Childhood and adolescent obesity has become a global epidemic. The interventions mainly include lifestyle intervention, medication treatment and bariatric surgery. Among them, lifestyle intervention, especially intensive lifestyle intervention with participation of family members, is the first-line treatment for obesity in children and adolescents. Both medication and bariatric surgery are adjuvant treatments for severely obese children and adolescents. Currently, metformin is the most widely used drug for the treatment of obesity in children and adolescents in both China and other countries; orlistat and liraglutide are also the drugs that are safe and often used in other countries; other drugs are not recommended. As a tertiary prevention and treatment strategy for obesity, bariatric surgery should be carried out on the basis of good compliance from both the children and their family members, with the cooperation of multiple disciplines. Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) are the most common types of procedure performed. Meanwhile, as a new treatment method, intra-gastric balloon procedure needs to be paid more attention to its efficacy and safety.
Adolescent ; Humans ; Child ; Pediatric Obesity/prevention & control* ; Obesity, Morbid/surgery* ; Gastric Bypass/methods* ; Metformin ; Gastrectomy/methods* ; Treatment Outcome ; Retrospective Studies

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy characterized by simple operation and few postoperative complications have gradually become the two most commonly used surgical methods in clinical practice.A series of complications often occur after bariatric surgery,including gallstone disease,anemia,malnutrition,gastroesophageal reflux disease,kidney stones,and birth defects in offspring of women of childbearing age.There are controversies regarding the causes and countermeasures of these complications.This article mainly reviews the risk factors and countermeasures for the complications after bariatric surgery.
Humans ; Female ; Bariatric Surgery/methods* ; Gastric Bypass/methods* ; Gastroesophageal Reflux/surgery* ; Postoperative Complications/prevention & control* ; Risk Factors ; Gastrectomy/methods* ; Laparoscopy/methods* ; Obesity, Morbid/surgery* ; Retrospective Studies

Objective: To investigate the safety and feasibility of using an endoscopic suturing instrument in laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy. Methods: A descriptive case series study was conducted to retrospectively analyze the clinical data of 5 patients with gastric cancer who underwent laparoscopic distal gastrectomy (Billroth II + Braun anastomosis) at Tangdu Hospital, Air Force Medical University from October 2022 to January 2023. The common opening was closed using an endoscopic suturing instrument. The indications were as follows: (1) patients aged between 18 and 80 years; (2) patients with gastric adenocarcinoma; (3) cTNM between I-III; (4) lower-third gastric cancer and radical gastrectomy is recommended; (5) no history of upper abdominal surgery (except for laparoscopic cholecystectomy). The surgery was performed as follows: A side-to-side gastrojejunostomy was performed with endoscopic linear cutter stapler. Then the common opening was closed with endoscopic suturing instrument. During suturing and closing the common opening, a vertical mattress suture was used to completely invert and close the mucosa-to-mucosa and serosa-to-serosa of the gastric and jejunum walls. After the first layer of suture was completed, the seromuscular layer was sutured from top to bottom to embed the common opening of stomach and jejunum. Results: Laparoscopic closure of the common gastrojejunal opening with endoscopic suturing instrument was successfully completed in all 5 patients. The operative time was (308.6±22.6) minutes, while the time of gastrojejunostomy was (15.4±3.1) minutes. The operative blood loss was (34.0±10.8) ml. No intraoperative or postoperative complications occurred in any of the patients. The first passage of gas occurred at (2.6±0.9) days, and the postoperative hospital stay was (7.0±1.9) days. Conclusion: The application of endoscopic suturing instrument in laparoscopic gastrojejunostomy is safe and feasible.
Humans ; Adolescent ; Young Adult ; Adult ; Middle Aged ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Gastric Bypass ; Stomach Neoplasms/pathology* ; Retrospective Studies ; Gastroenterostomy ; Laparoscopy ; Gastrectomy

Bariatric-metabolic surgery (BMS) has the potential of decreasing body weight and improving obesity-related metabolic syndrome by restricting food intake and malabsorption. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, adjustable gastric banding, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch are four major BMS procedures. Sleeve plus surgery, one-anastomosis gastric bypass, intragastric balloon and endoscopic surgery are also arising and gaining popularity due to their specific efficacy. Currently, BMS is now experiencing an era with deeply integrated interdisciplinarity, optimizing and innovating of surgeries and well-illustrated clinical efficacy, as a result, more obese patients would benefit from BMS.
Bariatric Surgery ; Gastrectomy ; Gastric Balloon ; Gastric Bypass ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Morbidity ; Obesity/surgery* ; Obesity, Morbid/surgery*

