Skip to main content

Why Size Matters: an Evaluation of Gastric Pouch Size in Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Using CT Volumetric Analysis and its Effect on Marginal Ulceration

Obesity Surgery volume 32, pages 587–592 (2022)Cite this article

Abstract

Purpose

Marginal ulceration (MU) is a common long-term complication following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). The causes of MU after RYGB are multifactorial and include surgical technique of constructing the gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the relationship between gastric pouch size in RYGB and MU using CT volumetrics.

Material and Methods

Patients were retrospectively identified who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) following RYGB at a tertiary care teaching hospital. Measurement of gastric pouch size was performed using 3-D CT software. Standard statistical methods were used, a univariate comparison was performed between MU and non-MU patients followed by a propensity-matched comparison to control for factors known to affect MU, and a propensity-matched subgroup analysis was also performed.

Results

In total, 122 patients met criteria, 57 of which had MU on EGD and 65 who did not. The MU group had more smokers and patients with PPI use than the non-MU group, and the mean time from operation to CT scan was 26.6 months (range: 0–108 months). The MU group had a larger gastric pouch size than the non-MU group (34.1 ± 11.8 versus 20.1 ± 6.8 cm3). When analyzed for matched patient cohorts, this difference remained for the MU group that included smokers and PPI use. When stratified for pouch size, for each 5 cm3 increase in pouch size, patients had 2.4 times odds increase of MU formation.

Conclusions

CT volumetric analysis demonstrated that a larger gastric pouch size was associated with MU following RYGB.

Graphical abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Finkelstein EA, Khavjou OA, Thompson H, et al. Obesity and severe obesity forecasts through 2030. Am J Prev Med [Internet]. Am J Prev Med; 2012 [cited 2021 Apr 25];42:563–70. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22608371/.

  2. Schauer PR, Bhatt DL, Kirwan JP, et al. Bariatric surgery versus intensive medical therapy for diabetes — 5-year outcomes. N Engl J Med [Internet]. New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM/MMS); 2017 [cited 2021 Apr 25];376:641–51. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28199805/.

  3. Olbers T, Lönroth H, Fagevik-Olsén M, et al. Laparoscopic gastric bypass: development of technique, respiratory function, and long-term outcome. Obes Surg. 2003;13:364–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Choi J, Polistena C. Management of marginal ulceration. Complicat Bariatr Surg [Internet]. Springer International Publishing; 2018 [cited 2021 Apr 25]. p. 45–58. Available from: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-75841-1_4.

  5. Kizy S, Jahansouz C, Downey MC, et al. National trends in bariatric surgery 2012–2015: demographics, procedure selection, readmissions, and cost. Obes Surg [Internet]. Springer New York LLC; 2017 [cited 2021 Apr 25];27:2933–9. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11695-017-2719-1.

  6. Campos GM, Khoraki J, Browning MG, et al. Changes in utilization of bariatric surgery in the United States from 1993 to 2016. Ann Surg [Internet]. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2020 [cited 2021 Apr 25];271:201–9. Available from: https://journals.lww.com/10.1097/SLA.0000000000003554.

  7. Edholm D, Sundbom M. Comparison between circular- and linear-stapled gastrojejunostomy in laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass - a cohort from the Scandinavian Obesity Registry. Surg Obes Relat Dis [Internet]. Elsevier; 2015;11:1233–6. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2015.03.010.

  8. Byrne TK. Complications of surgery for obesity. Surg Clin North Am. W.B. Saunders; 2001;81:1181–93.

  9. Ribeiro-Parenti L, Arapis K, Chosidow D, et al. Comparison of marginal ulcer rates between antecolic and retrocolic laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Obes Surg [Internet]. Springer Science and Business Media, LLC; 2015 [cited 2021 Apr 25];25:215–21. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11695-014-1392-x.

  10. Sapala JA, Wood MH, Sapala MA, et al. Marginal ulcer after gastric bypass: a prospective 3-year study of 173 patients. Obes. Surg. 1998; 8: 505-516. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9819081/

  11. Almby K, Edholm D. Anastomotic strictures after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a cohort study from the Scandinavian obesity surgery registry. Obes Surg. 2019;29:172–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Clapp B, Hahn J, Dodoo C, et al. Evaluation of the rate of marginal ulcer formation after bariatric surgery using the MBSAQIP database. Surg Endosc [Internet]. Springer New York LLC; 2019 [cited 2021 Apr 21];33:1890–7. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00464-018-6468-6.

