Daniela Zanotti1, Mohamed Elkalaawy2,3, Majid Hashemi2, Andrew Jenkinson2, Marco Adamo2. 1. Gastrointestinal Services, General Surgery, University College Hospital, 235 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BU, UK. dani83k@gmail.com. 2. Gastrointestinal Services, General Surgery, University College Hospital, 235 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BU, UK. 3. Medical Research Institute, University of Alexandria, Alexandria, Egypt.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Preoperative oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (p-OGD) is often routinely employed in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. The value of p-OGD is still unclear; however, since all bariatric procedures modify stomach anatomy differently with exclusion of the remnant in a majority of cases, the question arises whether there is a rational for including it routinely in the preoperative pathway. MATERIAL AND METHODS: To assess the current status of p-OGD in the UK, a survey was sent to the British Obesity & Metabolic Surgery Society members, regarding preoperative evaluation of patients, focusing on the role of p-OGD. Forty-nine UK bariatric units (in excess of 5000 patients estimated caseload/year) answered. RESULTS: The survey has shown that 44 units (90 %) include OGD in their preoperative work up, routinely or selectively. According to results, 25 units (51 %) changed the operative plans after OGD because of peptic ulcer (46 %), hiatus hernia (43 %), Barrett's oesophagus (32 %) or gastrointestinal stromal tumour (25 %). Only 2 units (7 %) found incidental gastrointestinal cancer. When specifically asked, p-OGD was believed to be essential in patients with family history of gastrointestinal cancer (61 %), pernicious anaemia (57 %) and reflux symptoms (54 %). Five units (10 %) considered p-OGD completely unnecessary. Only 11 units (25 %) would not be able to accommodate routine p-OGD in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Most units value p-OGD, either selectively or routinely, in preparation for bariatric surgery. However, there seems to be a discrepancy on the specific risk factors involved in the selection process. National and international guidelines are advocated.
PURPOSE: Preoperative oesophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (p-OGD) is often routinely employed in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. The value of p-OGD is still unclear; however, since all bariatric procedures modify stomach anatomy differently with exclusion of the remnant in a majority of cases, the question arises whether there is a rational for including it routinely in the preoperative pathway. MATERIAL AND METHODS: To assess the current status of p-OGD in the UK, a survey was sent to the British Obesity & Metabolic Surgery Society members, regarding preoperative evaluation of patients, focusing on the role of p-OGD. Forty-nine UK bariatric units (in excess of 5000 patients estimated caseload/year) answered. RESULTS: The survey has shown that 44 units (90 %) include OGD in their preoperative work up, routinely or selectively. According to results, 25 units (51 %) changed the operative plans after OGD because of peptic ulcer (46 %), hiatus hernia (43 %), Barrett's oesophagus (32 %) or gastrointestinal stromal tumour (25 %). Only 2 units (7 %) found incidental gastrointestinal cancer. When specifically asked, p-OGD was believed to be essential in patients with family history of gastrointestinal cancer (61 %), pernicious anaemia (57 %) and reflux symptoms (54 %). Five units (10 %) considered p-OGD completely unnecessary. Only 11 units (25 %) would not be able to accommodate routine p-OGD in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Most units value p-OGD, either selectively or routinely, in preparation for bariatric surgery. However, there seems to be a discrepancy on the specific risk factors involved in the selection process. National and international guidelines are advocated.
Authors: Martin Fried; Vojtĕch Hainer; Arnaud Basdevant; Henry Buchwald; Mervyn Deitel; Nicholas Finer; Jan Willem M Greve; Fritz Horber; Elisabeth Mathus-Vliegen; Nicola Scopinaro; Rudolf Steffen; Constantine Tsigos; Rudolf Weiner; Kurt Widhalm Journal: Obes Facts Date: 2008-02-08 Impact factor: 3.942
Authors: S Sauerland; L Angrisani; M Belachew; J M Chevallier; F Favretti; N Finer; A Fingerhut; M Garcia Caballero; J A Guisado Macias; R Mittermair; M Morino; S Msika; F Rubino; R Tacchino; R Weiner; E A M Neugebauer Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2004-12-02 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: M A Küper; T Kratt; K M Kramer; M Zdichavsky; J H Schneider; J Glatzle; D Stüker; A Königsrainer; B L D M Brücher Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2010-02-05 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Iman Ghaderi; Amlish B Gondal; Julia Samamé; Federico Serrot; Carlos A Galvani Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2019-05-09 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Valentin Mocanu; Jerry T Dang; Noah Switzer; Daniel Skubleny; Xinzhe Shi; Chris de Gara; Daniel W Birch; Shahzeer Karmali Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Tagleb S Mazahreh; Abdelwahab J Aleshawi; Nabil A Al-Zoubi; Mohammed Z Allouh; Khaled A Jadallah; Rasheed Elayyan; Nathan M Novotny Journal: Clin Exp Gastroenterol Date: 2019-07-03
Authors: Sharmaine Yen Ling Quake; Ghazaleh Mohammadi-Zaniani; Aya Musbahi; Oliver Old; Michael Courtney; Peter Small Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2022-09-03 Impact factor: 3.479