Objective: The pattern of digestive tract reconstruction in radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer is still inconclusive. This study aims to compare mid-term and long-term quality of life after radical gastrectomy for distal gastric cancer between Billroth-I (B-I) and Billroth-II (B-II) reconstruction. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted.Clinicopathological and follow-up data of 859 gastric cancer patients were colected cellected from the surgical case registry database of Gastrointestinal Surgery Center of Sichuan University West China Hospital, who underwent radical distal gastric cancer resection between January 2016 and December 2020. Inclusion criteria: (1) gastric cancer confirmed by preoperative gastroscopy and biopsy; (2) elective radical distal major gastrectomy performed according to the Japanese Society for Gastric Cancer treatment guidelines for gastric cancer; (3) TNM staging referenced to the American Cancer Society 8th edition criteria and exclusion of patients with stage IV by postoperative pathology; (4) combined organ resection only involving the gallbladder or appendix; (5) gastrointestinal tract reconstruction modality of B-I or B-II; (6) complete clinicopathological data; (7) survivor during the last follow-up period from December 15, 2021 to January 15, 2022. Exclusion criteria: (1) poor compliance to follow-up; (2) incomplete information on questionnaire evaluation; (3) survivors with tumors; (4) concurrent malignancies in other systems; (5) concurrent psychiatric and neurological disorders that seriously affected the objectivity of the questionnaire or interfered with patient's cognition. Telephone follow-up was conducted by a single investigator from December 2021 to January 2022, and the standardized questionnaire EORTC QLQ-C30 scale (symptom domains, functional domains and general health status) and EORTC QLQ-STO22 scale (5 symptoms of dysphagia, pain, reflux, restricted eating, anxiety; 4 single items of dry mouth, taste, body image, hair loss) were applied to evaluate postoperative quality of life. In 859 patients, 271 were females and 588 were males; the median age was 57.0 (49.5, 66.0) years. The included cases were divided into the postoperative follow-up first year group (202 cases), the second year group (236 cases), the third year group (148 cases), the fourth year group (129 cases) and the fifth year group (144 cases) according to the number of years of postoperative follow-up. Each group was then divided into B-I reconstruction group and B-II reconstruction group according to procedure of digestive tract reconstruction. Except for T-stage in the fourth year group, and age, tumor T-stage and tumor TNM-stage in the fifth year group, whose differences were statistically significant between the B-I and B-II reconstruction groups (all P<0.05), the differences between the B-I and B-II reconstruction groups in terms of demographics, body mass index (BMI), tumor TNM-stage and tumor pathological grading in postoperative follow-up each year group were not statistically significant (all P>0.05), suggesting that the baseline information between B-I reconstruction group and the B-II reconstruction group in postoperative each year group was comparable. Evaluation indicators of quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-STO22 scales) and nutrition-related laboratory tests (serum hemoglobin, albumin, total protein, triglycerides) between the B-I reconstruction group and B-II reconstruction group in each year group were compared. Non-normally distributed continuous variables were presented as median (Q(1),Q(3)), and compared by using the Wilcoxon rank sum test (paired=False). The χ(2) test or Fisher's exact test was used for comparison of categorical variables between groups. Results: There were no statistically significant differences in all indexes EORTC QLQ-30 scale between the B-I reconstruction group and the B-II reconstruction group among all postoperative follow-up year groups (all P>0.05). The EORTC QLQ-STO22 scale showed that significant differences in pain and eating scores between the B-I reconstruction group and the B-II reconstruction group were found in the second year group, and significant differences in eating, body and hair loss scores between the B-I reconstruction group and the B-II reconstruction group were found in the third year group (all P<0.05), while no significant differences of other item scores between the B-I reconstruction group and the B-II reconstruction group were found in postoperative follow-up of all year groups (P>0.05). Triglyceride level was higher in the B-II reconstruction group than that in the B-I reconstruction group (W=2 060.5, P=0.038), and the proportion of patients with hyperlipidemia (triglycerides >1.85 mmol/L) was also higher in the B-II reconstruction group (19/168, 11.3%) than that in the B-I reconstruction group (0/34) (χ(2)=0.047, P=0.030) in the first year group with significant difference. Albumin level was lower in the B-II reconstruction group than that in the B-I reconstruction group (W=482.5, P=0.036), and the proportion of patients with hypoproteinemia (albumin <40 g/L) was also higher in the B-II reconstruction group (19/125, 15.2%) than that in the B-I reconstruction group (0/19) in the fifth year group, but the difference was not statistically significant (χ(2)=0.341, P=0.164). Other nutrition-related clinical laboratory tests were not statistically different between the B-I reconstruction and the B-II reconstruction in each year group (all P>0.05). Conclusions: The effects of both B-I and B-II reconstruction methods on postoperative mid-term and long-term quality of life are comparable. The choice of reconstruction method after radical resection of distal gastric cancer can be based on a combination of patients' condition, sugenos' eoperience and operational convenience.
Aged ; Albumins ; Alopecia/surgery* ; Female ; Gastrectomy/methods* ; Gastric Bypass ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Pain ; Quality of Life ; Registries ; Retrospective Studies ; Stomach Neoplasms/surgery* ; Treatment Outcome ; Triglycerides

