Puvvadi, Suraj

Abstract Background: Refugee, immigrant, and asylee populations face significant barriers to healthcare access, including linguistic, cultural, socioeconomic, and institutional challenges. The Refugee Education and Clinic Team (REACT) is a student-run free clinic in Maricopa County, Arizona, providing subacute care and referrals to federally qualified health centers (FQHCs). This study evaluates patient demographics, clinical needs, social determinants of health (SDH), and follow-up outcomes to identify barriers to long-term care integration. Methods: A retrospective chart review of all REACT patients (2022–2024) was conducted using electronic health records. Data on demographics, SDH, chief complaints, prescriptions, referrals, and follow-up outcomes were analyzed using descriptive statistics and logistic regression. Results: The cohort (n=95) was predominantly uninsured (63%) and faced significant social barriers, including food insecurity (30.5%), employment challenges (30.5%), and language barriers (28.4%). Musculoskeletal pain and general health check-ups were the most common concerns. Older patients had higher-than-expected rates of possible hypertension. Nearly 90% received primary care provider (PCP) referrals, yet follow-up rates remained low, with only 42% attending or planning to still attend the referred visit after their initial clinic visit with us. Successful phone outreach was a significant predictor (OR: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.31-0.77) of PCP visit attendance by multivariate logistic regression. Conclusion: REACT serves a unique population with distinct barriers to care. While the clinic facilitates healthcare entry, limited follow-up adherence highlights the need for enhanced outreach, geographically optimized referrals, and integrated allied health services to improve care continuity.

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is the most effective and durable therapeutic intervention for patients with obesity. In recent years, laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has become the most commonly performed primary MBS procedure owing to its technical feasibility and excellent short-term outcomes. Despite these favorable results and perceived advantages, SG is associated with several unique complications. Complications such as a postoperative leak or bleeding have been more commonly observed and reported than others, and their management approaches are well described. However, other complications following SG are far less familiar to surgeons, which may delay recognition and result in poor patient outcomes. Of these complications, we describe splenic injuries; esophageal perforation; staple line malformations; stapling of intraluminal devices; phytobezoar formation; gastro-colic, gastro-pleural and gastro-bronchial fistula; pancreatic leak; and portomesenteric venous thrombosis. It is paramount for surgeons to be aware of these underreported issues and have the resources to learn how to recognize and manage them when they arise. This review aims to describe rare (i.e., reported incidence <1%) and underdescribed complications after SG, focusing on causes, clinical presentation, prevention strategies, and management.

Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is the most effective therapeutic intervention for patients with obesity, with sleeve gastrectomy (SG) being the most commonly performed primary MBS procedure. Long-term studies have demonstrated that 15–20% of patients require revisional bariatric surgery (RBS) due to weight-related issues or surgical complications. Despite the gold standard being laparoscopic revision, there are other available approaches such as open or robotic-assisted. An extensive literature review was performed for articles from their inception to February 2024. A descriptive review of MBS procedures (SG, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), single anastomosis duodeno-ileostomy (SADI) and biliopancreatic diversion-duodenal switch (BPD-DS)) was carried out to report and compare outcomes between primary and revisional bariatric surgery. A similar review was conducted to compare outcomes of revisional approaches (open, laparoscopic, robotic). RYGB remains the dominant RBS with a similar safety profile compared to revisional SADI and BPD-DS. In terms of the RBS surgical approach, all three options showed comparable short and long-term outcomes, with robotic RBS being associated with longer operative time and variable length of stay. Additional long-term studies are required to further validate our conclusions.