Clinical trials

Obesity remains a major global health challenge, with rising prevalence and significant metabolic, cardiovascular, and gastrointestinal comorbidities. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has emerged as the most widely performed bariatric procedure due to its technical simplicity and satisfactory short- to mid-term results. However, a proportion of patients experience suboptimal weight loss, recurrent weight gain, or both. In this study, patients with recurrent weight gain of maximum weight loss or suboptimal weight loss or both following sleeve gastrectomy were included. Suboptimal weight loss is defined as total weight loss (TWL) of less than 20% of the preoperative weight and/or excess weight loss (EWL) of less than 50%, measured at least 12-18 months after the primary sleeve gastrectomy. Recurrent weight gain after sleeve gastrectomy is defined as an increase of ≥20% of the maximum weight loss (from nadir weight) or an increase in BMI of \>5, measured at least 24 months after the primary procedure.

Obesity is a global health problem that has reached epidemic proportions, affecting more than one billion people worldwide and significantly increasing the risk of multiple comorbidities, including type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer (World Health Organization, 2024). Increasing evidence suggests that chronic low-grade inflammation associated with obesity plays a critical role in the development of obesity-related malignancies, including gastric cancer. Adipose tissue dysfunction in obesity leads to the recruitment and activation of various immune cells, such as macrophages and mast cells, which contribute to a pro-inflammatory microenvironment through the release of cytokines, growth factors, and angiogenic mediators.

Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) has become an increasingly popular bariatric procedure since its first performance by Hess and Hess in 1988 as a component of the biliopancreatic diversion-duodenal switch (BPD-DS) procedure, which was modified from Scopinaro's biliopancreatic diversion (BPD) and DeMeester's technique. In the early part of the twenty-first century, it was popularized as a first-step intervention before BPD or gastric bypass in the super obese and high-risk group of patients by Regan et al. Due to the unexpected good results in terms of weight loss and resolution of comorbidities, coupled with the simplicity of performing the procedure requiring intervention on only the stomach, sleeve gastrectomy gained status as a stand-alone bariatric procedure as demonstrated by Baltasar et al. The basic principle of LSG is to create a narrow stomach along the lesser curvature, depending on the left gastric artery, using a calibration bougie as a template to perform a vertical partial gastrectomy, resecting the greater curvature and fundus of the stomach according to the International Sleeve Gastrectomy Expert Panel Consensus Statement by Rosenthal et al. The procedure has demonstrated excellent outcomes in terms of weight loss and comorbidity resolution, making it one of the most commonly performed bariatric procedures worldwide according to the IFSO Worldwide Survey by Angrisani et al. Bougie Size Considerations and Rationale The selection of an appropriate bougie size during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy represents a critical technical decision that significantly influences both immediate surgical outcomes and long-term patient results. Calibration bougies serve as internal templates to standardize the gastric sleeve diameter and ensure consistent sleeve geometry across different surgeons and institutions, as described by Parikh et al. The diameter of the bougie directly determines the final gastric volume and the degree of restriction achieved, which in turn affects weight loss efficacy, food tolerance, and complication rates. Bougie sizes in current clinical practice typically range from 32-French (Fr) to 50-Fr, with most centers utilizing sizes between 34-Fr and 42-Fr according to the survey by Gagner et al. Small bougie sizes (32-36-Fr) create a more restrictive sleeve with potentially enhanced weight loss but may be associated with increased risks of stenosis, food intolerance, and gastroesophageal reflux disease as reported by Sakran et al. Medium bougie sizes (38-42-Fr) represent a compromise between restriction and safety, offering adequate weight loss while maintaining acceptable complication rates as demonstrated by Weiner et al. Large bougie sizes (44-50-Fr) provide greater sleeve capacity with improved food tolerance and potentially reduced leak rates, though concerns exist regarding long-term weight loss maintenance according to Abdallah et al. The rationale for comparing different bougie sizes stems from the ongoing debate regarding the optimal balance between surgical efficacy and safety. Recent meta-analyses have suggested that larger bougie sizes may be associated with reduced gastric leak rates without significantly compromising weight loss outcomes. However, the majority of existing evidence comes from retrospective observational studies with inherent limitations including selection bias, confounding variables, and lack of standardized outcome measures as noted by Shi et al. The current study aims to provide definitive prospective evidence comparing small (36-Fr) versus X large (larger than 40-Fr) bougie sizes in a randomized controlled trial design. Furthermore, the impact of bougie size on comorbidity resolution remains inadequately studied. Bariatric surgery has demonstrated remarkable efficacy in resolving obesity-related comorbidities, with diabetes remission rates ranging from 53% to 63% as reported by Schauer et al. and hypertension resolution rates varying from 8% to 50% depending on the specific criteria used according to Sjöström et al. The relationship between sleeve geometry, as determined by bougie size, and comorbidity resolution mechanisms requires further investigation to optimize patient outcomes and surgical technique selection.

