Pattou, F

Abstract Background Distal (ileal) metabolic bariatric surgeries (DMBS) have gained increasing adoption due to their enhanced metabolic effects. However, the absence of standardized definitions, classification, and clinical indications limits their consistent application. This consensus aimed to establish an international consensus on the definition, classification, indications, and postoperative management of DMBS. Methods A three-round modified Delphi study was conducted including international expert surgeons from 16 countries. A total of 98 statements were developed across three domains: procedural characteristics, patient selection, and postoperative follow-up. Consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement. Statements not reaching consensus were revised and resubmitted. Results Consensus was achieved on 81 statements. DMBS were defined as procedures involving gastro-ileal or duodeno-ileal bypass, emphasizing ileal stimulation as a key metabolic mechanism. Procedures with a common channel ≤350 cm, including single-anastomosis duodenal-ileal with SG (SADI-S), single anastomosis sleeve-ileal transit bipartition (SASI), sleeve gastrectomy with Roux-en-Y transit bipartition (SG+TB), and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch (BPD-DS), as well as one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB) with biliopancreatic limb > 50% of total small bowel length were classified as DMBS. Routine measurement of total small bowel length was strongly recommended. DMBS were considered appropriate as primary procedures in patients with BMI ≥40 kg/m² with comorbidities, a BMI ≥50–60 kg/m², irrespective of the presence of comorbidities, and as revisional options for suboptimal clinical response (SoCR), recurrent weight gain (RWG), or persistent metabolic disease. Comprehensive preoperative and multidisciplinary evaluation was deemed mandatory, and liver cirrhosis, heart failure, end-stage kidney disease, and inflammatory bowel disease were considered contraindications. Postoperative care requires lifelong multidisciplinary follow-up, with increased attention to nutritional deficiencies and supplementation. Conclusions This consensus provides a standardized framework for DMBS, supporting harmonization of practice and improved patient safety.

OBJECTIVE To describe trends of primary efficacy and safety outcomes of islet transplantation in type 1 diabetes recipients with severe hypoglycemia from the Collaborative Islet Transplant Registry (CITR) from 1999 to 2010. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A total of 677 islet transplant-alone or islet-after-kidney recipients with type 1 diabetes in the CITR were analyzed for five primary efficacy outcomes and overall safety to identify any differences by early (1999–2002), mid (2003–2006), or recent (2007–2010) transplant era based on annual follow-up to 5 years. RESULTS Insulin independence at 3 years after transplant improved from 27% in the early era (1999–2002, n = 214) to 37% in the mid (2003–2006, n = 255) and to 44% in the most recent era (2007–2010, n = 208; P = 0.006 for years-by-era; P = 0.01 for era alone). C-peptide ≥0.3 ng/mL, indicative of islet graft function, was retained longer in the most recent era (P < 0.001). Reduction of HbA1c and resolution of severe hypoglycemia exhibited enduring long-term effects. Fasting blood glucose stabilization also showed improvements in the most recent era. There were also modest reductions in the occurrence of adverse events. The islet reinfusion rate was lower: 48% by 1 year in 2007–2010 vs. 60–65% in 1999–2006 (P < 0.01). Recipients that ever achieved insulin-independence experienced longer duration of islet graft function (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS The CITR shows improvement in primary efficacy and safety outcomes of islet transplantation in recipients who received transplants in 2007–2010 compared with those in 1999–2006, with fewer islet infusions and adverse events per recipient.