Revisional bariatric surgery: who, what, where, and when?

• Published in: Surgery for obesity and related diseases Vol. 6; no. 6; pp. 635 - 642
• Main Authors: Radtka, John F., M.D, Puleo, Frances J., M.D, Wang, Li, Ph.D, Cooney, Robert N., M.D
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01-11-2010
• Subjects: Adult; Bariatric complications; Bariatric Surgery - mortality; Bariatric Surgery - statistics & numerical data; Failed weight loss; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Gastric Bypass; Gastroenterology and Hepatology; Humans; Length of Stay - statistics & numerical data; Male; Middle Aged; Obesity, Morbid - epidemiology; Obesity, Morbid - surgery; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology; Postoperative Complications - mortality; Reoperation - mortality; Reoperation - statistics & numerical data; Revisional bariatric surgery; Surgery; Treatment Outcome; Weight Loss; Failed weight loss; Revisional bariatric surgery; Bariatric complications
• ISSN: 1550-7289; 1878-7533
• DOI: 10.1016/j.soard.2010.04.005

Abstract Background Revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) outcomes have been poorly characterized. We compared the RBS and primary bariatric surgery (PBS) outcomes at the Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center in the United States. Methods A total of 72 RBS cases from 2000 to 2007 were reviewed and grouped by indication: failure of weight loss, gastrojejunal complications, or other. The RBS patients were compared with the 856 PBS patients who underwent Roux-en- Y gastric bypass. The mean follow-up time was 12.6 ± 1.2 months for the RBS group and 16 ± 0.5 months for the PBS group. Weight loss was analyzed as the kilograms lost and patients with ≥50% excess body weight loss (EBWL). Outcomes included mortality, leaks, surgical site infections, and length of stay. Results The weight loss was 23 ± 2.8 kg after RBS and 41.3 ± 0.7 kg after PBS ( P <.05 versus PBS). The post-RBS weight loss varied by surgical indication: failure of weight loss, 27.1 ± 2 kg; gastrojejunal complications, 8.7 ± 3.4 kg; and other 23.5 ± 10.6 kg. Also, 29% of the RBS patients had ≥50% excess body weight loss (versus the prerevision weight) and 61% (versus the initial weight) compared with 52.7% after PBS. Only age ≤50 years was associated with ≥50% excess body weight loss after RBS for the failure of weight loss group. No RBS patients died. However, leaks, surgical site infections, and length of stay were increased after RBS. Conclusion The results of our study have shown that weight loss after RBS varies with the surgical indication and is affected by age >50 years. Although the RBS patients had decreased weight loss and increased complications compared with the PBS patients, ≥50% EBWL was achieved by a significant number of RBS patients.