Ghazi, Rabih

Abstract Background and study aims Traditional transoral outlet reduction (TORe) is a minimally invasive endoscopic approach focused on reducing the aperture of the gastrojejunal (GJ) anastomosis, while the tubular transoral outlet reduction (tTORe) consists of tabularization of the distal pouch utilizing an O-shape gastroplasty suturing pattern. The primary aim of this study was to compare short-term weight loss between TORe and tTORe. Patients and methods Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database was conducted at a tertiary care bariatric center of excellence. The study included patients with history of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) who had an endoscopic revision by TORe or tTORe and had follow-up data in their electronic medical record. The primary outcome was percent total body weight loss (%TBWL). Results A total of 128 patients were included (tTORe=85, TORe=43). At 3 and 6 months, the tTORe and TORe cohorts presented similar %TBWL (3 months: 8.5±4.9 vs. 7.3±6.0, P = 0.27 and 6 months: 8.1±7.4 vs. 6.8±5.6, P = 0.44). At 9 months, there was a trend toward greater weight loss in the tTORe cohort (9.7±8.6% vs. 5.1±6.8%, P = 0.053). At 12 months, the %TBWL was significantly higher in the tubularization group compared to the standard group (8.2±10.8 vs. 2.3±7.3%, P = 0.01). Procedure time was significantly different between both groups (60.5 vs. 53.4 minutes, P = 0.03). The adverse events rate was similar between groups (8.2% vs. 7.0% for tTORe and TORe, respectively, P = 0.61). Conclusions The tTORe enhances efficacy and durability of the standard procedure without adding significant procedure-related risks.

Background The primary obesity surgery endoluminal 2.0 (POSE 2.0) procedure involves full-thickness gastric body plications to narrow the stomach using durable suture anchor pairs. We evaluated POSE 2.0 as a treatment strategy for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) in patients with obesity. Methods Adults with obesity and NAFLD were prospectively allocated based on their preference to undergo POSE 2.0 with lifestyle modification or lifestyle modification alone (control). Primary end points were improvement in controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) and resolution of hepatic steatosis at 12 months. Secondary end points included %total body weight loss (%TBWL), change in serum measures of hepatic steatosis and insulin resistance, and procedure safety. Results 42 adult patients were included (20 in the POSE 2.0 arm and 22 in the control arm). At 12 months, POSE 2.0 significantly improved CAP, whereas lifestyle modification alone did not (P < 0.001 for POSE 2.0; P = 0.24 for control). Similarly, both resolution of steatosis and %TBWL were significantly higher with POSE 2.0 than with control at 12 months. Compared with controls, POSE 2.0 significantly improved liver enzymes, hepatic steatosis index, and aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio at 12 months. There were no serious adverse events. Conclusion POSE 2.0 was effective for NAFLD in patients with obesity, with good durability and safety profile.

Abstract Bariatric surgeries are often complicated by de-novo gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) or worsening of pre-existing GERD. The growing rates of obesity and bariatric surgeries worldwide are paralleled by an increase in the number of patients requiring post-surgical GERD evaluation. However, there is currently no standardized approach for the assessment of GERD in these patients. In this review, we delineate the relationship between GERD and the most common bariatric surgeries: sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), with a focus on pathophysiology, objective assessment, and underlying anatomical and motility disturbances. We suggest a stepwise algorithm to help diagnose GERD after SG and RYGB, determine the underlying cause, and guide the management and treatment.

