Obesity is a global health problem, associated with significant morbidity and mortality, often due to cardiovascular (CV) diseases. While bariatric surgery is increasingly performed in patients with obesity and reduces CV risk factors, its effect on CV disease is not established. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of bariatric surgery on CV outcomes, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline. PubMed and Embase were searched for literature until August 2021 which compared bariatric surgery patients to non-surgical controls. Outcomes of interest were all-cause and CV mortality, atrial fibrillation (AF), heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction, and stroke. We included 39 studies, all prospective or retrospective cohort studies, but randomized outcome trials were not available. Bariatric surgery was associated with a beneficial effect on all-cause mortality [pooled hazard ratio (HR) of 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49–0.62, P < 0.001 vs. controls], and CV mortality (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47–0.73, P < 0.001). In addition, bariatric surgery was also associated with a reduced incidence of HF (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.38–0.66, P < 0.001), myocardial infarction (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43–0.76, P < 0.001), and stroke (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.53–0.77, P < 0.001), while its association with AF was not statistically significant (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.64–1.06, P = 0.12). The present systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that bariatric surgery is associated with reduced all-cause and CV mortality, and lowered incidence of several CV diseases in patients with obesity. Bariatric surgery should therefore be considered in these patients. Obesity and cardiovascular disease: the effect of bariatric surgery.

Summary: Postbariatric loss of muscle tissue could negatively affect long‐term health due to its role in various bodily processes, such as metabolism and functional capacity. This meta‐analysis aimed to unravel time‐dependent changes in the magnitude and progress of lean body mass (LBM), fat‐free mass (FFM), and skeletal muscle mass (SMM) loss following bariatric surgery. A systematic literature search was conducted in Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science. Fifty‐nine studies assessed LBM (n = 37), FFM (n = 20), or SMM (n = 3) preoperatively and ≥1 time points postsurgery. Random‐effects meta‐analyses were performed to determine pooled loss per outcome parameter and follow‐up time point. At 12‐month postsurgery, pooled LBM loss was −8.13 kg [95%CI −9.01; −7.26]. FFM loss and SMM loss were −8.23 kg [95%CI −10.74; −5.73] and −3.18 kg [95%CI −5.64; −0.71], respectively. About 55% of 12‐month LBM loss occurred within 3‐month postsurgery, followed by a more gradual decrease up to 12 months. Similar patterns were seen for FFM and SMM. In conclusion, >8 kg of LBM and FFM loss was observed within 1‐year postsurgery. LBM, FFM, and SMM were predominantly lost within 3‐month postsurgery, highlighting that interventions to mitigate such losses should be implemented perioperatively.

Background Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) has become the most performed bariatric procedure to induce weight loss worldwide. Unfortunately, a significant portion of patients show insufficient weight loss or weight regain after a few years. Objective To investigate the effectiveness of the single anastomosis duodenoileal (SADI) bypass versus the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) on health outcomes in morbid obese patients who had undergone SG previously, with up to 2 years of follow-up. Methods From 2007 to 2017, 140 patients received revisional laparoscopic surgery after SG in four specialized Dutch bariatric hospitals. Data was analyzed retrospectively and included comparisons for indication of surgery, vitamin/mineral deficiencies, and complications; divided into short-, medium-term. To compare weight loss, linear regression and linear mixed models were used. Results Conversion of a SG to SADI was performed in 66 patients and to RYGB in 74 patients. For patients in which additional weight loss was the main indication for surgery, SADI achieved 8.7%, 12.4%, and 19.4% more total body weight loss at 6, 12, and 24 months compared to RYGB (all p < .001). When a RYGB was indicated in case of gastroesophageal reflux or dysphagia, it greatly reduced complaints almost directly after surgery. Furthermore, a similar amount of complications and nutritional deficiencies was observed for both groups. There was no intra- or post-operative mortality. Conclusion Conversion into a SADI resulted in significantly more weight loss while complications rates and nutritional deficiencies were similar and may therefore be considered the recommended operation for patients in which only additional weight loss is required.

Objective There is no evidence-based treatment for persistent dysphagia after laparoscopic fundoplication. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of pneumatic dilation on persistent dysphagia after laparoscopic fundoplication. Design We performed a multicentre, single-blind, randomised sham-controlled trial of patients with persistent dysphagia (>3 months) after laparoscopic fundoplication. Patients with an Eckardt symptom score ≥4 were randomly assigned to pneumatic dilation (PD) using a 35 mm balloon or sham dilation. Primary outcome was treatment success, defined as an Eckardt score <4 and a minimal reduction of 2 points in the Eckardt score after 30 days. Secondary outcomes included change in stasis on timed barium oesophagogram, change in high-resolution manometry parameters and questionnaires on quality of life, reflux and dysphagia symptoms. Results Forty-two patients were randomised. In the intention-to-treat analysis, the success rates of PD (7/21 patients (33%)) and sham dilation (8/21 patients (38%)) were similar after 30 days (risk difference −4.7% (95% CI (−33.7% to 24.2%) p=0.747). There was no significant difference in change of stasis on the timed barium oesophagogram after 2 min (PD vs sham: median 0.0 cm, p25–p75 range 0.0–4.3 cm vs median 0.0 cm, p25–p75 range 0.0–0.0; p=0.122) or change in lower oesophageal sphincter relaxation pressure (PD vs sham: 10.54±6.25 vs 14.60±6.17 mm Hg; p=0.052). Quality of life, reflux and dysphagia symptoms were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion Pneumatic dilation with a 35 mm balloon is not superior to sham dilation for the treatment of persistent dysphagia after fundoplication.