Dean Keren

Bariatric approach to obesity provides substantial weight loss and comorbidity resolution. Our unique service includes pre- and postoperative visits to the Health and Nutrition Clinic headed by a specialist in gastroenterology and nutrition. We compared patients attending regular clinic routine with those who were lost to follow-up with regard to anthropometry, comorbidity, quality of life, and food tolerance and determined who benefited most from the operation. A retrospective review was performed on patients 30 months after undergoing sleeve gastrectomy. Body mass index was used to report weight loss. Bariatric Analysis and Reporting Outcome System (BAROS) and Food Tolerance Score were (FTS) completed by all patients at the 30-month follow-up visit and compared between two groups (group I—30 months of active postoperative follow-up; group II—without). A total of 119 patients participated in the study. For groups I and II, the mean percentage of excess BMI loss at 30 months was 82.08 ± 9.83 and 74.88 ± 8.75, respectively, with better comorbidity improvement in group I. BAROS scores were 7.62 ± 0.72 and 6.92 ± 0.92. FTS was 24.30 ± 2.09 and 22.55 ± 2.27, respectively. From our experience, getting the most from the sleeve is attributed to two main factors: surgery and nutrition. Surgery results in optimal restriction and improved satiety, whereas nutrition relies on a professional medical team providing constant, ongoing patient support throughout all the bariatric process stages. These teams of surgeons and gastroenterologists specializing in nutrition, working side by side, each in their area of specialty, are the main pillars leading to the success of the sleeve.

BACKGROUND: The appropriateness and safety of open‐access endoscopy are very important issues as its use continues to increase.OBJECTIVE: To present a review of a nine‐year experience with open‐access upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with respect to indications, diagnostic efficacy, safety and diseases diagnosed.METHODS: A retrospective, observational case series of all patients who underwent open‐access endoscopy between January 2000 and December 2008 was conducted. Indications were classified as appropriate or not appropriate according to American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines. Endoscopic diagnoses were based on widely accepted criteria. Major complication rates were assessed.RESULTS: A total of 20,620 patients with a mean age of 58 years were assessed, of whom 11,589 (56.2%) were women and 9031 (43.8%) were men. Adherence to ASGE indications led to statistically significant, clinically relevant findings. The most common indications in patients older than age 45 years of age were dyspepsia (28.5%) and anemia (19.7%) in the ASGE‐appropriate group, and dyspepsia in patients younger than 45 years of age without therapy trial (6.6%) in the nonappropriate group. Of the examinations, 38.57% were normal. Hiatal hernia and nonerosive gastritis were the most common findings. Important diagnoses such as malignancies and duodenal ulcers would have been missed if endoscopies were performed only according to appropriateness. There were only two major complications and no mortalities.CONCLUSIONS: Open‐access upper gastrointestinal endoscopy is a safe and effective system. More relevant findings were found when adhering to the ASGE guidelines. However, using these guidelines as the sole determining factor in whether to perform an endoscopy is not advisable because many clinically relevant diagnoses may be overlooked.

The role of Helicobacter pylori (HP) in patients scheduled and undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has not been previously evaluated. Included were obese patients presenting to our institution for LSG over 24 months. All patients had presurgical HP breath test, and the symptomatic ones received triple therapy with symptom follow-up. Post surgery, all excluded stomachs were evaluated for HP, and those that were positive performed a second ¹³C-urea breath test (UBT) 3 months later. Forty patients underwent LSG. Male to female sex ratio was 1:3; mean age—42 years; mean weight—122 kg; and mean BMI of 43.4 kg/m². Presurgical HP was positive in 15 (37.5%) patients (11 symptomatic and four asymptomatic). Only these 11 patients were given HP eradication therapy and all experienced complete subsequent symptom resolution. HP was detected in 17 out of the 40 (42.5%) cases of excluded stomachs. All performed a ¹³C-UBT 3 months post operation and only three (17.6%) tested positive. HP infection is frequent in biopsies from patients with previous LSG and the majority of follow-up ¹³C-UBT were negative. In our small initial sample, we treated only symptomatic patients preoperatively. Routine screening for HP for all LSG patients and/or treatment for all positive ones would subject patients to expensive and unnecessary investigations. We propose that this stomach-reducing, pylorus-preserving surgery might even lead to HP eradication. The clinical implications of HP and this gastrectomy for a non-neoplastic, non-peptic indication deserve further study.

Goals and Background To Evaluate the indications versus diagnostic yield of significant colonic neoplasia (SCN) in the open-access era and screening colonoscopy. Study During 6–year period, all procedural data were obtained from all consecutive patients who underwent colonoscopies. Indications were compared with American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines. Results In all 22,341 procedures were included in the study. Indications were divided into 3 groups: Screening (21.89% of the procedures), surveillance (17.60%) and symptoms/signs (60.51%). A total of 2867 patients (12.83%) had SCNs. Of these, 278 (7.00%) SCNs were found in the group less than 50 years of age and 2589 in the group over the age of 50 years (14.10%). SCN as per indication frequency was 12.69% in the symptom/sign group (subdivided to 7.24% and 14.01% in the under 50 and over 50, age groups, respectively); screening 13.37% (5.48% and 15.09%, respectively); surveillance 12.64% (8.48% and 13.19%, respectively). The indications leading to the highest SCN rate (over 25%) were: abnormal imaging, elevated carcinoembryonic antigen, and rectal pain. Conclusions Colonoscopy is a unique screening tool that can detect neoplastic lesions. SCN prevalence in our study was between 13% and 15% for all indications in patients above 50 years of age. This emphasizes performing a screening colonoscopy for the entire population over the age of 50 years, regardless of the indication. We feel that American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines should be reassessed. The revised criteria should state that the primary indication, are all people over the age of 50 years, who should have a colonoscopy performed, unless otherwise contraindicated.

Open access endoscopy facilitates the performance of colonoscopy on a physician's request, without a prior consultation with a gastroenterologist. To investigate: (1) the rates of relevant endoscopic findings in patients referred by family physicians compared to other specialists; (2) whether there is overuse of open-access colonoscopy in our country where the examination is free of charge for the patient; (3) whether a high rate of pre-malignant and malignant incidental findings might justify a more liberal approach to the indications of colonoscopy. Prospective study including all consecutive ambulatory patients referred for open access colonoscopy. The indication for the examination was tabulated according to the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) guidelines. Endoscopic findings were classified into relevant or normal; each relevant finding was correlated with the indication for which the examination was performed. A total of 34.2% of patients had a colonoscopy performed for an inappropriate indication; family physicians had a slightly higher rate of appropriate indications compared with the other specialists. However, a relevant endoscopic finding was diagnosed only in 14.0% of their referred cases, compared with 22.8% of the other specialists (p = 0.032). Polyps larger than 5 mm or a malignant tumor were diagnosed in 20.7% of the colonoscopies; 19 out of the 83 cases (23%) were diagnosed in examinations performed for inappropriate indications. It was found that 34% of the colonoscopies were performed for inappropriate indications. A higher proportion of relevant endoscopic findings was diagnosed among patients referred by surgeons, oncologists and internists as compared with those referred by family physicians. Considering that as much as 23% of polyps and malignant tumors were found in cases performed for inappropriate indications, we suggest that a liberal approach to the indications for colonoscopy--probably age over 50 years--may benefit the patients.