4.1 Article

Protein Energy Malnutrition After One-Anastomosis Gastric Bypass with a Biliopancreatic Limb ≤200 cm: A Case Series

Journal

Publisher

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/lap.2020.0226

Keywords

reversal; one-anastomosis gastric bypass; bariatric surgery; malnutrition; revisional; bariatric complications

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background:Increased popularity of one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) is associated with increased reports on the procedure-related complications. Protein-energy malnutrition (PEM) is a serious complication that may mandate reversal. The primary outcome of this study is the outcome of surgical management of PEM after OAGB. Methods:A retrospective cohort study of patients presented with PEM after OAGB between January 2014 and December 2018. Patients with a biliopancreatic limb (BPL) >200 cm were excluded. PEM was diagnosed based on the Global Leadership Initiative on Malnutrition criteria. Indications for reversal of OAGB due to PEM included failure of conservative measures, intolerable symptoms, and hepatic decompensation. Results:Eight patients presented with PEM and were reversed to normal anatomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The incidence of postoperative 30-day complications in this series was 37.5% (n: 3/7). Postoperative mortality due to hepatic cell failure occurred in 1 patient. Two patients deceased before reversal, one secondary to severe soft tissue infection, whereas the cause of death could not be confirmed for the second. Conclusion:Socioeconomic status and thorough preoperative counselling are important to predict patient commitment to postoperative supplementations and laboratory investigations. Bariatric teams should apply innovative methods as telemedicine to make patient compliance easier. The etiology of PEM cannot be purely explained by the BPL length. Revisional surgery is mandatory for resistant, recurrent, or complicated PEM.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available