Objective: To investigate the safety and learning curve of Da Vinci robotic single-anastomosis duodenal-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S) in the treatment of obesity patients. Methods: A descriptive case series study was performed. Clinical data of obesity patients who were treated with Da Vinci robotic SADI-S in China-Japan Union Hospital of Jilin University from March 2020 to May 2021 were analyzed retrospectively. Case inclusion criteria: (1) uncomplicated obese patients with body mass index (BMI)≥37.5 kg/m(2); (2) patients with BMI of 28 to <37.5 kg/m(2) complicated with type 2 diabetes or two metabolic syndrome components, or obesity comorbidities; (3) patients undergoing SADI-S by Da Vinci robotic surgery system. Those who received other bariatric procedures other than SADI-S or underwent Da Vince robotic SADI-S as revisional operation were excluded. A total of 77 patients were enrolled in the study, including 31 males and 46 females, with median age of 33 (18-59) years, preoperative body weight of (123.0±26.2) kg, BMI of (42.2±7.1) kg/m(2) and waistline of (127.6±16.3) cm. According to the order of operation date, the patients were numbered as 1-77. The textbook outcome (TO) and Clavien-Dindo grading standard were used to analyze the clinical outcome of each patient and to classify surgical complications, respectively. The standard of textbook outcome was as follows: the operative time less than or equal to the 75th percentile of the patient's operation time (210 min); the postoperative hospital stay less than or equal to the 75th percentile of the patient's postoperative hospital stay (7 d); complication grade lower than Clavien grade II; no readmission; no conversion to laparotomy or death. The patient undergoing robotic SADI-S was considered to meet the TO standard when meeting the above 5 criteria. The TO rate was calculated by cumulative sum analysis (CUSUM) method. The curve was drawn by case number as X-axis and CUSUM (TO rate) as Y-axis so as to understand the learning curve of robotic SADI-S. Results: The operative time of 77 robotic SADI-S was (182.9±37.5) minutes, and the length of postoperative hospital stay was 6 (4-55) days. There was no conversion to laparotomy or death. Seven patients suffered from complications (7/77, 9.1%). Four patients had grade II complications (5.2%), including one with duodeno-ileal anastomotic leakage, one with abdominal bleeding, one with peritoneal effusion and one with delayed gastric emptying; two patients were grade IIIb complications (2.6%) and both of them were diagnosed with gastric leakage; one patient was grade IV complication diagnosed with postoperative respiratory failure (1.3%), and all of them were cured successfully. A total of 51 patients met the textbook outcome standard, and the TO rate was positive and was steadily increasing after the number of surgical cases accumulated to the 46th case. Taking the 46th case as the boundary, all the patients were divided into learning stage group (n=46) and mastery stage group (n=31). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of gender, age, weight, body mass index, waist circumference, ASA classification, standard liver volume, operative time and morbidity of postoperative complication (all P>0.05). The percent of abdominal drainage tube in learning stage group was higher than that in mastery stage group (54.3% versus 16.1%, P<0.05). The length of postoperative hospital stay in learning stage group was longer than that in mastery stage group [6 (4-22) d versus 6 (5-55) d, P<0.05)]. Conclusion: The Da Vinci robotic SADI-S is safe and feasible with a learning curve of 46 cases.
Adult ; Anastomosis, Surgical ; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/surgery* ; Female ; Gastrectomy/methods* ; Gastric Bypass/adverse effects* ; Humans ; Learning Curve ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Obesity/surgery* ; Obesity, Morbid/surgery* ; Retrospective Studies ; Robotic Surgical Procedures

Laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is an important obesity surgery. The risk of remnant gastric cancer after RYGB for obesity is gaining growing attention from bariatric surgeons and patients with obesity. This systematic review included articles from major databases internationally and domestically that specifically described the remnant gastric cancer after RYGB intervention, a total of 21 cases was subsequently analyzed. The average median time from post-operative RYGB to diagnosis of gastric cancer was 11 years (1-28 years), the duration of gastric cancer symptoms lasted 7 days to 6 years, abdominal pain is the most common (71.4%), especially in the upper abdomen (33.3%), followed by nausea and vomiting (33.3%), over-weight loss (33.3%), and abdominal bloating (28.6%), etc. Neoplasm location was reported to occur in the antrum or the pre-pyloric region (71.4%), with adenocarcinoma being the most common tumor histology observed (71.4%), tumor stage III-IV as the most diagnosed, 38.1% of tumor were deemed to be unresectable, 52.4% of the patients performed subtotal gastrectomy and lymphadenectomy. In addition, a global article investigating the occurrence of esophageal gastric cancer after RYGB in 64 cases revealed the common preoperative medical history include smoking habits (37.5%), alcohol issues (14.0%), GERD (86.0%), presence with Barret esophagus (10.9%), patients that has other malignant tumor medical history (6.3%), first-degree relatives (6.3%), or other family members with gastric esophagus cancer family history. Although the incidence of gastric cancer after RYGB is rare, the increasing prevalence of gastric cancer development is one of great concern. A rise in clinical cases of patients treated with RYGB presents a target for future studies. Risk of gastric cancer after RYGB should be evaluated and considered in high-risk cases.
Esophageal Neoplasms/surgery* ; Gastric Bypass/adverse effects* ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Obesity/surgery* ; Obesity, Morbid/surgery* ; Stomach Neoplasms/surgery*

In 2001, Rutledge reported the first case of mini gastric bypass (MGB). Carbajo improved the technique of MGB and named it one anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). Over the past 20 years, a large number of clinical and basic studies on OAGB/MGB have been reported, and the answers to some key questions about OAGB/MGB have gradually become clear. From a technical point of view, MGB and OAGB can be regarded as two subvariants of one surgery. The advantages of OAGB/MGB include: (1) simplicity, safety and lower probability of internal hernia;(2) stable and durable weight reduction effect; (3) stable and durable remission rate of type 2 Diabetes. The disadvantages of OAGB/MGB include: (1) bile reflux; (2) higher risk of malnutrition. OAGB/MGB has achieved a good balance between effectiveness and safety, and has become the most noticed and fastest-growing bariatric and metabolic procedure in recent years. OAGB/MGB has been recommended as a standard bariatric and metabolic procedure by IFSO and ASMBS.
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/surgery* ; Gastric Bypass/methods* ; Humans ; Obesity, Morbid/surgery* ; Retrospective Studies ; Weight Loss

Due to the complexity and heterogeneity of obesity, the diagnosis and treatment of obesity vary greatly. Five to 10 percent of body weight can be lost through lifestyle modifications, nutritional and behavioral counseling, and the use of approved weight reduction medicines for obesity and diabetes; however, these non-surgical treatments are not effective for all patients. Compared to medical therapy, bariatric surgery is associated with higher rates of type 2 diabetes remission, lower mortality from vascular complications, and long-term, sustained weight loss. With the advent of precision medicine in surgical therapy, bariatric surgeons' fundamental understanding of laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery has evolved in recent years. The objective of surgery has shifted from short-term weight loss to the safe and successful long-term management of patient weight and comorbidities. In laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery, the concept of precision bariatric and metabolic surgery is mainly reflected in three aspects: accurate preoperative assessment, precise intraoperative operation, and comprehensive postoperative management. A new direction for the future development of precision laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery and obesity metabolic surgery is to formulate precise and individualized surgical treatment plans for patients and to use artificial intelligence and big data technology to improve the standardization of specialist data.
Artificial Intelligence ; Bariatric Surgery ; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/surgery* ; Gastric Bypass/adverse effects* ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Obesity/surgery* ; Obesity, Morbid/surgery* ; Treatment Outcome ; Weight Loss

At present, sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) have become the major bariatric and metabolic surgical procedures, but neither of them is perfect. Adding jejunojejunal bypass (JJB) to SG can enhance weight loss and hypoglycemic effect. Present clinical results show that the short-term weight loss effect of SG-JJB is better than SG, and the weight loss and hypoglycemic effect is similar to RYGB. However, SG-JJB does not have various complications like traditional jejunal ileal bypass (JIB). The existing evidence shows that SG-JJB is a safe and effective bariatric and metabolic surgery, with relatively simple technical requirement. Meanwhile, SG-JJB has almost no dumping syndrome or ulcers, and facilitates endoscopic examination of the biliary tract, and has no blind gastric pouch. Thus, SG-JJB has some clinical application prospects, but further high-quality research with long-term follow-up is needed.
Gastrectomy/methods* ; Gastric Bypass/methods* ; Humans ; Hypoglycemic Agents ; Obesity, Morbid/surgery* ; Retrospective Studies ; Treatment Outcome ; Weight Loss