalifoux; C Melinda Stevens; Shahrzad Mavandadi; Mario Longoria; Samuel E Wilson Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2005-12
Authors: Steven H Belle; Paul D Berk; Anita P Courcoulas; David R Flum; Carolyn W Miles; James E Mitchell; Walter J Pories; Bruce M Wolfe; Susan Z Yanovski Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2007 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 4.734
Authors: Cynthia L Ogden; Margaret D Carroll; Lester R Curtin; Margaret A McDowell; Carolyn J Tabak; Katherine M Flegal Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-04-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: David Reed Flum; Steven H Belle; Wendy C King; Abdus S Wahed; Paul Berk; William Chapman; Walter Pories; Anita Courcoulas; Carol McCloskey; James Mitchell; Emma Patterson; Alfons Pomp; Myrlene A Staten; Susan Z Yanovski; Richard Thirlby; Bruce Wolfe Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-07-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michael K Gould; David A Garcia; Sherry M Wren; Paul J Karanicolas; Juan I Arcelus; John A Heit; Charles M Samama Journal: Chest Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Kamal K Mahawar; Yitka Graham; William R J Carr; Neil Jennings; Norbert Schroeder; Shlok Balupuri; Peter K Small Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Barham K Abu Dayyeh; Pichamol Jirapinyo; Zachary Weitzner; Charlotte Barker; Michael S Flicker; David B Lautz; Christopher C Thompson Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Ranjan Sudan; Ninh T Nguyen; Matthew M Hutter; Stacy A Brethauer; Jaime Ponce; John M Morton Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2014-09-04 Impact factor: 3.452