Explore the vast range of titles available.

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is a commonly performed bariatric procedure. Weight regain following SG is a significant issue. Yet the defining, reporting and understanding of this phenomenon remains largely neglected. Systematic review was performed to locate articles reporting the definition, rate and/or cause of weight regain in patients at least 2 years post-SG. A range of definitions employed to describe weight regain were identified in the literature. Rates of regain ranged from 5.7 % at 2 years to 75.6 % at 6 years. Proposed causes of weight regain included initial sleeve size, sleeve dilation, increased ghrelin levels, inadequate follow-up support and maladaptive lifestyle behaviours. Bariatric literature would benefit from standardising definitions used to report weight regain and its rate in clinical series. Larger prospective studies are required to further understand mechanisms of weight regain following SG.

Background Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is the most common bariatric surgical procedure worldwide. Educational videos of LSGs are available from online sources with YouTube® being the most popular online video repository. However, due to the unrestricted and uncontrolled nature of YouTube®, anyone can upload videos without peer review or standardization. The LAP-VEGaS guidelines were formed to guide the production of high-quality surgical videos. The aim of this study is to use the LAP-VEGaS guidelines to determine if videos of LSGs available on Youtube® are of an acceptable standard for surgical educational purposes. Methods A YouTube® search was performed using the term laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Appropriate videos were analysed by two individuals using the sixteen LAP-VEGaS guidelines. Results A total of 575 videos were found, of which 202 videos were included and analysed using the LAP-VEGaS guidelines. The median video guideline score was 6/16 with 89% of videos meeting less than half of all guidelines. There was no correlation between the LAP-VEGaS score and view count. Conclusions There is an abundance of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy educational videos available on YouTube®; however, when analysed using the LAP-VEGaS guidelines, the majority do not meet acceptable educational standards for surgical training purposes.

Background Patient-reported outcomes are an important emerging metric increasingly utilised in clinical, research and registry settings. These outcomes, while vital, are underutilised and require refinement for the specific patient population of those undergoing bariatric surgery. This study aimed to investigate and compare how pre-surgical patients, post-surgical patients, and healthcare practitioners evaluate patient-reported outcomes of bariatric surgery to identify outcomes that are considered most important. Methods A modified Delphi survey was distributed to patients pre- and post-surgery, and to a variety of healthcare practitioners involved in bariatric care. Across two rounds, participants were asked to rate a variety of physical and psychosocial outcomes of bariatric surgery from 0 (Not Important) to 10 (Extremely Important). Outcomes rated 8–10 by at least 70% of participants were considered highly important (prioritised). The highest-rated outcomes were compared between the three groups as well as between medical and allied health practitioner subgroups. Results 20 pre-surgical patients, 95 post-surgical patients, and 28 healthcare practitioners completed both rounds of the questionnaire. There were 58 outcomes prioritised, with 21 outcomes (out of 90, 23.3%) prioritised by all three groups, 13 (14.4%) by two groups, and 24 (26.7%) prioritised by a single group or subgroup. Unanimously prioritised outcomes included ‘Co-morbidities’, ‘General Physical Health’, ‘Overall Quality of Life’ and ‘Overall Mental Health’. Discordant outcomes included ‘Fear of Weight Regain’, ‘Suicidal Thoughts’, ‘Addictive Behaviours’, and ‘Experience of Stigma or Discrimination’. Conclusion While there was considerable agreement between stakeholder groups on many outcomes, there remain several outcomes with discordant importance valuations that must be considered. In particular, healthcare practitioners prioritised 20 outcomes that were not prioritised by patients, emphasising the range of priorities across stakeholder groups. Future work will consider these priorities to ensure resulting measures encompass all important outcomes and are beneficial and valid for end users.

Obesity has been linked to an increased prevalence in multiple cancers. Studies have suggested a reduction in the overall risk of cancer after bariatric surgery. We reviewed the evidence for bariatric surgery reducing the risk of endometrial cancer. Data was extracted from PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline to perform a systematic review. Thirty-one full text articles were identified from 265 abstracts. Nine observational studies were relevant to endometrial cancer. In the five controlled studies, 462 of 113,032 (0.4%) patients receiving bariatric surgery versus 11,997 of 848,864 (1.4%) controls developed endometrial cancer, odds ratio of 0.317 (95% CI 0.161 to 0.627) using random effects model (P < 0.001). Bariatric surgery seems to reduce the risk of endometrial cancer; however, more research is required.

We reviewed the evidence for bariatric surgery reducing the risk of breast cancer. Data was extracted from multiple libraries, including PubMed, EMBASE, and Medline, to perform a systematic review. Abstracts were reviewed by two independent reviewers. Thirty-eight full-text articles were identified from 1171 abstracts. Four studies were included for meta-analysis; 114 of 10,533 (1.1%) patients receiving bariatric surgery versus 516 of 20,130 (2.6%) controls developed breast cancer, odds ratio 0.564 (95% CI 0.453 to 0.702) using a fixed effects model ( P  < 0.001) and odds ratio 0.585 (95% CI 0.247 to 1.386) using a random effects model ( P 0.223). Bariatric surgery may reduce the risk of breast cancer. More research is required due to heterogeneity of studies, difficulty in identifying accurate controls, and limited follow-up.

Background This systematic review aims to investigate the extent to which preoperative conditioning (PREHAB) improves physiologic function and whether it correlates with improved recovery after major surgery. Methods An electronic database search identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the safety and efficacy of PREHAB. The outcomes studied were changes in cardiorespiratory physiologic function, clinical outcomes (including length of hospital stay and rates of postoperative complications), and measures of changes in functional capacity (physical and psychological). Results Eight low- to medium-quality RCTs were included in the final analysis. The patients were elderly (mean age >60 years), and the exercise programs were significantly varied. Adherence to PREHAB was low. Only one study found that PREHAB led to significant improvement in physiologic function correlating with improved clinical outcomes. Conclusion There are only limited data to suggest that PREHAB confers any measured physiologic improvement with subsequent clinical benefit. Further data are required to investigate the efficacy and safety of PREHAB in younger patients and to identify interventions that may help improve adherence to PREHAB.

Background The Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis (LRINEC) scoring system was developed to aid the diagnosis of necrotizing fasciitis and guide management [ 1 ]. Aim To validate the LRINEC score and identify clinical predictors to develop a refined diagnostic scoring tool for the diagnosis of necrotizing fasciitis at Middlemore Hospital, New Zealand. Methods This was a retrospective case–control study of patients admitted to Middlemore Hospital with necrotizing fasciitis and severe cellulitis between January 2000 and December 2010. The LRINEC scores at admission were evaluated for performance in discriminating between cases of necrotizing fasciitis and severe cellulitis. Cases and controls were randomized into developmental and validation cohorts. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis of demographic, clinical, and laboratory variables for the diagnosis of necrotizing fasciitis was performed. The identified independent predictors were used to develop a new diagnostic scoring tool. Results The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (C-statistic) of a LRINEC score ≥6 for the diagnosis of necrotizing fasciitis was 0.679. The newly developed SIARI score [Site other than the lower limb, Immunosuppression, Age < 60 years, Renal impairment (creatinine > 141), and Inflammatory markers (CRP ≥ 150, WCC > 25] demonstrated superior diagnostic ability compared with the LRINEC score in both the developmental (C-statistic: 0.832 vs. 0.691, p  < 0.001) and validation cohorts (C-statistic: 0.847 vs. 0.667, p  < 0.001). Conclusion The LRINEC score exhibited only modest discriminative performance in this cohort, while the SIARI score is a simplified tool that demonstrates superior diagnostic ability for detecting necrotizing fasciitis. Future external validation studies are required to confirm the trends observed in this study.

Background Clinical prediction rules (CPRs) provide an objective method of assessment in the diagnosis of acute appendicitis. There are a number of available CPRs for the diagnosis of appendicitis, but it is unknown which performs best. Aim The aim of this study was to identify what CPRs are available and how they perform when diagnosing appendicitis in adults. Method A systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Studies that derived or validated a CPR were included. Their performance was assessed on sensitivity, specificity and area under curve (AUC) values. Results Thirty-four articles were included in this review. Of these 12 derived a CPR and 22 validated these CPRs. A narrative analysis was performed as meta-analysis was precluded due to study heterogeneity and quality of included studies. The results from validation studies showed that the overall best performer in terms of sensitivity (92%), specificity (63%) and AUC values (0.84–0.97) was the AIR score but only a limited number of studies investigated at this score. Although the Alvarado and Modified Alvarado scores were the most commonly validated, results from these studies were variable. The Alvarado score outperformed the modified Alvarado score in terms of sensitivity, specificity and AUC values. Conclusion There are 12 CPRs available for diagnosis of appendicitis in adults. The AIR score appeared to be the best performer and most pragmatic CPR.

Purpose Patient-reported measures are an important emerging metric in outcome monitoring; however, they remain ill-defined and underutilized in bariatric clinical practice. This study aimed to determine the characteristics of patient-reported measures employed in bariatric practices across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand, including barriers to their implementation and to what extent clinicians are receptive to their use. Methods An online survey was distributed to all bariatric surgeons actively contributing to the Australian and Aotearoa New Zealand Bariatric Surgery Registry ( n  = 176). Participants reported their use of patient-reported measures and identified the most important and useful outcomes of patient-reported data for clinical practice. Results Responses from 64 participants reported on 120 public and private bariatric practices across Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand. Most participants reported no collection of any patient-reported measure (39 of 64; 60.9%), citing insufficient staff time or resources as the primary barrier to the collection of both patient-reported experience measures (34 of 102 practices; 33.3%) and patient-reported outcome measures (30 of 84 practices; 35.7%). Participants indicated data collection by the Registry would be useful (47 of 57; 82.5%), highlighting the most valuable application to be a monitoring tool, facilitating increased understanding of patient health needs, increased reporting of symptoms, and enhanced patient-physician communication. Conclusion Despite the current lack of patient-reported measures, there is consensus that such data would be valuable in bariatric practices. Widespread collection of patient-reported measures by registries could improve the collective quality of the data, while avoiding implementation barriers faced by individual surgeons and hospitals. Graphical abstract

Introduction Obesity increases the risk of pelvic floor disorders in individuals with obesity, including faecal incontinence. Faecal incontinence (FI) is a condition with important clinical and psychosocial consequences. Though it is associated with obesity, the effect of bariatric surgery on the prevalence and severity of FI is not well reported. Objective To assess the effect of bariatric surgery on the prevalence and severity of FI in adult patients with obesity. Methods This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement. Two independent reviewers performed a literature search in MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane and Embase from 1 January 1980 to 12 January 2019. We included published English-language randomized control trials and observational studies assessing pre- and post-bariatric surgery prevalence or severity of FI. Random-effects models with DerSimonian and Laird’s variance estimator were used for meta-analysis. Results Thirteen studies were included, eight assessing prevalence (678 patients) and 11 assessing severity of FI (992 patients). There was no significant difference in prevalence post-operatively overall, though it trended towards a reduction [pooled OR=0.55; = 0.075]. There was a significant reduction of FI prevalence in women post-bariatric surgery [95% CI 0.22 to 0.94, p =0.034]. There was a statistically significant reduction in FI prevalence following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and one anastomosis gastric bypass [0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.81; p =0.007]. There was no significant reduction of incontinence episodes post-operatively [pooled mean difference =−0.17, 95% CI −0.90 to 0.56; p =0.65]. Quality of life (QOL) was not significantly improved post-bariatric surgery [mean differences for the following facets of QOL: behaviour −0.35, 95% CI −0.94 to 0.24; depression 0.04, 95% CI −0.12 to 0.2; lifestyle −0.33, 95% CI −0.98 to 0.33; p values of 0.25, 0.61 and 0.33, respectively]. Discussion There was a significant reduction in FI prevalence in women and those who underwent Roux-en-Y or one anastomosis gastric bypass. Our results for FI prevalence overall, FI severity and impact on quality of life were not statistically significant. Larger studies are needed in this under-researched area to determine the true effect of bariatric surgery on FI. Graphical abstract