Abstract Background and study aims Gastric outlet obstruction (GOO) is traditionally managed with surgical gastroenterostomy (surgical-GE) and enteral stenting (ES). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) is now a third option. Large studies assessing their relative risks and benefits with adequate follow-up are lacking. We conducted a comparative analysis of patients who underwent EUS-GE, ES, or surgical-GE for GOO. Patients and methods In this retrospective comparative cohort study, consecutive patients presenting with GOO who underwent EUS-GE, ES, or surgical-GE at two academic institutions were reviewed and independently cross-edited to ensure accurate reporting. The primary outcome was need for reintervention. Secondary outcomes were technical and clinical success, length of hospital stay (LOS), and adverse events (AEs). Results A total of 436 patients (232 EUS-GE, 131 ES, 73 surgical-GE) were included. The median duration of follow-up of the entire cohort was 185.5 days (interquartile range 55.25–454.25 days). The rate of reintervention in the EUS-GE group was lower than in the ES and surgical-GE groups (0.9 %, 12.2 %, and 13.7 %, P < 0.0001). Technical success was achieved in 98.3 %, 99.2 %, and 100 % (P = 0.58), and clinical success was achieved in 98.3 %, 91.6 %, and 90.4 % (P < 0.0001) in the EUS-GE, ES, and surgical-GE groups, respectively. The EUS-GE group had a shorter LOS (2 days vs. 3 days vs. 5 days, P < 0.0001) and a lower AE rate than the ES and surgical-GE groups (8.6 % vs. 38.9 % vs. 27.4 %, P < 0.0001). Conclusion This large cohort study demonstrates the safety and palliation durability of EUS-GE as an alternative strategy for GOO palliation in select patients.

AbstractObesity has been escalating as one of the worst public health epidemics. Conservative therapies including lifestyle modifications and weight loss medications have limited efficacy and long-term sustainability. Bariatric surgeries, although effective, remain underutilized due to their cost, safety concerns, and patient acceptance. In the past two decades, endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) have emerged as safe, effective, and less invasive options for the treatment of obesity and its comorbidities, with recent studies reporting favorable outcomes in terms of weight loss and metabolic parameters. This article reviews the major and newly developed EBMTs, with emphasis on their metabolic effects and potential use in the management of metabolic conditions.

Abstract Background and study aims Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ) is an endoscopic procedure for treating gastric outlet obstruction (GOO). Limited data exist regarding the safety and efficacy of EUS-GJ in patients with malignant GOO with ascites. Thus, we aimed to study the outcomes and safety of EUS-GJ in GOO patients with vs. without ascites. Patients and methods This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with malignant GOO who underwent successful EUS-GJ at a tertiary care academic center. Primary outcomes included the efficacy and safety of EUS-GJ. Secondary outcomes included 30-day readmission, reintervention, and survival utilizing Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results A total of 55 patients (mean age of 67.0 ± 11.3 years, 40.0 % female) who underwent EUS-GJ, of whom 24 had ascites (small in 22, large in 2) were included. Clinical success was achieved in 91.7 % and 93.5 % (P = 1.00) of patients with and without ascites, respectively. A higher rate of adverse events (AEs) was noted in patients with ascites but this was not statistically significant (37.5 % vs. 19.4 %, P = 0.13). Four patients in the ascites group (16.6 %) developed clinical evidence of peritonitis or sepsis post-EUS-GJ. Eight patients with ascites developed worsening ascites within a month of EUS-GJ. In contrast, only one patient without ascites developed evidence of new ascites. The median survival of patients was not significantly different between the two groups (patients with ascites: 129 days vs. patients without ascites: 180 days, (P = 0.12). Conclusions The efficacy EUS-GJ in the presence of ascites is promising; however, the safety profile remains concerning given the high rate of AEs, specifically peritonitis and sepsis.

Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is one of the most common obesity-associated comorbidities. The increasing prevalence of obesity worldwide is expected to cause a concomitant increase in the prevalence of GERD. While laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) remains the gold standard for the treatment of GERD, its efficacy in the setting of obesity is limited by a relatively high rate of post-procedural reflux recurrence. Currently, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is the gold standard treatment for GERD in patients with obesity. However, despite its proven efficacy, it remains underutilized due to its cost, safety concerns, and patient acceptance. During the past 2 decades, endoscopic therapies have emerged as minimally invasive and safe alternatives for the management of GERD. While most studies assessed their outcomes in patients without obesity, recently published case reports offered a potential framework for their use in patients with obesity. In this article, we review the available endoscopic anti-reflux therapies (EART) and endoscopic bariatric therapies (EBT), with emphasis on their potential role in the management of GERD in patients with obesity.