Key result
Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy showed no significant difference in 30-day serious complications after multivariable adjustment (OR 2.03, p=0.207) in patients with prior fundoplication.
Why the study?
The safety and prevalence of sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass after prior fundoplication remain poorly characterized.
Does Roux-en-Y gastric bypass compared to sleeve gastrectomy alter the risk of 30-day serious complications in patients with prior fundoplication?
Cohort (n=499)
Yes
Does Roux-en-Y gastric bypass compared to sleeve gastrectomy alter the risk of 30-day serious complications in patients with prior fundoplication?
Odds Ratio: 2.03 (95% CI 0.68–6.09)
Absolute Event Rate: 9.6% vs 4%
p-value: p=0.207
Both sleeve gastrectomy and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass appear to be safe revisional options after fundoplication, with no significant difference in 30-day serious complications after adjusting for baseline characteristics.
Supports safety of both SG and RYGB after fundoplication; leaves open need for prospective trials to confirm risk equivalence.
BACKGROUND: Obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) frequently coexist and may necessitate surgical intervention when conservative management fails. While fundoplication is effective for GERD, many patients ultimately require metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) for obesity. The safety and prevalence of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) after prior fundoplication remains poorly characterized. OBJECTIVES: To assess the prevalence and 30-day serious complication rates of SG and RYGB following fundoplication, and to identify independent predictors of adverse outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the 2022–2023 MBSAQIP database identified 499 patients undergoing primary SG or RYGB after fundoplication. Outcomes assessed included leak, bleeding, reoperation, reintervention, cardiac events, pneumonia, kidney injury, thromboembolism, infection, or sepsis. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for baseline differences. RESULTS: Of 499 patients, 126 (25.3%) underwent SG (F-SG) and 373 (74.7%) underwent RYGB (F-RYGB). Concomitant paraesophageal hernia repair was more common in the F-RYGB group (54.2% vs. 26.2%, p < 0.001). Mean BMI was higher in F-SG (42.4 vs. 40.1 kg/m², p < 0.001). Weight gain and GERD were the leading indications for revisional bariatric surgery. F-RYGB was associated with longer operative times, hospital stay, and higher rates of reoperation, readmission, bowel obstruction, and serious complications (9.6% vs. 4.0%, p = 0.045). Rates of anastomotic leak, postoperative bleeding, and composite wound complications were low but numerically higher in F-RYGB, without statistical significance. In multivariate analysis, procedure type was not significantly associated with serious complications (OR 2.03, 95% CI 0.68–6.09, p = 0.207). CONCLUSIONS: Both SG and RYGB appear to be safe and effective revisional options, and a history of fundoplication should not be considered a contraindication. Although RYGB was associated with longer operative times and higher early complication rates, multivariable analysis showed no significant difference in serious complications between the two procedures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kachornvitaya et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Obesity and gastroesophageal reflux disease with prior fundoplication (n=499). Roux-en-Y gastric bypass vs. Sleeve gastrectomy was evaluated on 30-day serious complications (OR 2.03, 95% CI 0.68-6.09, p=0.207). Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy showed no significant difference in 30-day serious complications after multivariable adjustment (OR 2.03, p=0.207) in patients with prior fundoplication.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: