Surgical Endoscopy

, Volume 32, Issue 10, pp 4158–4164 | Cite as

Updated panel report: best practices for the surgical treatment of obesity

  • Dana A. TelemEmail author
  • Daniel B. Jones
  • Philip R. Schauer
  • Stacy A. Brethauer
  • Raul J. Rosenthal
  • David Provost
  • Stephanie B. Jones



During the 2004 annual meeting of the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES), a panel of experts convened to provide updated information on best practices in bariatric surgery. The rapid evolution of endoluminal technologies, surgical indications, and training in bariatric surgery since 2004 has led to new questions and concerns about optimal treatment algorithms, patient selection, and the preparation of our current and future bariatric workforce.


An expert panel was convened at the SAGES 2017 annual meeting to provide a summative update on current practice patterns, techniques, and training in bariatric surgery in order to review and establish best practices. This was a joint effort by SAGES, International Society for the Perioperative Care of the Obese Patient, and the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery.


On March 23, 2017, seven expert faculty convened to address current areas of controversy in bariatric surgery and provide updated guidelines and practice recommendations. Areas addressed included the expanded indications for use of metabolic surgery in the treatment of diabetes, the safety and efficacy of new and investigational endoluminal procedures, updates on new guidelines for the management of airway and sleep apnea in the obese patient, the development of clinical pathways to reduce variation in the management of the bariatric patient, and new guidelines for training, credentialing, and bariatric program accreditation. The following article is a summary of this panel.


Bariatric surgery is a field that continues to evolve. A timely, systematic approach, such as described here, that coalesces data and establishes best practices on the current body of available evidence is imperative for optimal patient care and to inform provider, insurer, and policy decisions.


Bariatric surgery Diabetes Credentialing Endoluminal devices Centers of excellence Fellowship 


Compliance with ethical standards


Dr. Schauer has the following relationships: (1) Advisory Board: The Medicines Company, GI Dynamics, Neurotronic, Pacira; (2) Consultant: Ethicon, The Medicines Company, Novo Nordisk; (3) Research Support: Ethicon, National Institutes of Health, Medtronic, Pacira. Dr. Rosenthal has the following relationships: (1) Speaker, Medtronic. Dr. Daniel Jones: (1) Allurion Gastric Ballon. Dr. Dana Telem: (1) Consultant, Medtronic. Otherwise, the rest of the authors have no conflict of interest and nothing to disclose.


