Concurrent bariatric operations and association with perioperative outcomes: registry based cohort study.

Abstract

<b>Objective</b> To determine whether perioperative outcomes differ between patients undergoing concurrent compared with non-concurrent bariatric operations in the USA.<b>Design</b> Retrospective, propensity score matched cohort study.<b>Setting</b> Hospitals in the US accredited by the American College of Surgeons' metabolic and bariatric surgery accreditation and quality improvement program.<b>Participants</b> 513 167 patients undergoing bariatric operations between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2016.<b>Main outcome measures</b> The primary outcome measure was a composite of 30 day death, morbidity, readmission, reoperation, anastomotic or staple line leak, and bleeding events. Operative duration and lengths of stay were also assessed. Operations were defined as concurrent if they overlapped by 60 or more minutes or in their entirety.<b>Results</b> In this study of 513 167 operations, 739 (29.5%) surgeons at 483 (57.8%) hospitals performed 6087 (1.2%) concurrent operations. The most frequently performed concurrent bariatric operations were sleeve gastrectomy (n=3250, 53.4%) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (n=1601, 26.3%). Concurrent operations were more often performed at large academic medical centers with higher operative volumes and numbers of trainees and by higher volume surgeons. Compared with non-concurrent operations, concurrent operations lasted a median of 34 minutes longer (P<0.001) and resulted in 0.3 days longer average length of stay (P<0.001). Perioperative adverse events were not observed to more likely occur in concurrent compared with non-concurrent operations (7.5% <i>v</i> 7.4%; relative risk 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.15; P=0.84).<b>Conclusions</b> Concurrent bariatric operations occurred infrequently, but when they did, there was no observable increased risk for adverse perioperative outcomes compared with non-concurrent operations. These results, however, do not argue against improved and more meaningful disclosure of concurrent surgery practices.