Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Gastric bypass procedures are usually well tolerated and rarely require reversal. Literature regarding indications for reversal and outcomes is limited and largely restricted to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) [1,2,3,4,5]. Indications include food intolerance, malnutrition/excessive weight loss, dumping syndrome, postprandial hypoglycaemia, chronic pain, non-healing marginal ulcers and short bowel syndrome [1, 3, 5]. Over the years, the popularity and acceptance of one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) has grown worldwide. Currently, it is estimated that OAGB accounts for more than 10% of the bariatric and metabolic surgical procedures performed worldwide [6]. The data on the reversal of OAGB is not only scant but also limited to malnutrition. The aim of this video is to demonstrate surgical pitfalls whilst performing OAGB or reversal of OAGB and to establish the merits of multidisciplinary approach and intraoperative endoscopy during complicated revisional surgery.
Materials and Methods
The video presents a laparoscopic revision of a complicated and previously inadequately reversed OAGB in a 65-year-old female patient. Initial OAGB, done elsewhere, was reversed 7 days postoperatively due to complete intolerance to liquids. The patient had a poor functional outcome with ongoing vomiting and excess weight loss of more than 100% due to poor oral intake. She was referred to our centre 10 months following her initial procedure with a BMI of 24 kg/m2.
Intra-operatively, the OAGB gastric pouch was found to be communicating with the remnant stomach only through a very narrow side-to-side anastomosis, in agreement with the preoperative barium studies and cross-sectional imaging. This anastomosis was extended proximally up to the level of the gastric fundus to allow wide communication of the pouch with the body of the stomach. Intra-operative endoscopy revealed further stenosis at the body-antrum transition—presumably the result of the first horizontal stapling reaching too close to the greater curvature during the creation of the gastric pouch for the OAGB. This narrowing was not completely visualised in the preoperative studies. This narrow isthmus was widened by creating a side-to-side body-to-antrum anastomosis. Endoscopic views verified complete luminal reconstruction of the stomach.
The alternative conventional approach to the procedure performed would have been a standard RYGB with/without fundal resection, but the patient was adamant against having any further bypass procedures.
Results
Τhe patient had an uneventful postoperative recovery and was discharged on day 7. She had a slow progression through textures and had difficulties fully tolerating solid nutrition with occasional vomiting. A nuclear solid gastric emptying study 4 months postoperatively revealed mild gastroparesis. This clinically resolved over the course of the following 8 months. At 5 years follow-up, the patient is tolerating an unrestricted solid diet with no evidence of malnutrition, whilst maintaining a BMI of 26 kg/m2.
Conclusions
OAGB is a commonly performed bariatric procedure. Although considered technically less challenging as compared to RYGB, care must be taken to avoid dividing the pouch too close to the greater curve. Reversal procedures are challenging, and a multidisciplinary approach in conjunction with intraoperative endoscopy is essential to fully assess the anatomy and avoid pitfalls. Bariatric teams must be prepared that despite complete anatomical reconstruction, physiological reversal of gastric function may be slow or even incomplete in some cases.
References
Pernar LIM, Kim JJ, Shikora SA. Gastric bypass reversal: a 7-year experience. Surg Obes Relat Dis United States. 2016;12:1492–8.
Zaveri H, Dallal RM, Cottam D, et al. Indications and operative outcomes of gastric bypass reversal. Obes Surg United States. 2016;26:2285–90.
Ma P, Ghiassi S, Lloyd A, et al. Reversal of Roux en Y gastric bypass: largest single institution experience. Surg Obes Relat Dis United States. 2019;15:1311–6.
Pucher PH, Lord AC, Sodergren MH, et al. Reversal to normal anatomy after failed gastric bypass: systematic review of indications, techniques, and outcomes. Surg Obes Relat Dis United States. 2016;12:1351–6.
Shoar S, Nguyen T, Ona MA, et al. Roux-en-Y gastric bypass reversal: a systematic review. Surg Obes Relat Dis United States. 2016;12:1366–72.
Singhal R, Tahrani AA, Ludwig C, et al. Global 30-day outcomes after bariatric surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic (GENEVA): an international cohort study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2021;9:7–9.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
RS was the operating surgeon. MD and VC assisted in the operation. SK and MS were responsible for video editing and voiceover. All authors reviewed and approved the video and manuscript prior to submission.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical Approval Statement
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.
Informed Consent Statement
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
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
• When performing OAGB, avoid dividing the pouch too close to the greater curve.
• Multidisciplinary approach coupled with intraoperative endoscopy is essential to assess the anatomy and avoid pitfalls in bariatric reversal cases.
• Despite complete anatomical reconstruction, physiological restoration of gastric function may be incomplete in some reversal cases.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Supplementary file1 (MOV 442048 KB)
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Kapoulas, S., Charalampakis, V., Sahloul, M. et al. Revisional Surgery Following One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass: The Devil is in the Details. OBES SURG 33, 2949–2950 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-023-06706-z
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-023-06706-z