Revisional bariatric surgery in the elderly: a comprehensive review of the safety and efficacy profile.

IF 3.8
Noura Jawhar, Jack W Sample, Agustina Pontecorvo, Jorge Cornejo, Lorna A Evans, Nour El Ghazal, Simon J Laplante, Enrique F Elli, Omar M Ghanem
{"title":"Revisional bariatric surgery in the elderly: a comprehensive review of the safety and efficacy profile.","authors":"Noura Jawhar, Jack W Sample, Agustina Pontecorvo, Jorge Cornejo, Lorna A Evans, Nour El Ghazal, Simon J Laplante, Enrique F Elli, Omar M Ghanem","doi":"10.1016/j.soard.2025.08.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite the well-known safety and efficacy of metabolic and bariatric surgery, certain patients require revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) due to weight-related and/or procedure-related complications. Date on long-term RBS outcomes remains limited in the elderly.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the safety and efficacy of RBS in the elderly.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Tertiary referral centers with prospectively maintained metabolic and bariatric surgery databases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review was conducted for patients aged ≥ 60 years who underwent RBS between 2008 and 2023. Patient demographics, type of revisional procedure, postoperative outcomes, weight loss data, and nutritional parameters were collected. All patients had at least a 6-month follow-up and were followed at least 5 years after RBS when possible.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>201 patients were included. The most common indication for RBS was gastroesophageal reflux (37.8%). Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was the most common RBS procedure (65.2%). This subgroup achieved significantly sustained mean percentage of total weight loss throughout follow-up. Conversion to sleeve gastrectomy subgroup only maintained a significant mean percentage of total weight loss at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. The overall 30-day and late complication rates within the cohort were 17.4% and 26.9%, respectively. A .5% 30-day mortality rate and 0% long-term RBS-related morality rate were reported. For patients indicated for revision, RBS was successful in resolving malnutrition and did not result in recurrence of any nutritional deficiencies.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study demonstrated that RBS is safe and effective in elderly patients in the long term. Proper RBS procedure selection is integral to address revision indication and decrease the risk of long-term complications.</p>","PeriodicalId":94216,"journal":{"name":"Surgery for obesity and related diseases : official journal of the American Society for Bariatric Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery for obesity and related diseases : official journal of the American Society for Bariatric Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2025.08.012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Despite the well-known safety and efficacy of metabolic and bariatric surgery, certain patients require revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) due to weight-related and/or procedure-related complications. Date on long-term RBS outcomes remains limited in the elderly.

Objectives: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of RBS in the elderly.

Setting: Tertiary referral centers with prospectively maintained metabolic and bariatric surgery databases.

Methods: A retrospective review was conducted for patients aged ≥ 60 years who underwent RBS between 2008 and 2023. Patient demographics, type of revisional procedure, postoperative outcomes, weight loss data, and nutritional parameters were collected. All patients had at least a 6-month follow-up and were followed at least 5 years after RBS when possible.

Results: 201 patients were included. The most common indication for RBS was gastroesophageal reflux (37.8%). Conversion to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was the most common RBS procedure (65.2%). This subgroup achieved significantly sustained mean percentage of total weight loss throughout follow-up. Conversion to sleeve gastrectomy subgroup only maintained a significant mean percentage of total weight loss at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. The overall 30-day and late complication rates within the cohort were 17.4% and 26.9%, respectively. A .5% 30-day mortality rate and 0% long-term RBS-related morality rate were reported. For patients indicated for revision, RBS was successful in resolving malnutrition and did not result in recurrence of any nutritional deficiencies.

Conclusions: Our study demonstrated that RBS is safe and effective in elderly patients in the long term. Proper RBS procedure selection is integral to address revision indication and decrease the risk of long-term complications.

老年人修正减肥手术:安全性和有效性的综合评价。
背景:尽管代谢和减肥手术的安全性和有效性众所周知,但由于体重相关和/或手术相关的并发症,某些患者需要修正减肥手术(RBS)。关于老年人长期RBS结果的数据仍然有限。目的:评价RBS在老年患者中的安全性和有效性。环境:三级转诊中心,具有前瞻性的代谢和减肥手术数据库。方法:回顾性分析2008年至2023年间年龄≥60岁接受RBS治疗的患者。收集患者人口统计资料、手术类型、术后结果、体重减轻数据和营养参数。所有患者至少有6个月的随访,如果可能的话,在RBS后至少随访5年。结果:纳入201例患者。RBS最常见的适应症是胃食管反流(37.8%)。转Roux-en-Y胃旁路术是最常见的RBS手术(65.2%)。该亚组在整个随访期间取得了显著持续的总体重减轻的平均百分比。转到套筒胃切除术亚组仅在术后6个月、1年和2年保持显著的总体重减轻的平均百分比。30天和晚期并发症发生率在队列中分别为17.4%和26.9%。一个。30天死亡率为5%,与rbs相关的长期死亡率为0%。对于需要翻修的患者,RBS成功地解决了营养不良问题,并且没有导致任何营养缺乏的复发。结论:我们的研究表明,RBS对老年患者长期安全有效。正确的RBS手术选择对于解决手术适应症和降低长期并发症的风险是不可或缺的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信