title: Impact of technological advances on complications of revisional bariatric operations.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Revisional bariatric operations are technically challenging and are associated with a high perioperative complication rate. Several parameters were analyzed to determine whether experience, coupled with technical innovation, reduced complications after these high-risk procedures.
  
  
  METHODS
  Outcomes of 215 consecutive revisional bariatric operations performed by 1 surgeon during the past 22 years were assessed before and after routine use of 6-row endostaplers and harmonic scalpel, which began in 2001.
  
  
  RESULTS
  All but 3 operations were performed open, including 151 for weight loss failure (14 jejunoileal bypass, 71 gastroplasty or banding, 66 gastric bypass) and 64 for complications of the primary procedure (12 jejunoileal bypass, 11 gastroplasty or banding, 41 gastric bypass). Major perioperative complications occurred in 45 patients (21%): there were 15 leaks, 11 wound infections, 3 pulmonary embolisms, and 16 miscellaneous, including 3 deaths (1.4%). Morbidity after January 2001 was 6 of 73 (8.2%) versus 39 of 138 (28%) before 2001 (p < 0.0005). All deaths occurred before 2001. Complications occurred in 10 of 97 patients (10.3%) who had primary gastric restrictive operations (excluding banding) by the author versus 24 of 65 patients (36.9%) who had similar primary operations by other surgeons (p < 0.0001). Morbidity after second revisions was 70% versus 14.4% after first revisions (p < 0.0001). The 32 most recent patients were discharged in a mean of 3.0 days without complications.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Incorporating the endostaplers and harmonic scalpel into open revisional operations significantly reduced postoperative complications. Because these 2 devices were introduced during the last 5 years of this study, it seems likely that cumulative experience also contributed to improved outcomes. Our results also suggest that surgeons perform their initial revisions on their own patients rather than on patients who had primary procedures elsewhere. Patients presenting as candidates for a second revision should be cautiously evaluated, anticipating a high morbidity rate.
authors.affiliation: Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical School, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
authors.forename: Robert E
authors.initials: RE
authors.lastname: Brolin
authors.forename: Ronald P
authors.initials: RP
authors.lastname: Cody
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D000704:Analysis of Variance; D050110:Bariatric Surgery / Q000009:adverse effects* / Q000295:instrumentation*; D005260:Female; D005767:Gastrointestinal Diseases / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000145:classification / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D011655:Pulmonary Embolism / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control; D012086:Reoperation; D013525:Surgical Instruments; D013528:Surgical Staplers; D013530:Surgical Wound Infection / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D015431:Weight Loss