Top

Obesity Surgery

Published in:

01-07-2021 | Obesity | Original Contributions

National Bariatric Surgery Registries: an International Comparison

Authors: Erman O. Akpinar, Perla J. Marang- van de Mheen, Simon W. Nienhuijs, Jan Willem M. Greve, Ronald S. L. Liem

Published in: Obesity Surgery | Issue 7/2021

Abstract

Introduction

Pooling population-based data from all national bariatric registries may provide international real-world evidence for outcomes that will help establish a universal standard of care, provided that the same variables and definitions are used. Therefore, this study aims to assess the concordance of variables across national registries to identify which outcomes can be used for international collaborations.

Methods

All 18 countries with a national bariatric registry who contributed to The International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders (IFSO) Global Registry report 2019 were requested to share their data dictionary by email. The primary outcome was the percentage of perfect agreement for variables by domain: patient, prior bariatric history, screening, operation, complication, and follow-up. Perfect agreement was defined as 100% concordance, meaning that the variable was registered with the same definition across all registries. Secondary outcomes were defined as variables having “substantial agreement” (75–99.9%) and “moderate agreement” (50–74.9%) across registries.

Results

Eleven registries responded and had a total of 2585 recorded variables that were grouped into 250 variables measuring the same concept. A total of 25 (10%) variables have a perfect agreement across all domains: 3 (18.75%) for the patient domain, 0 (0.0%) for prior bariatric history, 5 (8.2%) for screening, 6 (11.8%) for operation, 5 (8.8%) for complications, and 6 (11.8%) for follow-up. Furthermore, 28 (11.2%) variables have substantial agreement and 59 (23.6%) variables have moderate agreement across registries.

Conclusion

There is limited uniform agreement in variables across national bariatric registries. Further alignment and uniformity in collected variables are required to enable future international collaborations and comparison.

Graphical abstract

Available only for authorised users

Poelemeijer YQM, Marang-van de Mheen PJ, Wouters MWJM, et al. Textbook outcome: an ordered composite measure for quality of bariatric surgery. Obes Surg. 2019;29:1287–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-018-03642-1.CrossRefPubMed

Tatarian T, Yang J, Wang J, et al. Trends in the utilization and perioperative outcomes of primary robotic bariatric surgery from 2015 to 2018: a study of 46,764 patients from the MBSAQIP data registry. Surg Endosc. 2020; https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-020-07839-3.

Hopkins J, Welbourn R. The importance of national registries/databases in metabolic surgery: the UK experience. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2016;12:1178–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2016.02.030.CrossRefPubMed

Anderin C, Gustafsson UO, Heijbel N, et al. Weight loss before bariatric surgery and postoperative complications: data from the Scandinavian Obesity Registry (SOReg). Ann Surg. 2015;261:909–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000839.CrossRefPubMed

Poelemeijer YQM, Liem RSL, Våge V, et al. Perioperative outcomes of primary bariatric surgery in North-Western Europe: a pooled multinational registry analysis. Obes Surg. 2018;28:3916–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-018-3408-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Poelemeijer YQM, Liem RSL, Våge V, et al. Gastric bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy: patient selection and short-term outcome of 47,101 primary operations from the Swedish, Norwegian, and Dutch national quality registries. Ann Surg. 2020;272:326–33. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000003279.CrossRefPubMed

Nguyen NT, Blackstone RP, Morton JM, et al., editors. The ASMBS textbook of bariatric surgery. New York, NY: Springer; 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1206-3.CrossRef

The International Federation for the Surgery of Obesity and Metabolic Disorders. 5th IFSO Global Registry Report 2019. IFSO 2019. https://www.ifso.com/pdf/5th-ifso-global-registry-report-september-2019.pdf. Accessed 4 Oct 2020.

Angrisani L, Santonicola A, Iovino P, et al. Bariatric surgery worldwide 2013. Obes Surg. 2015;25:1822–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-015-1657-z.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Welbourn R, Pournaras DJ, Dixon J, et al. Bariatric surgery worldwide: baseline demographic description and one-year outcomes from the second IFSO Global Registry Report 2013–2015. Obes Surg. 2018;28:313–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-017-2845-9.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Welbourn R, Hollyman M, Kinsman R, et al. Bariatric surgery worldwide: baseline demographic description and one-year outcomes from the fourth IFSO Global Registry Report 2018. Obes Surg. 2019;29:782–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-018-3593-1.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Burger PM, Monpellier VM, Deden LN, et al. Standardized reporting of co-morbidity outcome after bariatric surgery: low compliance with the ASMBS outcome reporting standards despite ease of use. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2020;16:1673–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2020.07.011.CrossRefPubMed

13.

National Library of Medicine. Common data element (CDE) resource portal [cited 2013 Jan 3] n.d. https://www.nlm.nih.gov/cde/glossary.html#cdedefinition. Accessed 4 Oct 2020.

14.

Coulman KD, Hopkins J, Brookes ST, et al. A core outcome set for the benefits and adverse events of bariatric and metabolic surgery: the BARIACT project. PLoS Med. 2016;13 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002187.

15.

Brethauer SA, Kim J, El Chaar M, et al. Standardized outcomes reporting in metabolic and bariatric surgery. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2015;11:489–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2015.02.003.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Classification and diagnosis of diabetes: standards of medical care in diabetesd 2018. Diabetes Care 2018;41:S13–27. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc18-S002.

17.

IDF. “International Diabetes Federation. Recommendations for managing type 2 diabetes in primary care, 2017.” n.d. www.idf.org/managing-type2-diabetes. Accessed 4 Oct 2020.

18.

Grinnon ST, Miller K, Marler JR, et al. National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Common Data Element Project - approach and methods. Clin Trials. 2012;9:322–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774512438980.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: National Bariatric Surgery Registries: an International Comparison
Authors: Erman O. Akpinar
Perla J. Marang- van de Mheen
Simon W. Nienhuijs
Jan Willem M. Greve
Ronald S. L. Liem
Publication date: 01-07-2021
Publisher: Springer US
Keywords: Obesity
Obesity
Bariatric Surgery
Bariatric Surgery
Published in: Obesity Surgery / Issue 7/2021
Print ISSN: 0960-8923
Electronic ISSN: 1708-0428
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-021-05359-0

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

National Bariatric Surgery Registries: an International Comparison

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Graphical abstract

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Graphical abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 7/2021

Biography: Oral Ospanov, M.D., PhD, DMedSc, Professor

Adverse Neonatal and Obstetric Outcomes in a 20-year Brazilian Retrospective Cohort of Pregnancies after Bariatric Surgery

Importance of Maintaining Zinc and Copper Supplement Dosage Ratio After Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery

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

Am I on Track? Evaluating Patient-Specific Weight Loss After Bariatric Surgery Using an Outcomes Calculator

Eighty-Seven Consecutive Sleeve Gastrectomies Between the Two Peaks of the Covid-19 Pandemic. An Opening-Phase Experience