Jaruvongvanich, Veeravich

Abstract Background and study aims Concomitant hiatal hernia (HH) repair with transoral incisionless fundoplication (TIF) is a therapeutic option for patients with HH > 2 cm and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Data comparing this approach with laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) are lacking. We performed an exploratory analysis to compare these two approaches' adverse events (AEs) and clinical outcomes. Patients and methods This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study of HH repair followed by LNF versus HH repair followed by TIF in patients with GERD and moderate HH (2–5 cm). AEs were assessed using the Clavien-Dindo classification. Symptoms (heartburn/regurgitation, bloating, and dysphagia) were compared at 6 and 12 months. Results A total of 125 patients with HH repair with TIF and 70 with HH repair with LNF were compared. There was no difference in rates of discontinuing or decreasing proton pump inhibitor use, dysphagia, esophagitis, disrupted wrap, and HH recurrence between the two groups (P > 0.05). The length of hospital stay (1 day vs. 2 days), 30-day readmission rate (0 vs. 4.3 %), early AE rate (0 vs. 18.6 %), and early serious AE rate (0 vs. 4.3 %) favored TIF (all P < 0.05). The rate of new or worse than baseline bloating was lower in the TIF group at 6 months (13.8 % vs. 30.0 %, P = 0.009). Conclusions Concomitant HH repair with TIF is feasible and associated with lower early and serious AEs compared to LNF. Further comparative efficacy studies are warranted.

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.

Objective Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) has gained global adoption but our understanding of its mechanism(s) of action and durability of efficacy is limited. We sought to determine changes in gastric emptying (GE), gastric motility (GM), hormones and eating behaviours after ESG. Design A priori-designed single-centre substudy of a large US randomised clinical trial, adults with obesity were randomised to ESG or lifestyle interventions (LS) alone. We measured GE, hormones and weight loss and assessed eating behaviours. In a subset of ESG patients, we assessed GM. The primary outcome was the change in T1/2 (min) at 3 months, and secondary outcomes were changes in weight, GE, GM, hormones and eating behaviours. We used t-test analyses and regression to determine the association between GE and weight loss. Results 36 (ESG=18; LS=18) participated in this substudy. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. At 3 months, T1/2 was delayed in the ESG group (n=17) compared with the LS group (n=17) (152.3±47.3 vs 89.1±27.9; p<0.001). At 12 months, T1/2 remained delayed in the ESG group (n=16) vs control group (n=14) (137±37.4 vs 90.1±23.4; p<0.001). Greater delays in GE at 3 months were associated with greater weight loss. GM was preserved and fasting ghrelin, glucagon-like peptide 1 and polypeptide YY significantly increased 18 months after ESG. Conclusion ESG promotes weight loss through several key mechanistic pathways involving GE and hormones while preserving GM. These findings further support clinical adoption of this technique for the management of obesity. Trial registration number NCT03406975.

Abstract Background: Endoscopic bariatric therapies can help address widening management gaps in obesity. Their ability to facilitate weight loss is largely tied to influences on appetite through perturbations of gastric emptying and accommodation. As these tools gain traction in obesity therapy, their physiologic underpinnings require exploration, which may enhance efficacy, tolerance, and patient-tailored care. Methods: We prospectively assessed consecutive subjects with fluid-filled intragastric balloons (IGBs) (n = 18) placed between October 2016 and June 2017 or underwent endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) (n = 23) from March 2018 to June 2018. Patients underwent physiologic appraisal at 3 months with 13C-spirulina-based gastric emptying breath test to determine time to half emptying (T50), as well as maximum tolerated volume (MTV) of a standard nutrient drink test. Changes in T50 and MTV at 3 months were compared with percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) at 3 and 6 months using best-fit linear regression. Results: The change in T50 at 3 months correlated with %TBWL at 3 months for IGB (P = 0.01) and ESG (P = 0.01) but with greater impact on %TBWL in IGB compared to ESG (R 2 = 0.42 vs. 0.26). Change in T50 at 3 months was predictive of weight loss at 6 months for IGB (P = 0.01) but not ESG (P = 0.11). ESG was associated with greater decrease in MTV compared to IGB (340.25 ± 297.97 mL vs. 183.00 ± 217.13 mL, P = 0.08), indicting an enhanced effect on satiation through decreased gastric accommodation. Changes in MTV at 3 months did not correlate with %TBWL for either IGB (P = 0.26) or ESG (P = 0.49) but trended toward significance for predicting %TBWL at 6 months for ESG (P = 0.06) but not IGB (P = 0.19). Conclusion: IGB and ESG both induce weight loss but likely through distinct gastric motor function phenotypes, and gastric emptying may predict future weight loss in patients with IGB.