  1. 1.
    Jones DB, DeMaria E, Provost DA, Smith CD, Morgenstern L, Schirmer B (2004) Optimal management of the morbidly obese patient: SAGES appropriateness conference statement. Surg Endosc 18(7):1029–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mechanick JI, Youdim A, Jones DB et al (2013) Clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative nutritional, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of the bariatric surgery patient—2013 update; cosponsored by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, the Obesity Society, and the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery. SOARD 9:159–191 (Concurrently published Obesity 21:S1–S27, 2013, and Endocrine Practice 2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jones SB, Jones DB (2009) Obesity surgery: patient safety and best practices. Cine-Med Inc., WoodburyGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lim R, Blackburn G, Jones DB (2010) Benchmarking best practices in weight loss surgery. Curr Probl Surg 47(2):69–174Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schirmer B, Jones DB (2007) American College of Surgeons Bariatric Surgery Center Network: establishing standards. Bull Am Coll Surg 92(8):21–27PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rubino F, Nathan DM, Schauer PR et al (2016) Metabolic surgery in the treatment algorithm for type 2 diabetes: a joint statement by international diabetes organizations. Diabetes Care 39(6):861–877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mingrone G, Panunzi S, De Gaetano A et al (2015) Bariatric-metabolic surgery versus conventional medical treatment in obese patients with type 2 diabetes: 5 year follow-up of an open-label, single-centre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 386(9997):964–973CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schauer PR, Bhatt DL, Kirwan JP, STAMPEDE Investigators et al (2017) Bariatric surgery versus intensive medical therapy for diabetes—5-year outcomes. N Engl J Med 376(7):641–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    American Diabetes Association (2017) Obesity management for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 40(1):S57–S63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zheng Y, Wang M, He S, Ji G (2015) Short-term effects of intragastric balloon in association with conservative therapy on weight loss: a meta-analysis. J Transl Med 13:246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thompson CC, Abu Dayyeh BK, Kushner R et al (2017) Percutaneous gastrostomy device for the treatment of class II and class III obesity: results of a randomized controlled trial. Am J Gastroenterol 112(3):447–457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brethauer SA, Chand B, Schauer PR, Thompson CC (2012) Transoral gastric volume reduction as intervention for weight management: 12-month follow-up of TRIM trial. Surg Obes Relat Dis 8(3):296–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lopez-Nava G, Galvao M, Bautista-Castaño I, Fernandez-Corbelle JP, Trell M (2016) Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty with 1-year follow-up: factors predictive of success. Endosc Int Open 4(2):E222–E227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sullivan S, Swain JM, Woodman G, Antonetti M et al (2017) Randomized sham-controlled trial evaluating efficacy and safety of endoscopic gastric plication for primary obesity: the ESSENTIAL trial. Obesity (Silver Spring) 25(2):294–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rohde U, Hedbäck N, Gluud LL, Vilsbøll T, Knop FK (2016) Effect of the endobarrier gastrointestinal liner on obesity and type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Obes Metab 18(3):300–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rajagopalan H, Cherrington AD, Thompson CC, Kaplan LM et al (2016) Endoscopic duodenal mucosal resurfacing for the treatment of type 2 diabetes: 6-month interim analysis from the first-in-human proof-of-concept study. Diabetes Care 39(12):2254–2261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Peterson G, Domino K, Caplan RA, Posner KL, Lee LA et al (2005) Management of the difficult airway: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology 103:33–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Apfelbaum JL, Hagberg CA, Caplan RA, Connis RT, American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway et al (2013) Practice guidelines for management of the difficult airway: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Management of the Difficult Airway. Anesthesiology 118(2):251–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Frerk C, Mitchell VS, McNarry AF, Bhagrath R et al (2015) Difficult Airway Society 2015 guidelines for management of unanticipated difficult intubation in adults. Br J Anaesth 115(6):827–848CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Perioperative Management of Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea (2014) Practice guidelines for the perioperative management of patients with obstructive sleep apnea: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Perioperative Management of patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Anesthesiology 120(2):268–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chung F, Memtsoudis SG, Ramachandran SK et al (2016) Society of anesthesia and sleep medicine guidelines on preoperative screening and assessment of adult patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Anesth Analg 123(2):452–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Panella M, Marchisio S, Di Stanislao F (2003) Reducing clinical variations with clinical pathways: do pathways work? Int J Qual Health Care 15:509–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rotter T, Kugler J, Koch R et al (2008) A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of clinical pathways on length of stay, hospital costs and patient outcomes. BMC Health Serv Res 8:265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Campillo-Soto A, Martín-Lorenzo JG, Lirón-Ruíz R et al (2008) Evaluation of the clinical pathway for laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Obes Surg 18:395–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Huerta S, Heber D, Sawicki MP et al (2001) Reduced length of stay by implementation of a clinical pathway for bariatric surgery in an academic health care center. Am Surg 67:1128–1135PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yeats M, Wedergren S, Fox N, Thompson JS (2005) The use and modification of clinical pathways to achieve specific outcomes in bariatric surgery. Am Surg 71:152–154PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Frutos MD, Luján J, Hernández Q, Valero G, Parrilla P (2007) Clinical pathway for laparoscopic gastric bypass. Obes Surg 17:1584–1587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ronellenfitsch U, Schwarzbach M, Kring A, Kienle P, Post S, Hasenberg T (2012) The effect of clinical pathways for bariatric surgery on perioperative quality of care. Obes Surg 22:732–739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Standards Manual V2.0 (2016) Resource for optimal care of the bariatric surgery patient. American College of Surgeons, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Telem DA, Majid SF, Powers K, DeMaria E, Morton J, Jones DB (2017) Assessing national provision of care: variability in bariatric clinical care pathways. Surg Obes Relat Dis 13:281–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Telem DA, Gould J, Pesta C, Powers K, Majid S, Greenberg JA, Teixeira A, Brounts L, Lin H, DeMaria E, Rosenthal R (2017) American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery: care pathway for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Surg Obes Relat Dis 13(5):742–749CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    McBride CL, Rosenthal RJ, Brethauer S, DeMaria E et al (2017) Constructing a competency-based bariatric surgery fellowship training curriculum. Surg Obes Relat Dis 13(3):437–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dana A. Telem
    • 1
    Email author
  • Daniel B. Jones
    • 2
  • Philip R. Schauer
    • 3
  • Stacy A. Brethauer
    • 3
  • Raul J. Rosenthal
    • 4
  • David Provost
    • 5
  • Stephanie B. Jones
    • 6
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Department of Surgery, Harvard Medical SchoolBeth Israel Deaconess Medical CenterBostonUSA
  3. 3.Department of General Surgery, Bariatric and Metabolic InstituteCleveland ClinicClevelandUSA
  4. 4.Department of General Surgery and The Bariatric and Metabolic InstituteCleveland Clinic FloridaWestonUSA
  5. 5.Provost Bariatrics, Scott and White ClinicTempleUSA
  6. 6.Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain MedicineBeth Israel Deaconess Medical CenterBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations