Bariatric surgery remains the gold standard treatment for morbidly obese patients. Roux-en-y gastric bypass and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy are the most frequently performed surgeries worldwide. Obesity has also been related to gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The management of a preoperative diagnosis of GERD, with/without hiatal hernia before bariatric surgery, is mandatory. Endoscopy can show abnormal findings that might influence the final type of surgery.
1. Introduction
Bariatric surgery (BS) is the most effective treatment for morbid obesity and obtains the best long-term outcomes
[1]. Bariatric surgery is also the only treatment option that achieves sustained weight loss and has a positive impact on related co-morbidities
[2]. Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is recognized as a linked condition to obesity, especially morbid obesity
[1,3,4][1][3][4]. This association between obesity and GERD is very well-known. In comparison to the general population, obese patients have 2–2.5 more chances of developing reflux symptoms
[5,6][5][6]. More than 50% of obese patients develop GERD symptoms, and the condition is found in up to 70% of morbidly obese patients who seek bariatric surgery
[7,8][7][8]. GERD is a common condition with a prevalence of 9% to 25% in Europe
[9] and it is increasing in Eastern and Western countries
[3]. Part of the problem with GERD is that sometimes we cannot find a correlation between self-reported reflux symptoms and their correlation with objectified reflux, meaning that a high percentage of patients with severe GERD symptoms do not have true pathological GERD on objective testing.
Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) is currently the most performed surgery worldwide, followed by laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (LRYGB)
[10,11][10][11]. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) seems to achieve equal weight loss as laparoscopic Roux-en-Y bypass (LRYGB), but there is still much debate about other aspects, including metabolic co-morbidity results, long term weight loss, and the quality of life after LSG, mainly concerning the association with gastroesophageal reflux
[2]. Mid and long-term follow-up of GERD after bariatric surgery is controversial, however, data suggest that some procedures, such as LSG, could have more severe endoscopic findings compared to clinical symptoms
[8]. There is no clear data regarding the correlation between GERD and endoscopic findings, however, some recent reports suggest that there is a need for endoscopic follow-up after LSG to avoid potential serious complications. The aim of this review article is to evaluate the relevant endoscopic findings in patients with GERD symptoms after LRYGB and LSG. Additionally, this review aims to elucidate the appearance of GERD in patients after LSG and LRYGB, and the endoscopic findings and correlations with clinical symptoms.
2. GERD after Bariatric Surgery
There is a vast amount of controversy regarding the symptoms of GERD and their correlation with previous bariatric surgery, and the anatomical situation of the esophageal hiatus. Studies concerning the analysis of the initial anatomical situation of an obese patient, which occurs whenever a LRYGB or LSG is performed, are extremely limited. In fact, there is little evidence that allows us to promote any single technique according to the hiatus situation. It seems that when large hiatal hernias are present in an obese patient in the preoperative setting, LRYGB is the most reasonable surgery
[20][12]. However, some authors have developed protocols to include large hiatoplasties with mesh placement, and even antireflux surgical strategies, while performing LSG.
As we can see in , sometimes there is a lack of clear correlation between self-reported reflux symptoms and endoscopic findings
[21][13]; bariatric surgery caused either de novo GERD or the aggravation of existing GERD. Gu et al.
[16][14] found the improvement or remission of GERD (40.4%) in LSG and (74.2%) in LRYGB patients. LRYGB had a better effect on GERD (OR = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.12–0.30,
p < 0.001) compared to LSG, especially within 3 years and > 3 years
[16][14]. 3534 patients were included, 1918 were subjected to LSG and 1616 to LRYGB, the appearance of new GERD was 9.3% and 2.3% after LSG and LRYGB, respectively (179 in LSG and 37 in LRYGB). In the global analysis, the authors found that LSG showed a higher risk of GERD than LRYGB (OR = 5.10, 95% CI 3.60–7.23,
p < 0.001); the results were consistent in the subgroup analysis according to type of study, follow-up time, low heterogeneity, and the risk of GERD after surgery.
Table 1. RYGB-Roux en Y gastric bypass, SG-Sleeve Gastrectomy, Pts—patients; yrs—years; mo—months; Endoscopic findings were graded according to the Los Angeles Classification, Barrett’s esophagus was biopsy proven. NA: not applicable.