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.

Abstract Background and study aims Management of malignant gastrointestinal obstruction (MGIO) is more challenging in the presence of peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC). Outcomes data to guide the management of MGIO with PC are lacking. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes and adverse events between endoscopic and surgical palliation and identify predictors of stent success in patients with MGIO with PC. Patients and methods Consecutive inpatients with MGIO with PC between 2000 and 2018 who underwent palliative surgery or enteral stenting were included. Clinical success was defined as relief of obstructive symptoms. Results Fifty-seven patients with enteral stenting and 40 with palliative surgery were compared. The two groups did not differ in rates of technical success, 30-day mortality, or recurrence. Clinical success from a single intervention (63.2 % versus 95 %), luminal patency duration (27 days vs. 145 days), and survival length (148 days vs. 336 days) favored palliative surgery (all P < 0.05) but the patients in the surgery group had a trend toward better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) status. The rate of adverse events (AEs) (10.5 % vs. 50 %), the severity of AEs, and length of hospital stay (4.5 days vs. 9 days) favored enteral stenting (P < 0.05). The need for more than one stent was associated with a higher likelihood of stent failure. Conclusions Our study suggests that enteral stenting is safer and associated with a shorter hospital stay than palliative surgery, although unlike other MGIOs, clinical success is lower in MGIO with PC. Identification of the right candidates and potential predictors of clinical success in ECOG-matched large-scale studies is needed to validate these results.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies can potentially reproduce similar gastric and small intestinal anatomic and physiologic manipulations as Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. This proof of concept animal study was aimed to assess the feasibility, safety, efficacy, and impact on gastrointestinal physiology of combined intragastric balloons (IGB) and duodenal-jejunal bypass liner (DJBL) for the treatment of obesity. METHODS: Five Ossabaw pigs were fed a high-calorie diet to develop obesity and were randomly assigned to receive IGB or DJBL in sequence. The weight gain rate was calculated. Fasting and postprandial blood samples were drawn before any intervention (serving as the baseline group) and 1 month after second device insertion (serving as the combination group) to measure gut neurohormonal changes and metabolic parameters. RESULTS: Four pigs successfully received a sequential device insertion. One pig developed duodenal sleeve prolapse that was spontaneously resolved. One pig was early terminated because of developing a central line infection. The rate of weight gain in the combination group (0.63 ± 1.3 kg/wk) was significantly lower than the baseline group (1.96 ± 2.17 kg/wk) and numerically lower than after insertion of the IGB (1.00 ± 1.40 kg/wk) or the DJBL (0.75 ± 2.27 kg/wk) alone. A trend of higher postprandial glucagon-like peptide-1 was observed in the combination group compared with the baseline group. DISCUSSION: A combination of IGB and DJBL is feasible and well tolerated. A strategy of sequential use of these devices might offer a synergistic approach that can enhance weight loss and metabolic outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: To assess the effects of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) on acid reflux and esophageal motor function and to evaluate the observation of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) after bariatric surgery. METHODS: We searched 5 databases for adults who underwent SG or RYGB and had esophageal pH test and/or esophageal manometry before and after surgery. A separate systemic search of observational studies and a retrospective review at 3 institutions of adults who developed EAC after these surgeries were conducted. Outcomes were changes in manometric and pH parameters and EAC cases after SG and RYGB. RESULTS: A total of 27 nonrandomized studies (SG: 612 patients; RYGB: 470 patients) were included. After SG, lower esophageal sphincter pressure and esophageal body amplitude were decreased and the risk of ineffective esophageal motility was increased. Total and recumbent acid exposure times were increased. After RYGB, an increased risk of ineffective esophageal motility was observed. Total, upright, and recumbent acid exposure times were decreased. The total reflux episodes remained unchanged but with increased nonacid reflux and decreased acid reflux events. Including our largest series, 31 EAC cases have been reported to date after SG and RYGB. DISCUSSION: This systematic review demonstrates increased acid reflux after SG and decreased acid reflux after RYGB. An observed increased nonacid reflux after RYGB might contribute to failure of gastroesophageal reflux disease improvement. This refluxate might be noxious to the esophagus, warranting further studies. RYGB might not entirely preserve esophageal function as previously believed.