Mohamad A Minhem1, Sali F Sarkis2, Bassem Y Safadi1, Souha A Fares3, Ramzi S Alami4,5. 1. Department of Surgery, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon. 2. Faculty of Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon. 3. Hariri School of Nursing, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon. 4. Department of Surgery, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon. ra204@aub.edu.lb. 5. American University of Beirut Medical Center, PO Box 11-0236, Riad El Solh, Beirut, 1107 2020, Lebanon. ra204@aub.edu.lb.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Chronic liver disease is prevalent in obese patients presenting for bariatric surgery and is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality (M&M). There are no comparative studies on the safety of different types of bariatric operations in this subset of patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the 30-day postoperative M&M between laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-Y-gastric bypass (LRYGB) in the subset of patients with a model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score ≥ 8. METHODS: Data for LSG and LRYGB were extracted from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from years 2012 and 2013. MELD score was calculated using serum creatinine, bilirubin, INR, and sodium. Postoperative M&M were assessed in patients with a score ≥ 8 and compared for the type of operation. This was followed by analysis for MELD subcategories. Multiple logistic regression was performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: Out of 34,169, 9.8% of cases had MELD ≥ 8 and were included. Primary endpoint, 30-day M&M, was significantly lower post-LSG (9.5%) compared to LRYGB (14.7%); [AOR = 0.66(0.53, 0.83)]. Superficial wound infection, prolonged hospital stay, and unplanned readmission were more common in LRYGB. M&M post-LRYGB (30.6%) was significantly higher than LSG (15.7%) among MELD15-19 subgroup analysis. CONCLUSION: LRYGB is associated with a higher postoperative risk than LSG in patients with MELD ≥ 8. The difference in postoperative complications between procedures was magnified with higher MELD. This suggests that LSG might be a safer option in morbidly obese patients with higher MELD scores, especially above 15.
INTRODUCTION:Chronic liver disease is prevalent in obesepatients presenting for bariatric surgery and is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality (M&M). There are no comparative studies on the safety of different types of bariatric operations in this subset of patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare the 30-day postoperative M&M between laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) and laparoscopic Roux-Y-gastric bypass (LRYGB) in the subset of patients with a model of end-stage liver disease (MELD) score ≥ 8. METHODS: Data for LSG and LRYGB were extracted from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from years 2012 and 2013. MELD score was calculated using serum creatinine, bilirubin, INR, and sodium. Postoperative M&M were assessed in patients with a score ≥ 8 and compared for the type of operation. This was followed by analysis for MELD subcategories. Multiple logistic regression was performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: Out of 34,169, 9.8% of cases had MELD ≥ 8 and were included. Primary endpoint, 30-day M&M, was significantly lower post-LSG (9.5%) compared to LRYGB (14.7%); [AOR = 0.66(0.53, 0.83)]. Superficial wound infection, prolonged hospital stay, and unplanned readmission were more common in LRYGB. M&M post-LRYGB (30.6%) was significantly higher than LSG (15.7%) among MELD15-19 subgroup analysis. CONCLUSION: LRYGB is associated with a higher postoperative risk than LSG in patients with MELD ≥ 8. The difference in postoperative complications between procedures was magnified with higher MELD. This suggests that LSG might be a safer option in morbidly obesepatients with higher MELD scores, especially above 15.
Authors: Aliu Sanni; Sebastian Perez; Rachel Medbery; Hernan D Urrego; Craig McCready; Juan P Toro; Ankit D Patel; Edward Lin; John F Sweeney; S Scott Davis Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-08-13 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Teena Chopra; Jing J Zhao; George Alangaden; Michael H Wood; Keith S Kaye Journal: Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 2.217
Authors: Ted D Adams; Lance E Davidson; Sheldon E Litwin; Ronette L Kolotkin; Michael J LaMonte; Robert C Pendleton; Michael B Strong; Russell Vinik; Nathan A Wanner; Paul N Hopkins; Richard E Gress; James M Walker; Tom V Cloward; R Tom Nuttall; Ahmad Hammoud; Jessica L J Greenwood; Ross D Crosby; Rodrick McKinlay; Steven C Simper; Sherman C Smith; Steven C Hunt Journal: JAMA Date: 2012-09-19 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Megan Sippey; Kevin R Kasten; William H H Chapman; Walter J Pories; Konstantinos Spaniolas Journal: Surg Obes Relat Dis Date: 2016-02-03 Impact factor: 4.734
Authors: Ahmad Elnahas; Geoffrey C Nguyen; Allan Okrainec; Fayez Quereshy; Timothy D Jackson Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-04-16 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Amitabh Suman; David S Barnes; Nizar N Zein; Gavin N Levinthal; Jason T Connor; William D Carey Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Stephan C Bischoff; Rocco Barazzoni; Luca Busetto; Marjo Campmans-Kuijpers; Vincenzo Cardinale; Irit Chermesh; Ahad Eshraghian; Haluk Tarik Kani; Wafaa Khannoussi; Laurence Lacaze; Miguel Léon-Sanz; Juan M Mendive; Michael W Müller; Johann Ockenga; Frank Tacke; Anders Thorell; Darija Vranesic Bender; Arved Weimann; Cristina Cuerda Journal: United European Gastroenterol J Date: 2022-08-12 Impact factor: 6.866