GERD and Barrett’s esophagus as indications for revisional surgery after sleeve gastrectomy: experience of a bariatric center of excellence IFSO-EC and narrative review

ABSTRACT

Introduction

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy is the most commonly performed bariatric procedure worldwide; due to its extensive impact and analysis, multiple procedure-related early and late complications have been described. Gastroesophageal reflux and Barrett’s esophagus are highly debated issues related to sleeve gastrectomy in long-term follow-up. This review aims to explore the association between sleeve gastrectomy and gastroesophageal reflux in terms of their occurrence, and to analyze the protective or affecting factors.

Areas covered

Gastroesophageal reflux and Barrett’s esophagus after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

Expert opinion

Gastroesophageal reflux is the Achilles’ heel of sleeve gastrectomy and is affected by multiple procedure-related functional or mechanical factors (intrathoracic migration, stenosis, lower esophageal sphincter incompetence). Its postoperative incidence is about 30% with significant variability among groups, especially in terms of preoperative workup (lack of routine upper gastro-intestinal endoscopy and symptom assessment). Strict patient selection and mandatory pre-operative endoscopy are the primary steps taken to prevent and reduce the incidence of post-operative severe gastroesophageal reflux. However, patients should also be informed of the possibility of the ‘de novo gastroesophageal reflux disease’ (incidence – 22–50%) and the need for surgical revision in selected cases (0.5–7%).

KEYWORDS:

• Gastroesophageal reflux after sleeve gastrectomy
• barrett’s esophagus after sleeve gastrectomy
• reflux after sleeve gastrectomy
• late complications after sleeve gastrectomy
• revisional procedures after sleeve gastrectomy

Declaration of interest

The authors have no relevant affiliations or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. This includes employment, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, grants or patents received or pending, or royalties.

Reviewer disclosures

Peer reviewers on this manuscript have no relevant financial or other relationships to disclose.

Additional information

Funding

This paper received no funding.