Study |
Journal/Year |
Number of Patients |
Age (Years) |
Gender (Female) |
Interval Time from Surgery to Endoscopy |
Endoscopic Findings (Pts) [%] |
Weight Loss Results at Evaluation |
Additional Comments |
Borbély et al. [15] |
SOARD 2018 |
47 (100%RYGB) |
36.5 (19–67) |
27 (57.4%) |
3.8 yrs (3–12) |
Esophagitis (C and D LA) (5) [10.6%] Barrett’s esophagus (7) [14.9%] Marginal ulcers (4) [8.5%] |
30.3 (20.3–47.2) |
Esophagitis improved in 19 patients (41.3%), remained similar in 14 (30.4%), and worsened in 13 (28.3%). |
Boerlage et al. [16] |
SOARD 2020 |
98 (100%RYGB) |
41 (±10.0) |
223 (89.2%) |
7 Mo (2–16) |
Reflux esophagitis (6) [2.4%] Marginal ulcer (46) [18.4%] Stomal stenosis (26) [10.4%] Bleeding (7) [2.8%] Candida esophagitis (3) [1.2%] Food impaction (2) [0.8%] |
TWL% 25.7 (±12.9) |
|
Huang et al. [17] |
Gastrointestinal endoscopy 2003 |
49 (100%RYGB) |
46 y (28–65) |
42 (85.7%) |
49 Mo |
Marginal ulcer (13) [27%] Stomal stenosis (9) [19%] Esophagitis (2) [0.4%] |
|
|
Signorini et al. [18] |
Surgical endoscopy 2019 |
227 RYGB 80 (35.2%) SG 147 (64.8%) |
44.9 (36–53) |
179 (78.9%) |
2 yrs |
HH de novo SG group (20) [46%] RYGB group (1) [2%] HH+EE postoperative SG group (16) [11%] RYGB group (8) [10%] |
NA |
SG had more de novo EE than GBP (25% vs. 5%, p = 0.001). EE improved in 10%, was resolved in 31.2%, worsened in 2.5% and remained unchanged in 10% of RYGB cases. |
Lihu Gu et al. [14] |
Obesity Surgery 2019 |
23 studies ** LSG 2463 (49.2%) RGYB 2537 (51.3%) |
NA |
NA |
NA |
Correlation of endoscopic findings and GERD symptoms. |
NA |
LSG was associated with a higher risk of GERD than LRYGB (odds ratio [OR] = 5.10 [3.60–7.23], p < 0.001). |
Dimbezel et al. [19] |
Obesity Surgery 2020 |
48 100% LSG |
49.63 (±11.69) |
42 (87.5%) |
62.4 mo |
Esophagitis (A and B LA) (17) [35.4%] Esophagitis (C and D LA) (1) [0.2%] Barrett’s esophagus (4) [8.3%] |
40 ± 1.89 kg/m2 |
RYGB conversion improved EE (14) [29.2%]. |
Felsenreich et al. [20] |
Obeisty Sugery 2017 |
53 100% LSG |
38.4 (±12.4) |
42 (79%) |
129 mo |
Hiatal hernia de novo (9) [16.9%] Columnar lined esophagus (10) [5.3%] (symptomatic reflux, 7; no reflux, 3). Barrett’s esophagus (3) [15%] |
|
CLE is significantly longer in patients who suffer from symptomatic reflux (4.0 mm) than in patients who do not (2.3 mm) (p = 0.013). RYGBP conversion due to reflux (8) [14%] |
Braghetto et al. [21] |
Arq Bras Cir Dig 2021 |
39 100% LSG |
43.7 (±8.5) |
34 |
5.6 (±2.5 yrs) |
Erosive esophagitis (33) [84.6%] Esophagitis (A and B LA) (28) [71.7%] Esophagitis (C LA) (5) [12.8%] Barrett’s esophagus (5) [12.8%] |
38.4 + 13.4 kg/m2 |
mean time of appearance of reflux symptoms after surgery was 26.8 + 24.1 mo. |