Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Patient Selection in One Anastomosis/Mini Gastric Bypass—an Expert Modified Delphi Consensus

  • Original Contributions
  • Published:
Obesity Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

One anastomosis/mini gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB) is up to date the third most performed obesity and metabolic procedure worldwide, which recently has been endorsed by ASMBS. The main criticisms are the risk of bile reflux, esophageal cancer, and malnutrition. Although IFSO has recognized this procedure, guidance is needed regarding selection criteria. To give clinicians a daily support in performing the right patient selection in OAGB/MGB, the aim of this paper is to generate clinical guidelines based on an expert modified Delphi consensus.

Methods

A committee of 57 recognized bariatric surgeons from 24 countries created 69 statements. Modified Delphi consensus voting was performed in two rounds. An agreement/disagreement among ≥ 70.0% of the experts was considered to indicate a consensus.

Results

Consensus was achieved for 56 statements. Remarkably, ≥ 90.0% of the experts felt that OAGB/MGB is an acceptable and suitable option “in patients with Body mass index (BMI) > 70, BMI > 60, BMI > 50 kg/m2 as a one-stage procedure,” “as the second stage of a two-stage bariatric surgery after Sleeve Gastrectomy for BMI > 50 kg/m2 (instead of BPD/DS),” and “in patients with weight regain after restrictive procedures. No consensus was reached on the statement that OAGB/MGB is a suitable option in case of resistant Helicobacter pylori. This is likely as there is a concern that this procedure is associated with reflux and its related long-term complications including risk of cancer in the esophagus or stomach. Also no consensus reached on OAGB/MGB as conversional surgery in patients with GERD after restrictive procedures. Consensus for disagreement was predominantly achieved “in case of intestinal metaplasia of the stomach” (74.55%), “in patients with severe Gastro Esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)(C,D)” (75.44%), “in patients with Barrett’s metaplasia” (89.29%), and “in documented insulinoma” (89.47%).

Conclusion

Patient selection in OAGB/MGB is still a point of discussion among experts. There was consensus that OAGB/MGB is a suitable option in elderly patients, patients with low BMI (30–35 kg/m2) with associated metabolic problems, and patients with BMIs more than 50 kg/m2 as one-stage procedure. OAGB/MGB can also be a safe procedure in vegetarian and vegan patients. Although OAGB/MGB can be a suitable procedure in patients with large hiatal hernia with concurrent hiatal hernia, it should not be offered to patients with grade C or D esophagitis or Barrett’s metaplasia.

