Stefan Wolter1, Anna Duprée2, Jameel Miro2, Cornelia Schroeder2, Marie-Isabelle Jansen2, Clarissa Schulze-Zur-Wiesch3, Stefan Groth4, Jakob Izbicki2, Oliver Mann2, Philipp Busch2. 1. Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. swolter@uke.de. 2. Department of General, Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany. 3. Department of Endocrinology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 4. Department of Endoscopy, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Upper gastrointestinal pathologies are common in bariatric patients. Preoperative esophagogastroduodenal endoscopy (EGD) should detect and treat pathologies that might alter the type of bariatric surgery. However, clinical consequences of these findings are often insignificant. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of preoperative endoscopy in our cohort and its clinical consequences. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of endoscopic findings in patients under evaluation for bariatric surgery. Endoscopic findings were compared to preoperative risk factors as well as postoperative complications, and its clinical consequences were analyzed. RESULTS: Data was available for 801 patients. Abnormal endoscopic findings were found in 65.7% of all patients. The most common conditions were gastritis (32.1%) and gastroesophageal reflux (24.8%). Malignancies were observed in 0.5% of all patients. We observed early-stage adenocarcinoma of the esophagus in two patients through our routine preoperative evaluation. Helicobacter pylori infections were detected in preoperative biopsies in only 3.7% of all patients. Patients who reported reflux symptoms had a higher rate of pathological EGDs (74.2 vs. 64.9%, p .019). We did not find any other risk factors for a pathological endoscopy. The postoperative complication rate was 11.2%. Leakage rate was 1.1%. Mortality rate was 0.4%. We did not find any correlation between the incidence of postoperative complications and preoperative endoscopic findings. CONCLUSIONS: Relevant findings in routine preoperative endoscopy are rare but have significant influence on decision-making in bariatric patients and should be assessed as a necessary diagnostic tool.
BACKGROUND: Upper gastrointestinal pathologies are common in bariatric patients. Preoperative esophagogastroduodenal endoscopy (EGD) should detect and treat pathologies that might alter the type of bariatric surgery. However, clinical consequences of these findings are often insignificant. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of preoperative endoscopy in our cohort and its clinical consequences. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of endoscopic findings in patients under evaluation for bariatric surgery. Endoscopic findings were compared to preoperative risk factors as well as postoperative complications, and its clinical consequences were analyzed. RESULTS: Data was available for 801 patients. Abnormal endoscopic findings were found in 65.7% of all patients. The most common conditions were gastritis (32.1%) and gastroesophageal reflux (24.8%). Malignancies were observed in 0.5% of all patients. We observed early-stage adenocarcinoma of the esophagus in two patients through our routine preoperative evaluation. Helicobacter pyloriinfections were detected in preoperative biopsies in only 3.7% of all patients. Patients who reported reflux symptoms had a higher rate of pathological EGDs (74.2 vs. 64.9%, p .019). We did not find any other risk factors for a pathological endoscopy. The postoperative complication rate was 11.2%. Leakage rate was 1.1%. Mortality rate was 0.4%. We did not find any correlation between the incidence of postoperative complications and preoperative endoscopic findings. CONCLUSIONS: Relevant findings in routine preoperative endoscopy are rare but have significant influence on decision-making in bariatric patients and should be assessed as a necessary diagnostic tool.
Authors: S E Roberts; S Morrison-Rees; D G Samuel; K Thorne; A Akbari; J G Williams Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: Matthew R Crouthamel; Jedediah A Kaufman; Josiah P Billing; Peter S Billing; Robert W Landerholm Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2015-06-10 Impact factor: 4.734
Authors: Joshua J Weis; Matthew Goldblatt; Aurora Pryor; Brian J Dunkin; L Michael Brunt; Daniel B Jones; Daniel J Scott Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-01-17 Impact factor: 4.584