Low Incidence of Postoperative Leaks When Using Small-Diameter Calibrated Bougies During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Nasser Sakran, Asnat Raziel, Ian M. Gralnek, Zvi Perry, Kamal K. Mahawar, Scott A. Shikora, David Goitein

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is a well-established bariatric procedure. A staple line leak is a recognized complication of LSG. Bougie size has been suggested to impact leak rates. In this study, we evaluate the impact of using 32–34F bougie sizes with LSG on early postoperative outcomes including staple line leaks within our practice. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort analysis of a prospectively maintained database of all LSG procedures performed between January 2012 and December 2018 at a single medical center. Data collected and analyzed included bougie size, postoperative leak rate, need for re-operation, 12-month excess weight loss, and 30-day morbidity and mortality. Results: During the study period, 3153 patients underwent LSG, of whom 1977 (62.7%) were female. Mean age and body mass index (BMI) were 42.9 ± 12.2 years (range 15–76 years) and 42.4 ± 5.2 kg/m2 (range 27–73), respectively. No intraoperative complications or mortality occurred. There was one case of perioperative mortality due to bleeding (0.03%). Early postoperative adverse events occurred in 131 patients (4.1%): 17 leaks (0.5%), 75 bleeds (2.4%), and 39 (1.2%) other. Conclusion: The use of smaller-sized (32–34F) bougies had no impact on staple line leaks in the hands of experienced bariatric surgeons at a high-volume center.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)849-854
Number of pages6
JournalWorld Journal of Surgery
Volume44
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Mar 2020
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Low Incidence of Postoperative Leaks When Using Small-Diameter Calibrated Bougies During Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this