Obesity has escalated to pandemic levels, impacting over 650 million adults globally and significantly contributing to the burden of non-communicable diseases such as type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, obstructive sleep apnea, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, and infertility. The chronic, multifactorial nature of obesity presents substantial challenges for long-term management, as lifestyle modifications and pharmacotherapy often yield limited and transient success. In this context, Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) has emerged as the most effective and enduring treatment for obesity, offering significant weight loss and marked improvement or remission of obesity-related comorbidities. The most prevalent MBS procedures include sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), and one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB). While these interventions offer considerable metabolic advantages, they inherently cause significant modifications to gastrointestinal anatomy and physiology, which can predispose patients to long-term micronutrient deficiencies. These deficiencies can stem from reduced dietary intake, altered gastric acid secretion, decreased intrinsic factor production, and the bypassing of critical absorptive sites in the gastrointestinal tract. Commonly affected nutrients encompass iron, vitamin B12, Vitamin B6, folate, vitamin D, calcium, and zinc. If not effectively managed, these nutrient deficiencies can lead to anemia, secondary hyperparathyroidism, osteopenia, neurological complications, immune dysfunction, and impaired postoperative recovery. Population-based recommended dietary allowances (RDAs) and tolerable upper intake levels (ULs) tend to underestimate the nutritional requirements for postoperative patients, as they are derived from healthy cohorts. Many standard formulations may fall short due to inadequate dosages, non-bioavailable forms, or poor tolerability, which can significantly impact patient adherence to supplementation regimens. Over-the-counter multivitamins, such as Centrum®, are designed for the general population and often lack the dosing, bioavailability, or elemental forms required for post-MBS physiology, particularly following bypass procedures. The American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) recommends 8-22 mg of elemental zinc per day, depending on the procedure, and the International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) and the World Gastroenterology Organization (WGO) recommend up to 30 mg/day for OAGB patients. These values are below the national upper limit in Egypt, which is 25 mg/day. Moreover, there is evidence indicating a discrepancy in nutrient deficiencies among different bariatric surgery patients; for instance, OAGB patients exhibit a greater prevalence of iron and zinc deficiencies compared to those undergoing RYGB or SG, thereby necessitating proportionally higher supplementation tailored to their specific needs.

