4.4 Article

The Utility of EndoFLIP for Measuring Gastrojejunal Anastomosis Diameter and Distensibility in Patients Experiencing Weight Regain Post Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

Journal

OBESITY SURGERY
Volume 31, Issue 7, Pages 3353-3359

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-021-05302-3

Keywords

EndoFLIP; RYGB; Weight regain; GJA diameter; GJA distensibility

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study compared endoscopic visual estimation and endoluminal functional impedance planimetry (EndoFLIP) for measuring GJA diameter in patients with weight regain post-RYGB, finding that visual estimation tends to overestimate GJA diameter. In addition, the study identified patients with normal GJA diameter but increased distensibility, potentially representing a new subgroup. The findings suggest the potential utility of EndoFLIP in evaluating post-RYGB weight regain and the need for further prospective studies on the relationship between GJA distensibility and weight regain.
A dilated gastrojejunal anastomosis (GJA) diameter is an independent predictor of weight regain following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Despite this, there is no standardized method for GJA diameter measurement. We performed a retrospective analysis to compare endoscopic visual estimation and endoluminal functional impedance planimetry (EndoFLIP) for measuring GJA diameter in patients with weight regain post-RYGB. Visual estimation was found to overestimate GJA diameter by a mean of 4.2mm +/- 4.6mm when compared with EndoFLIP. Furthermore, we identified symptomatic patients with normal GJA diameter but increased distensibility, which may represent a previously unrecognized subgroup. Our findings suggest the potential utility of EndoFLIP in the evaluation of post-RYGB weight regain and support the need for prospective studies to investigate the relationship between GJA distensibility and weight regain

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available