Citations

Abstract Aims To compare weight loss outcomes between patients starting semaglutide who had previously been on another anti‐obesity medication (AOM) compared to those who were AOM‐naïve. Materials and Methods We performed a retrospective study in patients with overweight or obesity taking semaglutide for weight loss for a duration of 3 to 12 months. Our primary endpoint was assessment of percentage of total body weight loss (TBWL) in patients who started semaglutide as their first AOM (AOM‐naïve) compared to those who started semaglutide and had previously taken another AOM (non‐AOM‐naïve). The secondary outcome was a comparison of the proportions of patients achieving ≥5%, ≥10%, ≥15% and ≥20% TBWL between the groups. Our endpoints were analysed using independent t ‐tests and ANOVA/ANCOVA for continuous variables and Pearson's test for categorical variables. Results This study included 305 patients. Outcomes of semaglutide treatment were superior in AOM‐naïve patients ( n = 231) compared to non‐AOM‐naïve patients ( n = 74) at 3 (6.3% vs. 3.8%), 6 (10.6% vs. 6.7%), 9 (14.0% vs. 9.1%) and 12 months (14.3% vs. 10.6%; p < 0.0001 at 3, 6 and 9 months, and p = 0.01 at 12 months). A greater proportion of patients in the AOM‐naïve group achieved a TBWL ≥ 15% (48% vs 21%; p = 0.02) and ≥20% (27% vs 4% p < 0.01) at 12 months. Conclusion The use of semaglutide in patients with previous intake of other AOMs was associated with inferior weight loss outcomes in comparison to patients who were AOM‐naïve.

Abstract Background and study aims Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is performed in clinical practice by gastroenterologists and bariatric surgeons. Given the increasing regulatory approval and global adoption, we aimed to evaluate real-world outcomes in multidisciplinary practices involving bariatric surgeons and gastroenterologists across the United States. Patients and methods We included adult patients with obesity who underwent ESG from January 2013 to August 2022 in seven academic and private centers in the United States. Patient and procedure characteristics, serious adverse events (SAEs), and weight loss outcomes up to 24 months were analyzed. SPSS (version 29.0) was used for all statistical analyses. Results A total of 1506 patients from seven sites included 235 (15.6%) treated by surgeons and 1271 (84.4%) treated by gastroenterologists. There were no baseline differences between groups. Gastroenterologists used argon plasma coagulation for marking significantly more often than surgeons (P<0.001). Surgeons placed sutures in the fundus in all instances whereas gastroenterologist placed them in the fundus in less than 1% of the cases (P<0.001>). Procedure times were significantly different between groups, with surgeons requiring approximately 20 minutes more during the procedure than gastroenterologists (P<0.001). Percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) and percent responders achieving >10 and >15% TBWL were similar between the two groups at 12, 18, and 24 months. Rates of SAEs were low and similar at 1.7% for surgeons and 2.7% for gastroenterologists (P>0.05). Conclusions Data from a large US cohort show significant and sustained weight loss with ESG and an excellent safety profile in both bariatric surgery and gastroenterology practices, supporting the scalability of the procedure across practices in a multidisciplinary setting.

Goals: We aim to describe the weight loss outcomes of patients with celiac disease (CeD) taking antiobesity medications (AOMs) and compare it with the weight loss outcomes of patients without CeD taking AOMs. Background: Increasing rates of obesity and obesity-associated comorbidities have been previously reported in patients with CeD on a gluten-free diet. The effectiveness of AOMs in this population has not been previously described. Methods: In our retrospective cohort study, we matched 39 patients with treated CeD to 78 patients without CeD based on sex and AOM. We assessed the weight loss outcomes at 3, 6, and 12 months after starting the AOM in both cohorts and analyzed if there was a differential response when comparing by type of AOM [injectable glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists vs. oral non-GLP-1 AOMs]. Results: Both cohorts had similar baseline demographic and anthropometric characteristics. At 12 months, the CeD cohort had a nonsignificantly inferior total body weight loss percentage compared with the cohort without CeD (6.5% vs. 9.5%, P=0.13). The CeD cohort had a similar proportion of patients achieving a total body weight loss percentage of ≥5% than the cohort without CeD (72.7% vs. 72.1%, P=1.00). No significant difference was observed when comparing the weight loss outcomes of injectables (GLP-1 receptor agonists) to oral AOMs. The proportion of patients reporting side effects was similar for both groups, regardless of the type of AOM. Conclusion: Patients with CeD taking AOMs had similar weight loss outcomes to patients without CeD. Hence, AOMs can be a safe and effective therapy for weight management in patients with CeD.