Obesity is a complex, multifactorial chronic disease with an escalating global incidence, impacting over 650 million adults worldwide. It is closely linked to a variety of metabolic, cardiovascular, and musculoskeletal diseases, and is a leading contributor to preventable morbidity and mortality. Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (MBS) stands out as the most effective long-term intervention for obesity, facilitating significant and sustained weight loss while also promoting remission of associated diseases. However, the anatomical and physiological alterations induced by MBS, including gastric restriction, bypass of absorptive surfaces, altered gastrointestinal transit, and reduced gastric acid production, significantly disrupt nutrient absorption and metabolism, placing patients at lifelong risk of micronutrient deficiencies or, conversely, hypervitaminosis resulting from excessive supplementation. Among these, Vitamin B6 imbalance has emerged as a significant yet under-recognized issue in post-MBS patients. Among the nutrients affected, vitamin B6 (pyridoxine) presents a unique challenge. Vitamin B6 functions as a coenzyme in amino acid metabolism, neurotransmitter synthesis, and immune regulation. Deficiencies in Vitamin B6 are well-documented and can manifest as glossitis, irritability, and peripheral neuropathy. Notably, B6-related neuropathy may clinically resemble Guillain-Barré syndrome in post-MBS patients. This anxiety surrounding deficiency symptoms often leads to the overconsumption of Vitamin B6, resulting in hypervitaminosis, which can also present with neurological manifestations such as sensory neuropathy and ataxia. The risk of hypervitaminosis is further exacerbated by the widespread use of high-dose multivitamin formulations post-surgery, many of which contain vitamin B6 at levels far exceeding the Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA). For males, the RDA is 1.3 mg daily for those aged 19-50 years, increasing to 1.7 mg for those over 50. For females, the RDA is 1.3 mg for those aged 19-50 and 1.5 mg for those over 50. Yet some commercially available bariatric supplements exceed this level several-fold. Studies by Dogan et al. and Homan et al. emphasize the prevalence of vitamin B6 toxicity in post-MBS populations, largely attributable to inappropriate supplementation practices.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), including Ozempic (semaglutide) and Saxenda (liraglutide), are gaining traction in treating obesity and its associated diseases due to their capacity to facilitate substantial weight loss through mechanisms such as appetite suppression and delayed gastric emptying. Clinical trials have consistently shown that patients prescribed GLP-1 RAs can achieve significant body weight reductions when combined with appropriate dosing and lifestyle modifications. However, the chronic appetite suppression and reduced caloric intake associated with prolonged GLP-1 RA use may increase the risk of micronutrient deficiencies, paralleling the biochemical changes observed after metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS). In MBS cohorts, insufficient dietary intake coupled with malabsorption frequently results in deficiencies of essential vitamins and minerals, even in patients adhering to standard multivitamin regimens. Research has demonstrated that high-dose specialized multivitamin supplementation can substantially lower the incidence of postoperative micronutrient deficiencies in MBS patients. This raises the possibility that proactive nutrient supplementation might similarly benefit individuals undergoing weight loss with GLP-1 RAs, although this hypothesis remains to be empirically validated. To address this gap, this randomized trial aims to investigate the efficacy of Balanced nutritional tablets-comprehensive multivitamin and mineral supplements- in preventing micronutrient deficiencies among patients utilizing GLP-1 RAs for weight loss in comparison to a placebo control. Moreover, the study will assess changes in key nutrient biomarkers and relevant clinical outcomes over 12 months.

Assess what revisional surgery is superior and provides the best weight loss after primary LSG. What is the occurrence of complications and the nutritional laboratory status? And if the resolution and /or improvement of associated medical problems after the weight loss will occur.

SUMMARY Rationale: Prophylactic antibiotics in laparoscopic surgeries, including Metabolic Bariatric Surgery (MBS), are routinely provided to reduce postoperative infections, especially at wound incision sites. However, since incisional wound infections in laparoscopic MBS are rare and morbidity is very low, the benefit of antibiotic prophylaxis is questionable. Objective: Evaluate the non-inferiority of omitting antibiotic prophylaxis in MBS. Compare postoperative outcomes between Group A (no antibiotics) and Group B (standard antibiotic care) to determine if omission increases complications, particularly wound infections. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial (RCT), double-blind. Study Population: Patients with obesity eligible for MBS. Intervention: * Group A (No Antibiotic Prophylaxis): Undergo MBS without antibiotics to test safety regarding postoperative complications, focusing on surgical site infections (SSIs). * Group B (Standard Antibiotic Prophylaxis): Receive standard one-time antibiotics before incision. Main Study Parameters/Endpoints: Compare the incidence of incisional and organ/space SSIs within six weeks post-surgery between Group A and Group B to determine if omitting antibiotics affects infection rates.

Evaluating the differences between D2 and D3 lymphadenectomy in laparoscopic right hemicolectomy in patients with right cancer colon post-operative outcome, intra-operative blood transfusion, post-operative ICU admission, anastomotic leakage, lymph node harvesting in the final specimen, and six months follow up and overall survival time after 5-years