4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

The Impact of Bariatric Surgery on Short Term Risk of Clostridium Difficile Admissions

Journal

OBESITY SURGERY
Volume 28, Issue 7, Pages 2006-2013

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-018-3131-1

Keywords

Clostridium difficile; Obesity; Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; Sleeve gastrectomy; Nationwide readmission database

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Aims Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is major health care concern with reports linking it to obesity. Our aim was to investigate the little known impact of the two most common bariatric surgeries, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and vertical sleeve gastrectomy (VSG), on risk of CDI admissions. Methods This is a retrospective cohort study using the 2013 Nationwide Readmission Database. We examined inpatient CDI rates within 120 days after RYGB (n = 40,059) and VSG (n = 45,394). In a time to event analysis we also evaluated inpatient CDI rates up to 11 months post-surgery. We chose morbidly obese patients that underwent non-emergent ventral hernia repair (VHR) as additional surgical controls (n = 9673). Result CDI rates were higher after RYGB than VSG in the first 30 days (odds ratio [OR] = 2.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-4.20) with a similar but nonsignificant trend within 31-120 days. CDI rates were also higher after RYGB compared to VHR controls within 31-120 days after surgery (OR = 3.22, 95%CI: 1.31, 7.88, p = 0.01). In a time to event analysis with up to 11 months follow up, RYGB led to higher CDI compared to VSG (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.87; 95% CI, 1.12-3.13) with a trend towards higher CDI compared to VHR (HR = 1.95; 95% CI, 0.94-4.06). Similar CDI rates occurred after VSG vs VHR. Conclusions RYGB may increase the risk of CDI hospitalization when compared to VSG and VHR controls. This data suggest VSG may be a better bariatric choice when post-surgical CDI risk is a concern.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available