Bariatric surgery: to bleed or not to bleed? This is the question

Abstract

Background Bariatric surgery procedures are the most successful and durable treatment for morbid obesity. Hemorrhage represents a life-threatening complication, occurring in 1.3–1.7% of bariatric surgeries. Materials and methods We examined patients undergoing Bariatric Surgery from July 2017 to June 2020 (Group A) and those operated from July 2020 to June 2022 (Group B) in our Department. Starting from July 2020 we have implemented intraoperative measures to prevent postoperative bleeding, increasing mean arterial pressure (MAP) by 30% compared to preoperative and reducing the pneumoperitoneal pressure of CO2 to 8 mmHg in the last 15 min of the operation. Results The study gathered 200 patients divided into the two described groups. The mean age of Group A is 44 ± 8.49 and 43.73 ± 9.28. The mean preoperative BMI is 45.6 kg/m2 ± 6.71 for Group A and 48.9 ± 7.15 kg/m2 for Group B. Group A recorded a mean MAP of 83.06 ± 18.58 mmHg and group B a value of 111.88 ± 12.46 mmHg (p value < 0.05 and z-score is 4.15226 and the value of U is 13,900). We observed 9 cases of bleeding in group A, most of them being treated with medical therapy and transfusions; only 1 hemodynamically unstable patient underwent re-laparoscopy. We reported only 2 cases of bleeding in group B, one of which required blood transfusions. Conclusion From our study we can conclude that increasing mean arterial pressure (MAP) by 30% compared to preoperative and reducing the pneumoperitoneum pressure of CO2 to 8 mmHg in the last 15 min of the operation led to a decrease in bleeding cases in group B and, most importantly, all the bleedings were easily controllable with medical therapy and/or transfusions. These measures allowed us to reduce postoperative bleeding.

Can robotic gastric bypass be considered a valid alternative to laparoscopy? Our early experience and literature review

“…One of the main advantages is the improved dexterity of the instrument (increased freedom of movement) and the filtering of tremors, which allow the surgeon to operate as if in open surgery, allowing delicate microsurgery and microanastomosis ( 14 , 15 ). Other advantages include a three-dimensional view of the surgical field that provides better depth perception, the ability for the surgeon to control the field of view of the surgical field, and an ergonomically designed workstation that allows the surgeon a comfortable sitting position ( 16 , 17 ).…”