Anastomotic metabolic and bariatric surgeries with same-day discharge: 30-day outcomes of a cohort from a high-volume center in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: On the basis of our extensive experience in same-day discharge (SDD) sleeve gastrectomy, we extended this management strategy to anastomotic metabolic and bariatric surgeries (MBS). OBJECTIVES: To retrospectively analyze early outcomes (≤30 d) after anastomotic MBS with planned SDD (≤12 hr). SETTING: University Hospital, Canada; Public Practice. METHODS: SDD anastomotic MBS were proposed with strict preoperative criteria and included single-anastomosis duodeno-ileal bypass with sleeve gastrectomy (SADI-S), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), one-anastomosis gastric bypass (OAGB), and single-anastomosis sleeve ileal bypass (SASI). Enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols and post-anesthesia care unit criteria were followed. Unplanned overnight stay, emergency department (ED) visit, readmission, morbidity-mortality, and reintervention rates were analyzed. RESULTS: ). Unplanned overnight stays and ED visits were 4.8% and 4.3%, respectively. Readmission rate was 5.8% (5 SADI-S, 5 RYGB, 1 OAGB, and 1 SASI). Overall morbidity rate was 14.9%, including 3.9% major complications. Within 30 days postoperatively, there were 2 duodenal leaks, 1 intrabdominal collection, 1 common bile duct stenosis, and 1 acute appendicitis in the SADI-S group. There were 2 occlusions on the jejunojejunal anastomosis and 1 bleeding on the gastrojejunal anastomosis in the RYGB group. Five (2.4%) required reintervention with no mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We report low and acceptable rates of unplanned overnight stay, readmission, and reintervention. Early outcomes suggest that SDD anastomotic MBS seems safe and feasible with an experienced team, selective criteria, and appropriate postoperative follow-up.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".