  13. Printen KJ, Scott D, Mason EE. Stomal ulcers after gastric bypass. Arch Surg [Internet]. Arch Surg; 1980 [cited 2021 Apr 21];115:525–7. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7362464/.

  14. Siilin H, Wanders A, Gustavsson S, et al. The proximal gastric pouch invariably contains acid-producing parietal cells in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Obes Surg [Internet]. FD Communications Inc.; 2005 [cited 2021 Apr 21];15:771–7. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15978145/.

  15. Edholm D, Ottosson J, Sundbom M. Importance of pouch size in laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a cohort study of 14,168 patients. Surg Endosc. Springer US; 2016;30:2011–5.

  16. Coblijn UK, Lagarde SM, de Castro SMM, et al. Symptomatic marginal ulcer disease after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: incidence, risk factors and management. Obes Surg. 2015;25:805–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Coblijn UK, Goucham AB, Lagarde SM, et al. Development of ulcer disease after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, incidence, risk factors, and patient presentation: a systematic review [Internet]. Obes. Surg. Obes Surg; 2014 [cited 2021 Apr 21]. p. 299–309. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24234733/.

  18. Wennerlund J, Gunnarsson U, Strigård K, et al. Acid-related complications after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: risk factors and impact of proton pump inhibitors. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2020;16:620–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Suggs WJ, Kouli W, Lupovici M, et al. Complications at gastrojejunostomy after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: comparison between 21- and 25-mm circular staplers. Surg Obes Relat Dis. Elsevier; 2007;3:508–14.

  20. Sundaresan N, Sullivan M, Hiticas BA, et al. Impacts of gastrojejunal anastomotic technique on rates of marginal ulcer formation and anastomotic bleeding following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Obes Surg. 2021;31:2921–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Sapala JA, Wood MH, Sapala MA, et al. The micropouch gastric bypass: technical considerations in primary and revisionary operations. Obes Surg [Internet]. Springer; 2001 [cited 2021 Apr 26];11:3–17. Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1381/096089201321454042.

  22. Bonanno A, Tieu B, Dewey E, et al. Thoracoscopic truncal vagotomy versus surgical revision of the gastrojejunal anastomosis for recalcitrant marginal ulcers. Surg Endosc. Springer New York LLC; 2019;33:607–11.

  23. Wu Chao Ying V, Song SH, J. Khan K, et al. Prophylactic PPI help reduce marginal ulcers after gastric bypass surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Surg Endosc [Internet]. Springer New York LLC; 2015 [cited 2021 Apr 21];29:1018–23. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25159641/.

Download references

Funding

There was no outside funding received for this study; all funding came directly from Atrium Health and the Section of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Atrium Health Weight Management, Section of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, 28204, USA

    Sullivan A. Ayuso, Jordan N. Robinson, Leslie M. Okorji, Iain H. McKillop, Timothy S. Kuwada, Keith S. Gersin, Selwan D. Barbat, Roc W. Bauman & Abdelrahman Nimeri

  2. Division of Research, Department of Surgery, Carolinas Medical Center, Atrium Health, Charlotte, NC, 28204, USA

    Kyle J. Thompson

Authors
  1. Sullivan A. Ayuso
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jordan N. Robinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Leslie M. Okorji
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kyle J. Thompson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Iain H. McKillop
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Timothy S. Kuwada
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Keith S. Gersin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Selwan D. Barbat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Roc W. Bauman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Abdelrahman Nimeri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Each of the above authors contributed substantially to the design of the work, the drafting of the manuscript, and the final approval of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sullivan A. Ayuso.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Dr. Nimeri receives honoraria for speaking from Medtronic. Dr. Gersin is a speaker for WL Gore and Medtronic, an investor in Standard Bariatrics, and a consultant for GI dynamics. Dr. Kuwada receives honoraria for speaking from Bard and WL Gore and is a consultant for Medtronic. The rest of the authors have nothing to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Accepted for Oral Presentation at the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) Annual Meeting, Miami, Florida, August, 2022

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ayuso, S.A., Robinson, J.N., Okorji, L.M. et al. Why Size Matters: an Evaluation of Gastric Pouch Size in Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Using CT Volumetric Analysis and its Effect on Marginal Ulceration. OBES SURG 32, 587–592 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-021-05850-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-021-05850-8

Keywords

  • Roux-en-Y gastric bypass
  • Marginal ulceration
  • Gastric pouch
  • Computed tomography
  • Volumetric analysis