INTRODUCTION: Inadequate bowel preparation can result in decreased diagnostic accuracy and therapeutic safety of colonoscopy for colon cancer screening. The Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) has been used to assess the quality of bowel preparation. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) are commonly used medications for diabetes mellitus and obesity that are known to delay gastrointestinal motility. We hypothesized that the use of GLP-1RA would be associated with decreased quality of bowel preparation. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent screening or surveillance colonoscopy at a large academic medical center between December 2021 and December 2022. We included patients taking any GLP-1RA for diabetes or obesity during colonoscopy defined as our cases, and patients who were prescribed GLP-1RA at one point but not within 3 months of colonoscopy defined as our controls. We excluded patients on any promotility or antimotility agents and those without BBPS recorded on their procedure report. Independent t test assessed statistical differences in the case and control groups to compare the quality of bowel preparation for continuous variables, and the χ 2 test was used for categorical variables. Multivariate linear regression including diabetes as a covariate was also performed for continuous variables, and multivariate logistic regression was performed for categorical variables. RESULTS: A total of 446 patients were included in the study, comprising 265 (59%) cases and 181 controls (41%). There were no statistically significant differences between groups at baseline except for the diagnosis of diabetes ( P = 0.001) with a higher proportion of patients with diabetes in the cases. The mean BBPS was significantly higher in controls (7.0 ± 1.9 vs 7.5 ± 2.4, P = 0.046) when controlling for diabetes. The percentage of patients with a total BBPS score of <5 was significantly higher in cases (15.5% vs 6.6%, P = 0.01). The proportion of patients who required a repeat colonoscopy due to poor bowel preparation was also significantly higher in cases (18.9% vs 11.1%, P = 0.041). DISCUSSION: The use of GLP-1RA was associated with a statistically significantly lower quality of bowel preparation, with additional clinical significance given a notable difference in the need for a repeat colonoscopy. It will be essential to understand the cumulative effect of medications that may delay gastric emptying on the quality of bowel preparation to better understand the appropriate measures and counseling that need to be taken before undergoing outpatient colonoscopies.

INTRODUCTION: Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) has gained popularity over the past decade and has been adopted in both academic and private institutions globally. We present outcomes of the largest cohort of patients from the United States undergoing ESG and evaluate these according to obesity class. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of adult patients who underwent ESG. Medical information was abstracted from the electronic record with weight records up to 2 years after ESG. Percent total body weight loss (%TBWL) at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months was calculated based on baseline weight at the procedure. SPSS (version 29.0) was used for all statistical analyses. RESULTS: A total of 1,506 patients from 7 sites were included (501 Class I obesity, 546 Class II, and 459 Class III). Baseline demographics differed according to obesity class due to differences in age, body mass index (BMI), height, sex distribution, and race. As early as 6 months post-ESG, mean BMI for each class dropped to the next lower class and remained there through 2 years. %TWBL achieved in the Class III group was significantly greater when compared with other classes at all time points. At 12 months, 83.2% and 60.9% of patients had ≥10% and ≥15% TBWL for all classes. There were no differences in adverse events between classes. DISCUSSION: Real-world data from a large cohort of patients of all BMI classes across the United States shows significant and sustained weight loss with ESG. ESG is safe to perform in a higher obesity class with acceptable midterm efficacy.

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.