Graphical abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Angrisani L, Santonicola A, Iovino P, Ramos A, Shikora S, Kow L. Bariatric Surgery Survey 2018: similarities and disparities among the 5 IFSO chapters. Obes Surg. 2021;31(5):1937–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kermansaravi M, Shahmiri SS, DavarpanahJazi AH, Valizadeh R, Berardi G, Vitiello A, et al. One anastomosis/mini-gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB) as revisional surgery following primary restrictive bariatric procedures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Surg. 2021;31(1):370–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Rutledge R. The mini-gastric bypass: experience with the first 1,274 cases. Obes Surg. 2001;11(3):276–80.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Robert M, Espalieu P, Pelascini E, Caiazzo R, Sterkers A, Khamphommala L, et al. Efficacy and safety of one anastomosis gastric bypass versus Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for obesity (YOMEGA): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial. Lancet (London, England). 2019;393(10178):1299–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mahawar KK, Kumar P, Carr WR, Jennings N, Schroeder N, Balupuri S, et al. Current status of mini-gastric bypass. J Minimal Access Surg. 2016;12(4):305–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Mahawar KK, Borg CM, Kular KS, Courtney MJ, Sillah K, Carr WRJ, et al. Understanding objections to one anastomosis (mini) gastric bypass: a survey of 417 surgeons not performing this procedure. Obes Surg. 2017;27(9):2222–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Saarinen T, Räsänen J, Salo J, Loimaala A, Pitkonen M, Leivonen M, et al. Bile reflux scintigraphy after mini-gastric bypass. Obes Surg. 2017;27(8):2083–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Genco A, Castagneto-Gissey L, Gualtieri L, Lucchese M, Leuratti L, Soricelli E, et al. GORD and Barrett’s oesophagus after bariatric procedures: multicentre prospective study. Br J Surg. 2021;108(12):1498–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chiappetta S, Stier C, Weiner RA. The Edmonton obesity staging system predicts perioperative complications and procedure choice in obesity and metabolic surgery-a German nationwide register-based cohort study (StuDoQ|MBE). Obes Surg. 2019;29(12):3791–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. De Luca M, Tie T, Ooi G, Higa K, Himpens J, Carbajo MA, et al. Mini gastric bypass-one anastomosis gastric bypass (MGB-OAGB)-IFSO position statement. Obes Surg. 2018;28(5):1188–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Kermansaravi M, DavarpanahJazi AH, ShahabiShahmiri S, Carbajo M, Vitiello A, Parmar CD, et al. Areas of non-consensus around one anastomosis/mini gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB): a narrative review. Obes Surg. 2021;31(6):2453–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Mahawar KK, Aggarwal S, Carr WR, Jennings N, Balupuri S, Small PK. Consensus statements and bariatric surgery. Obes Surg. 2015;25(6):1063–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Dalkey N. Helmer OJMs. An Experimental App Delphi Method use Experts. 1963;9(3):458–67.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Carandina S, Soprani A, Zulian V, Cady J. Long-term results of one anastomosis gastric bypass: a single center experience with a minimum follow-up of 10 years. Obes Surg. 2021;31(8):3468–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kapoulas S, Sahloul M, Singhal R. Laparoscopic conversion of sleeve gastrectomy to one anastomosis gastric bypass in a hostile abdomen. Obes Surg. 2021;31(6):2845–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Parmar CD, Zakeri R, Mahawar K. A systematic review of one anastomosis/mini gastric bypass as a metabolic operation for patients with body mass index ≤ 35 kg/m(2). Obes Surg. 2020;30(2):725–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Soong TC, Lee MH, Lee WJ, Almalki OM, Chen JC, Wu CC, et al. Long-term efficacy of bariatric surgery for the treatment of super-obesity: comparison of SG, RYGB, and OAGB. Obes Surg. 2021;31(8):3391–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Navarrete Aulestia S, Leyba JL, Navarrete Llopis S, Pulgar V. One anastomosis gastric bypass/minigastric bypass in patients with BMI < 35 kg/m(2) and type 2 diabetes mellitus: preliminary report. Obes Surg. 2019;29(12):3987–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Velotti N, Vitiello A, Berardi G, Di Lauro K, Musella M. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus one anastomosis-mini gastric bypass as a rescue procedure following failed restrictive bariatric surgery. A systematic review of literature with metanalysis. Updates in Surg. 2021;73(2):639–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Poublon N, Chidi I, Bethlehem M, Kuipers E, Gadiot R, Emous M, et al. One anastomosis gastric bypass vs Roux-en-Y gastric bypass remedy for insufficient weight loss and weight regain after failed restrictive bariatric surgery. Obesity surgery. 2020;30(9):3287–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Parmar CD, Gan J, Stier C, Dong Z, Chiappetta S, El-Kadre L, et al. One Anastomosis/Mini Gastric Bypass (OAGB-MGB) as revisional bariatric surgery after failed primary adjustable gastric band (LAGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG): a systematic review of 1075 patients. Int J Surg (London, England). 2020;81:32–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mahawar KK, Himpens J, Shikora SA, Chevallier JM, Lakdawala M, De Luca M, et al. The First Consensus Statement on one anastomosis/mini gastric bypass (OAGB/MGB) using a modified Delphi approach. Obes Surg. 2018;28(2):303–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Ouyang W, Dass C, Zhao H, Kim C, Criner G. Multiplanar MDCT measurement of esophageal hiatus surface area: association with hiatal hernia and GERD. Surg Endosc. 2016;30(6):2465–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Parmar CD, Mahawar KK. One anastomosis (mini) gastric bypass is now an established bariatric procedure: a systematic review of 12,807 patients. Obes Surg. 2018;28(9):2956–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ramos AC, Chevallier JM, Mahawar K, Brown W, Kow L, White KP, et al. IFSO (International Federation for Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders) Consensus Conference Statement on one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB-MGB): results of a modified Delphi study. Obes Surg. 2020;30(5):1625–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Parmar C, Abdelhalim MA, Mahawar KK, Boyle M, Carr WRJ, Jennings N, et al. Management of super-super obese patients: comparison between one anastomosis (mini) gastric bypass and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Endosc. 2017;31(9):3504–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Parmar CD, Bryant C, Luque-de-Leon E, Peraglie C, Prasad A, Rheinwalt K, et al. One anastomosis gastric bypass in morbidly obese patients with BMI ≥ 50 kg/m(2): a systematic review comparing it with Roux-En-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy. Obes Surg. 2019;29(9):3039–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maurizio De Luca.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent does not apply.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Key Points

• OAGB/MGB is a suitable option in elderly patients.

• OAGB/MGB is a suitable option for patients with low BMI (30–35 kg/m2) with associated metabolic problems.

• OAGB/MGB is a suitable option in patients with BMIs more than 50 kg/m2 as one-stage procedure. OAGB/MGB can be a suitable procedure in patients with large/giant hiatal hernia with concurrent hiatal hernia repair.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 19 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kermansaravi, M., Parmar, C., Chiappetta, S. et al. Patient Selection in One Anastomosis/Mini Gastric Bypass—an Expert Modified Delphi Consensus. OBES SURG 32, 2512–2524 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-022-06124-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-022-06124-7

Keywords

Navigation