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: 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

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

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

Objective: To analyze the incidence of early severe complications following bariatric and metabolic surgery and the experience of their diagnosis, treatment, and risk factors. Methods: In this retrospective observational study, the clinical data of 4255 patients who underwent bariatric and metabolic surgery between May 2010 and May 2022 in the Department of Bariatric and Metabolic Surgery of the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University were retrospectively collected. Among these patients, 1125 were male and 3130 were female. The mean age and body mass index (BMI) of the patients at the time of operation were 31.3±4.5 years and 36.5±6.4 kg/m², respectively. Regarding surgical type, 2397 patients underwent sleeve gastrectomy (SG), 489 underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), 1028 underwent sleeve gastrectomy plus jejunojejunal bypass (SG+JJB), and 341 underwent single anastomosis duodenal switch (SADS). The inclusion criteria were patients (1) with a Clavien-Dindo grade of ≥III; (2) who were undergoing SG, RYGB, SG-JJB, or SADS; and (3) who had complete clinical data. The exclusion criteria were patients (1) undergoing revisional surgery and (2) other operations during the bariatric and metabolic surgery. The Clavien-Dindo classification was used to analyze the incidence of early severe postoperative complications and their prognosis. Early severe postoperative complications were defined as Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complications within 30 days after surgery. Meanwhile, multivariate logistic regression model was used to identify risk factors of the complications. Results: Summary of early severe complications following bariatric and metabolic surgery: (1) of the 4255 patients, 22 (12 male and 10 female) exhibited early severe complications (0.52%). The mean age and BMI of these patients were 41.1±9.9 years and 36.9±8.2 kg/m², respectively. Preoperatively, 7 patients had hypertension, 10 had type 2 diabetes mellitus, 1 had respiratory failure, and 1 had heart failure. The severe complications included 9 patients (0.21%) with grade IIIa, 11 (0.26%) with grade IIIb, 1 (0.02%) with grade IVa, and 1 (0.02%) with grade V complications. The incidences of severe postoperative complications in the different surgical procedures were 0.17% for SG (4/2397), 0.61% for RYGB (3/489), 0.58% for SG+JJB (6/1028), and 2.64% for SADS (9/341). The common severe complications were leakage (0.28%, 12 patients), bleeding (0.14%, 6 patients), and obstruction (0.05%, 2 patients). (2) Management of complications: Grade IIIa complications (including eight patients with leakage and one with severe inflammation) were treated with antibiotics, nasogastric and nutritional tube placements, and CT-guided drainage. For grade IIIa complications, five patients with bleeding were treated with reoperation, and all the patients recovered; four patients with leakage were treated with reoperation, wherein three were converted to RYGB and one patient underwent resuturing of the leakage site; two patients with obstruction were treated with adhesiolysis. The patient with grade IVa complication (including respiratory failure complicated with acid aspiration) was treated in the ICU. For the grade V complication, bleeding in a patient with SG+JJB was treated with reoperation, which confirmed the bleeding of short gastric vessels. Unfortunately, the patient died. (3) Risk factor analysis of early severe complications: univariate analysis detected that sex, age, type 2 diabetes mellitus, operation time, and surgical type were associated with postoperative complications (P<0.05). However, multivariate analysis indicated that an age of ≥31.3 years (odds ratio [OR] = 5.423, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.004-29.278, P=0.049) and surgical type (SADS: OR = 19.758, 95%CI: 5.803-67.282, P<0.001; RYGB: OR = 9.752, 95%CI: 2.456-38.723, P=0.001; SG+JJB: OR = 5.706, 95%CI: 1.966- 16.559, P=0.001) were independent risk factors of early severe complications following bariatric and metabolic surgery. Conclusion: Bariatric and metabolic surgery is safe. Its common postoperative complications include leakage, bleeding, and obstruction, which require early detection, diagnosis, and treatment to improve treatment outcomes. Age and surgical type are independent risk factors of early severe complications following bariatric and metabolic surgery.
Adult ; Anti-Bacterial Agents ; Bariatric Surgery/adverse effects* ; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/surgery* ; Female ; Gastrectomy/methods* ; Gastric Bypass/adverse effects* ; Humans ; Male ; Obesity, Morbid/surgery* ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology* ; Respiratory Insufficiency/etiology* ; Retrospective Studies ; Risk Factors ; Treatment Outcome

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Currently, a new over-the-scope clip (OTSC) system has been introduced. This system has been used for gastrointestinal perforations and fistulas in other countries. The aim of our study is to examine the therapeutic success rate of endoscopic treatment using the OTSC system in Korea. METHODS: This was a multicenter prospective study. A total of seven endoscopists at seven centers performed this procedure. RESULTS: A total of 19 patients were included, with gastrointestinal leakages from anastomosis sites, fistulas, or esophageal perforations due to Boerhaave’s syndrome. Among these, there were three gastrojejunostomy sites, three esophagojejunostomy sites, four esophagogastrostomy sites, one esophagocolonostomy site, one jejuno-jejunal site, two endoscopic full thickness resection site closures, one Boerhaave’s syndrome, two esophago-bronchial fistulas, one gastrocolonic fistula, and one colonopseudocyst fistula. The size of the leakage ranged from 5 to 30 mm. The median procedure time was 16 min. All cases were technically successful. Complete closure of the leak was achieved in 14 of 19 patients using OTSC alone. CONCLUSIONS: The OTSC system is a safe and effective method for the management of gastrointestinal leakage, especially in cases of anastomotic leakage after surgery.
Anastomotic Leak ; Esophageal Perforation ; Fistula ; Gastric Bypass ; Humans ; Korea ; Methods ; Prospective Studies

Surgical therapy is currently the only effective treatment for morbid obesity. Bariatric surgery traditionally consisted of laparoscopic gastric bypass and adjustable gastric banding in numerous patients. Recently, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy has become the most common bariatric procedure performed. Publicly issued medical-accident had a critical effect on the incidence and trend of bariatric surgery in Korea. Recently, the trend of bariatric surgery has shifted from weight loss surgery to metabolic surgery. The onco-metabolic surgical concept needs to be considered for gastric cancer patients with type II diabetes mellitus (DM) who are expecting a favorable prognosis. Therefore, for gastric cancer patients with type II DM, curative gastrectomy with long-limb bypass reconstruction could be a more attractive option for long-term diabetes control. Although a few centers are currently applying this reconstruction method for some early gastric cancer cases, further studies are needed.
Bariatric Surgery ; Diabetes Mellitus ; Gastrectomy ; Gastric Bypass ; Humans ; Incidence ; Korea ; Metabolism ; Methods ; Obesity, Morbid* ; Prognosis ; Stomach Neoplasms ; Weight Loss

PURPOSE: The mechanism by which bariatric surgery facilitates diabetic control is still unknown. Duodenojejunal bypass supports the foregut theory; however, its efficacy when used alone is not yet established. METHODS: During the period from January 2008 to December 2009, patients who underwent laparoscopic duodenojejunal bypass (LDJB) or laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB) for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with or without morbid obesity were included. Patients who had a follow-up for less than 3 years were excluded. Patient baseline characteristics, change of body weight, body mass index (BMI), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and diabetic treatments were analyzed. RESULTS: In total, 8 LDJB and 20 LRYGB patients were analyzed. The LDJB group had more number of male patients than the LRYGB group (LDJB 75% vs. LRYGB 30%, P = 0.030). Baseline BMI in the LRYGB group was higher than in the LDJB group (LDJB 27.0 ± 2.5 vs. LRYGB 32.6 ± 3.4, P < 0.001). Age, DM duration, baseline HbA1c, and C-peptide levels were similar. Longer operation time was needed to perform LDJB (LDJB 367.5 ± 120.2 vs. LRYGB 232.9 ± 41.1, P < 0.001), but no differences were observed in the hospital stay and complication rate between the 2 groups. At the third year of follow-up, the T2DM remission rate was observed in 40% of patients in the LRYGB group and 12.5% of patients in the LDJB group. CONCLUSION: LDJB is not an effective method for controlling T2DM compared with LRYGB. Foregut theory may not be the main mechanism of diabetic control during bariatric surgery.
Bariatric Surgery ; Body Mass Index ; Body Weight ; C-Peptide ; Diabetes Mellitus ; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2* ; Follow-Up Studies ; Gastric Bypass* ; Hemoglobin A, Glycosylated ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Length of Stay ; Male ; Methods ; Obesity, Morbid