No abstract

Preserving duodenal-jejunal transit does not impede glucose tolerance and diabetes remission after gastric bypass in type-2 diabetes Sprague-Dawley rat model.

Recent studies suggest the possibility of the stomach playing a role in diabetes remission after bariatric surgery. In this study, we investigated whether bypassing the stomach alleviates diabetes in diabetic rodent model. Eighteen moderately obese and diabetic Sprague-Dawley rats were randomly assigned to Esophagoduodenostomy with or without gastric preservation (EDG and EDNG/total gastrectomy, respectively), and SHAM groups. Bodyweight, food intake, fasting glucose level, oral glucose tolerance test result (OGTT), and hormone levels (insulin, glucagon-like peptide-1, ghrelin, gastrin and glucagon) were measured preoperative and postoperatively. Postoperatively, bodyweight and food intake did not differ significantly between the EDG and EDNG groups. Postoperative fasting blood glucose and OGTT results declined significantly in the EDG and EDNG group when compared with the respective preoperative levels. Postoperative glucose control improvements in EDNG group was significantly inferior when compared to EDG. Compared preoperatively, postoperative plasma ghrelin and gastrin levels declined significantly in EDNG group. Preoperative and postoperative plasma GLP-1 level did not differ significantly among all the groups. Postoperatively, EDG group had significantly higher insulin and lower glucagon levels when compared with SHAM. In conclusion, bypassing and preserving the stomach resulted in superior glucose control improvements than total gastrectomy.

Background: To observe if absorbable suture can effectively and safely be used to close the mesenteric defect after Roux-en-Y reconstruction. Methods: Rats were randomly assigned to 5 experimental groups according to different suture materials used in closing the mesenteric defects (Peterson’s space) after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Group A (control group), Group B (non-absorbable suture, Prolene suture), Group C (biological glue), Group D (non-absorbable suture, polyester suture) and Group E (absorbable suture). All rats were followed up for 8 weeks postoperatively and underwent laparotomy to observe the degree of adhesion and closure of the mesenteric defect. Results: No significant difference was found in the decrease in food intake and body weight among all groups. No internal hernia (IH) occurred in any group. The mesenteric defects of Group A remained completely visible without any closure or adhesion. Multiple gaps were found between Prolene suture and the mesentery along the suture line in Group B. The mesenteric defects of Group C were complete closed with multiple adhesions of the small intestine and the greater omentum. The mesenteric defects had closed completely in both Group D and Group E. Average adhesion score of Group A and Group B was 0 and 0.33±0.52 respectively. Average adhesion score was higher in group C (3.83±0.41) than the other groups (p＜0.05). Group D and E had similar average adhesion score, 3.17±0.41 and 3.00±0.00 respectively. Conclusion: Absorbable sutures can be effectively and safely used to close the mesenteric defect in a rat model.

Foregut (foregut exclusions) and hindgut (rapid transit of nutrients to the distal intestine) theories are the most commonly used explanations for the metabolic improvements observed after metabolic surgeries. However, several procedures that do not comprise duodenal exclusions, such as sleeve with jejunojejunal bypass, ileal interposition, and transit bipartition and sleeve gastrectomy were found to have similar diabetes remission rates when compared with duodenal exclusion procedures, such as gastric bypass, biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch, and diverted sleeve with ileal interposition. Moreover, the complete exclusion of the proximal intestine could result in the malabsorption of several important micronutrients. This article reviews commonly performed procedures, with and without foregut exclusion, to better comprehend whether there is a critical need to include foregut exclusion in metabolic surgery.