Patients with SBO after distal gastric bypass may present with vague complaints and confusing laboratory and non-specific findings on x-rays. Delayed diagnosis can have catastrophic consequences. CT imaging with oral and intravenous contrast can be life-saving, and should be obtained in all gastric bypass patients with abdominal pain, particularly when all other parameters seem "normal". Unexplained abdominal pain should prompt exploration.

BACKGROUND: Comparing primary vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG) and distal gastric bypass (DGBP) patients might assist decision-making based on patient profiles and desired outcomes. METHODS: A prospective study of 81 vertical banded gastroplasty and 60 distal gastric bypass patients. Technical aspects, complications, weight loss, post-op compliance and satisfaction are reported. Length of follow-up is 48 months (VBG) and 36 (DGBP). Lost-to-follow-up 41% (VBG) and 22% (DGBP). Ten per cent of VBGs were revised, with 1% takedown. Three percent DGBPs were converted to proximal GBPs. Demographics are comparable. RESULTS: Operative time was 40 min VBG and 88 DGBP; blood loss 187 cc vs 335 cc; and hospital stay 3 versus 4 days. Exclusive VBG complications include: 1% staple-line leak, 4% intra-abdominal abscess, 1% respiratory failure, 5% pneumonia, 1% intra-abdominal bleed, 1% small bowel obstruction, 2% infected incision, 2% fistula, 2% stenotic or obstructed obstructed stoma, and 1% bezoar. Exclusive DGBP complications include: 2% GI bleed, 12% marginal ulcer, 5% reflux esophagitis, 13% hypocalcemia, 23% hypovitaminosis A and D (12% requiring B12 therapy). Shared complications include hypoproteinemia 6% VBG versus 40% DGBP; excess vomiting (>6 months post-op), 7% versus 10%, excess diarrhea 2% versus 20%, dehydration 1% versus 8%, re-hospitalization 4% versus 15% (hyperalimentation), post-op cholecystectomy 1% versus 5%, weight regain 48% versus 1%. VBG experienced an average of 64% excess weight loss at 36 months versus DGBP 89% excess weight loss. VBG follow-up compliance is generally poor but good for DGBP. Compliance with diet and supplements is equivalent (50%). Satisfaction is 85% and 93% respectively. CONCLUSION: The DGBP provides better long-term weight loss, but nutritional deficiencies occur more often and require close follow-up. The surgery is more complex, but as a primary procedure there are few major complications.

The RI established in this study provide a useful baseline for the assessment of hematologic and biochemical data in Friesian horses residing in North America.

METHODS: Evaluated are surgical difficulties, management problems and weight loss in patients with distal gastric bypass as a revisionary procedure. Eighty patients were followed up to 3 years; four were lost to follow-up. Mean age was 43; mean prebariatric surgery weight 134 kg; height 1.65 meters; body mass index 40.1; ideal body weight 62.7 kg; excess weight 70.5 kg; per cent excess weight 214%. A 250 cm stomach-to-ileocecal valve segment of small bowel was used, and the biliopancreatic secretions were brought into the terminal ileum 100 6 in from the ileocecal valve. Mean pouch size was 63 cc; length of hospital stay 5 days; operative blood loss 616 cc; operative time 130 min. RESULTS: Intraoperative complications included three splenic injuries (without splenectomy). Early complications included one deep vein thrombosis, two marginal ulcers, one GI hemorrhage, one wound dehiscence, one pouch outlet obstruction and one pancreatitis. Late complications included: one death from protein malnutrition/ ARDS; 21 hypoproteinemia; six protein malnutrition, and of these, three had hyperalimentation; three cholecystitis; 27 anemia; 22 incisional hernia; two staple-line disruption (reoperated); 26 low serum iron; 11 prolonged (>6 months) diarrhea; three prolonged frequent vomiting; and two unrelated deaths (chronic myelogenous leukemia and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis). Mean excess weight loss was 83% at 12 months; 89% at 24 months; and 94% at 36 months. CONCLUSION: The distal gastric bypass is fraught with the operative and immediate post-operative complications experienced in any revisionary bariatric surgery. Distal gastric bypass is very effective in producing long-term weight loss. Nutritional problems are common but usually easily corrected. The most serious nutritional complication is protein malnutrition, which must be identified and corrected early. Success of this procedure is dependent upon patient compliance with proper nutrition and supplements, and regular office follow-up with monitoring of laboratory data. Patients who are noncompliant are at significant risk for complications.

Attention to patient management is essential to success, and this study found that appropriately-managed U.S. LAGB patients can be as successful as their international counterparts. Frequent follow-up delivered by a bariatric team with easy access to band adjustments is essential.

Topical benzocaine 20% (Hurricaine) spray used in EGDs gets absorbed and can cause methemoglobinemia. Sprays should be limited to 1 second. Prompt treatment with 1% methylene blue IV can be life-saving.

Understanding the obese person is primary to effectively educating the public. There are many appropriate and much-needed applications of this information to the public, the obese population, other health-care providers, legislators, and insurers.

The Kuzmak adjustable silicone gastric band (ASGB; 33 patients) and the vertical banded gastroplasty (VBG; 91 patients) are compared for weight loss, complication rates, and patient satisfaction. The complexity of the two operations is also compared, using operative time, blood loss, and length of hospitalization. When these three parameters were evaluated, the operations were remarkably similar, although a significant percentage of the ASGB patients left the hospital earlier than the VBG patients. The ASGB group of patients lost 52% of their excess weight (34 kg) and the VBG group 63% (40 kg), with the maximum follow-up being 15 months. Mechanical problems (leaks in the system) occurred in four ASGS patients. This slowed their weight loss and caused dissatisfaction with the procedure. Sixty-four percent of the patients underwent adjustment of the silicone band at least once during the 15 months. Complications included stomal stenosis in 9% of the ASGB patients vs 1.3% in the VBG patients. There was one staple-line leak, one subphrenic abscess (without a leak), and one retrogastric hematoma in the VBG patients. One death occurred in the ASGB group in a patient who was found at surgery to have unanticipated post-hepatitic cirrhosis. There were no deaths in the VBG group. The conclusion reached is that the ASGB compares favorably with the VBG as a bariatric surgical procedure.