Introduction: Laparoscopic BariClip Gastroplasty (LBCG) represents a new bariatric procedure that mimics the principle of the Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy (LSG), but using a completely reversible mechanism, which is essential for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The purpose of our study was to evaluate the evolution of GERD following the initial experience with LBCG. Methods: The first 43 obese patients who underwent LBCG performed by the same surgeon in two different medical centers in May 2018–December 2019 were included in the current study. Twelve patients had issues of reflux, regularly receiving PPIs (proton pump inhibitors) treatment in eight cases, and occasionally in four cases. Thirty-two patients completed the follow-up at one year and the GERD was evaluated using the PPI medications and the GerdQ. Results: The median preoperative GerdQ score was (14.58 ± 1.9). Three patients out of the twelve who had complained about preoperative GERD did not consent to the one year follow-up form. For the rest of nine patients, the median post-operative GerdQ score was (10.11 ± 3.2). The PPIs were used at one year follow-up in six patients: four with occasional use, one patient with regular use showing no improvement, and one who experienced de novo GERD symptomatology (3.1%). No statistically significant difference between the groups was recorded in terms of GERD. We recorded no intraoperative complications. No case of erosion occurred in the post-operative period, but we encountered two cases of slippage. One additional BariClip was removed at 14 months. Conclusion: LBCG represents a new bariatric procedure that mimics the principle of the laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, but with a completely reversible mechanism. Even with limited cases, our experience reports several mechanisms of action that will be evaluated and discussed in further prospective clinical trials. After this preliminary clinical study, LBCG’s effects on GERD and its safety are highly encouraging.

Background: Laparoscopic adjustable gastric band (LAGB) procedures have declined worldwide in recent years. A known complication is the intraluminal erosion of the prosthetic material. The endoscopic management of gastric band erosion represents the recommended approach nowadays, and it avoids any additional trauma to the gastric wall already damaged by the migration. The purpose of our study was to assess the feasibility of endoscopic management for intraluminal gastric band erosion following LAGB. Methods: From January 2009–December 2020, a total of 29 patients were retrospectively reviewed after undergoing endoscopic gastric band removal. The study included all consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic gastric band removal in this period. No patients were excluded from the study. Data on patient demographic characteristics, case history, operative details (procedural time, adverse events), and complications were reviewed retrospectively. Results: Twenty-nine patients underwent endoscopic gastric band removal: 22 women (75.8%) with a mean age of 45 years (range: 28–63) and mean Body Mass Index (BMI) of 31 ± 4.7 kg/m² (range: 24–41). The average time to the identification of erosion after LAGB was 42 months (range: 28–137). The initial upper endoscopy found a migrated band of more than half of the diameter in 21 cases, less than a half but more than a third in seven cases and in one case, less than a third (use of a stent). Twenty-seven patients were successfully treated with endoscopic removal, and in two cases, the endoscopic approach failed, and laparoscopy was further performed. Conclusions: The endoscopic management of intraluminal erosion after LAGB can be safe and effective and should be considered the procedure of choice when treating this complication. The percentage of the band migration is important for the timing of the endoscopic removal.