Obesity Surgery

, Volume 29, Issue 5, pp 1452–1461 | Cite as

Multidisciplinary Management of Leaks After One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass in a Single-Center Series of 2780 Consecutive Patients

  • Arnaud Liagre
  • Michel Queralto
  • Gildas Juglard
  • Yves Anduze
  • Antonio Iannelli
  • Francesco MartiniEmail author
Original Contributions



Few data exist in the literature concerning leaks after one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). Our aim was to describe the incidence, presentation, and management of leaks after OAGB.


A private clinic in France.


Between May 2010 and December 2017, 2780 consecutive patients underwent OAGB. A retrospective chart review was performed on the 46 patients (1.7%) who experienced postoperative leaks.


Leaks arose from the anastomosis in 6 cases (13%) and from the gastric pouch in 27 cases (59%), while the remaining 13 patients (28%) had leaks from an undetermined origin. Management followed a standardized algorithm taking into consideration the clinical situation and findings on an oral contrast computed tomography (CT) scan. All patients were treated by fasting, total parenteral nutrition, and antimicrobial therapy. Nine patients (20%) could be managed by medical treatment only, 13 patients (28%) underwent laparoscopic management (washout and drainage plus T-tube placement in 5 cases or conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) in one case). The remaining 23 patients (50%) were managed by percutaneous drainage and/or endoscopy. No mortality was observed; the major morbidity rate was 20%. The median length of a hospital stay was 17 days (5–80).


Management of leaks after OAGB depends on clinical conditions and presence, size, and location of an abscess and/or a fistula. If endoscopy and interventional radiology are available, reoperation can be avoided in most patients. In most leaks at the gastrojejunal anastomosis, inserting a T-tube in the leak orifice avoids the necessity for conversion to RYGB.


One-anastomosis gastric bypass Leak Multidisciplinary management Surgical treatment Percutaneous drainage Endoscopic drainage 


Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Statement of Human and Animal Rights

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Statement of Informed Consent

For this type of study formal consent is not required.


  1. 1.
    Angrisani L, Santonicola A, Iovino P, et al. Bariatric surgery and endoluminal procedures: IFSO Worldwide Survey 2014. Obes Surg. 2017;27(9):2279–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Georgiadou D, Sergentanis TN, Nixon A, et al. Efficacy and safety of laparoscopic mini gastric bypass. A systematic review. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2014;10(5):984–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lee WJ, Yu PJ, Wang W, et al. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y versus mini-gastric bypass for the treatment of morbid obesity: a prospective randomized controlled clinical trial. Ann Surg. 2005;242(1):20–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    De Luca M, Tie T, Ooi G, et al. Mini gastric bypass-one anastomosis gastric bypass (MGB-OAGB)-IFSO position statement. Obes Surg. 2018;28(5):1188–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beaupel N, Bruzzi M, Voron T, et al. Management of acute intra-abdominal sepsis caused by leakage after one anastomosis gastric bypass. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017;13(8):1297–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carbajo MA, Luque-de-Leon E, Jimenez JM, et al. Laparoscopic one-anastomosis gastric bypass: technique, results, and long-term follow-up in 1200 patients. Obes Surg. 2017;27(5):1153–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Genser L, Carandina S, Tabbara M, et al. Presentation and surgical management of leaks after mini-gastric bypass for morbid obesity. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2016;12(2):305–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kular KS, Manchanda N, Rutledge R. A 6-year experience with 1,054 mini-gastric bypasses-first study from Indian subcontinent. Obes Surg. 2014;24(9):1430–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee WJ, Ser KH, Lee YC, et al. Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y vs. mini-gastric bypass for the treatment of morbid obesity: a 10-year experience. Obes Surg. 2012;22(12):1827–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Musella M, Susa A, Manno E, et al. Complications following the mini/one anastomosis gastric bypass (MGB/OAGB): a multi-institutional survey on 2678 patients with a mid-term (5 years) follow-up. Obes Surg. 2017;27(11):2956–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Noun R, Skaff J, Riachi E, et al. One thousand consecutive mini-gastric bypass: short- and long-term outcome. Obes Surg. 2012;22(5):697–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rutledge R, Walsh TR. Continued excellent results with the mini-gastric bypass: six-year study in 2,410 patients. Obes Surg. 2005;15(9):1304–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jacobsen HJ, Nergard BJ, Leifsson BG, et al. Management of suspected anastomotic leak after bariatric laparoscopic Roux-en-y gastric bypass. Br J Surg. 2014;101(4):417–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aurora AR, Khaitan L, Saber AA. Sleeve gastrectomy and the risk of leak: a systematic analysis of 4,888 patients. Surg Endosc. 2012;26(6):1509–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Inaba CS, Koh CY, Sujatha-Bhaskar S, et al. One-year mortality after contemporary laparoscopic bariatric surgery: an analysis of the bariatric outcomes longitudinal database. J Am Coll Surg. 2018;226(6):1166–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour CW, et al. The Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315(8):801–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009;250(2):187–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Choi Y. Comment on: diagnostic value of computed tomography for detecting anastomotic or staple line leakage after bariatric surgery. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2018;14:1318. Scholar
  19. 19.
    Daldoul S, Moussi A, Zaouche A. T-tube drainage of the common bile duct choleperitoneum: etiology and management. J Visc Surg. 2012;149(3):e172–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Musella M, Cantoni V, Green R, et al. Efficacy of postoperative upper gastrointestinal series (UGI) and computed tomography (CT) scan in bariatric surgery: a meta-analysis on 7516 patients. Obes Surg. 2018;28(8):2396–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Benois M, Sebastianelli L, Morisot A, et al. Revisional but not conversional gastric bypass surgery increases the risk of leaks: review of 176 redo out of 932 consecutive cases. Obes Surg. 2018;28(9):2903–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bouchard S, Eisendrath P, Toussaint E, et al. Trans-fistulary endoscopic drainage for post-bariatric abdominal collections communicating with the upper gastrointestinal tract. Endoscopy. 2016;48(9):809–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Puli SR, Spofford IS, Thompson CC. Use of self-expandable stents in the treatment of bariatric surgery leaks: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2012;75(2):287–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Digestive and Bariatric Surgery UnitClinique des CedresCornebarrieuFrance
  2. 2.Gastrointestinal Endoscopy UnitClinique des CedresCornebarrieuFrance
  3. 3.Université Côte d’AzurNiceFrance
  4. 4.Digestive Surgery and Liver Transplantation Unit, Archet 2 HospitalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de NiceNiceFrance
  5. 5.Inserm, U1065, Team 8 “Hepatic complications of obesity”NiceFrance
  6. 6.Digestive and Bariatric Surgery UnitHôpital Joseph DucuingToulouseFrance

Personalised recommendations