The Spatz3® Intragastric Adjustable Balloon (SAB) offers a novel approach to weight loss in super obese patients [body mass index (BMI) ≥50 kg/m 2 ]. This study evaluates the safety, effectiveness, and predictors of success of SAB in this population.

A retrospective study was conducted at King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia, involving 94 patients with SAB implantation. Weight loss metrics (%EWL, %TBWL), complications, and predictors of adverse events were analyzed.

Eleven patients required early SAB removal due to severe symptoms. Complications included gastrointestinal bleeding (3.2%), gastric ulcer/erosion (27.7%), and deflation (5.3%). Significant weight loss was observed at 6 and 12 months. The mean absolute weight loss was 22.03 kg at 12 months, with %EWL of 19.27%. Early weight loss at 3 months predicted long-term success. SAB adjustments did not significantly impact outcomes. Post SAB, 57% of patients proceeded to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) with rare postoperative complications (2.9%).

SAB is safe and effective for patients with BMI ≥50 kg/m 2 , achieving significant weight loss at 12 months. Early weight loss predicts long-term success, and subsequent LSG can be performed without significant complications. Further research should explore long-term outcomes and comparative analyses.

Obesity is a chronic and multifactorial disease with a variety of potential treatment options available. Currently, there are several multidisciplinary therapeutic options for its management, including conservative, endoscopic, and surgical treatment.

To clarify indications, technical aspects, and outcomes of bariatric endoscopy.

Narrative review of current literature based on electronic databases including MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane Library, and SciELO.

Bariatric endoscopy is in constant development and comprises primary and revisional treatment options as well as management of surgical complications. Various devices act upon different mechanisms of action, which may be individualized to each patient. Despite favorable results for the endoscopic treatment of obesity, prospective randomized studies with long-term follow-up are required to fully validate primary and revisional endoscopic therapies. Regarding the management of bariatric surgery complications, endoscopic therapy may be considered the procedure of choice in a variety of situations. Still, as there is no standardized algorithm, local experience should be considered in decision-making.

The treatment of patients with obesity is complex, and a multidisciplinary approach is essential. Bariatric endoscopy has shown impressive results both in the treatment of obesity and its surgical complications, and therefore, must be part of the armamentarium in the fight against this disease.

Bariatric surgery for patients with severe obesity (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 50kg/m²) is technically challenging. Intragastric balloon (IGB) has been proposed for weight loss before bariatric surgery to reduce surgical risks but its efficacy remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of IGB as bridging therapy and assess potential complications. Amongst 2419 citations, 13 studies were included. IGB resulted in a BMI reduction of 6.60 kg/m² (MD=6.60, 95% CI: 5.06-8.15; I²=72%). The total post-procedural complication rate was 8.13% (95% CI: 4.04-13.17%), with majority being balloon intolerance. Overall, IGB is effective as a bridging therapy with adequate procedural safety profile, but further study is needed to evaluate the risk reduction for bariatric surgery and long-term weight-loss outcomes.

For high-risk classified patients, patients with superobesity and in cases of contraindication to abdominal surgery, traditional bariatric surgery might lead to potential morbidity and mortality. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a novel and effective bariatric therapy for morbidly obese patients. Our research group initially evaluated the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of ESG for high-risk, high body mass index (BMI) patients, and patients contraindicated to abdominal surgeries.

Eligible patients characterized as high-risk for bariatric surgery due to high-BMI, severe comorbidities, or impenetrable abdomen were prospectively documented. ESG was performed by using Overstich® (Apollo Endosurgery, Austin, TX, USA). Primary outcomes included technical success, post-procedure adverse events and mortality, and the change of weight and BMI.

ESG was successfully performed for all patients (N = 24, mean age was 55.6 (± 9.2) years old, 75% male). Baseline weight and BMI were 157.9 (± 49.1) kg and 49.9 (± 14.4) kg/m². According to Edmonton Obesity Staging System (EOSS), 8 (33.3%), 14 (58.3%), and 2 (8.3%) patients were respectively classified as EOSS 2, 3, and 4. Mean operation time was 114.7 (± 26.0) min, without intraoperative complication. Weight loss, BMI reduction, %total weight loss (%TWL), and %excess weight loss (%EWL) were 17.5 (± 14.6) kg, 5.6 (± 4.6) kg/m², 12.2% (± 8.9%), and 29.1% (± 17.9%) at post-ESG 12-month, respectively. One (4.2%) moderate post-procedure adverse event (gastric mucosal bleeding) was observed.

ESG can be used as a safe, feasible, and effective option for the therapy of patients with superobesity, high-risk patients, and patients contraindicated to abdominal surgery. Graphical Abstract.

Intragastric balloon therapy is an endoluminal treatment of obesity that is indicated for patients with moderate obesity (body mass index, 30-35 kg/m²) who have failed to lose weight with lifestyle and medical management. Treatment duration ranges from 4 to 12 months, and percent total body weight loss ranges from 6% to 15% at the time of balloon removal. Adverse events, such as bowel obstruction or gastric perforation, are rare, and early balloon removal because of intolerance is the most common complication. Long-term data are lacking, although weight regain after balloon removal seems to be common.

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists.

Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts.

New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest).

Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPG) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, The Obesity Society, the American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, the Obesity Medicine Association, and the American Society of Anesthesiologists boards of directors in adherence to the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPG, algorithms, and checklists.

Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts.

New or updated topics in this CPG include contextualization in an adiposity-based, chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based, and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current healthcare arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest).

Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence-based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

Obesity is a chronic disease with an exponentially increasing incidence rate, and its negative effects are well documented in numerous studies. As a result, the importance of bariatric therapy cannot be overemphasized, and many bariatric treatment methods with varying mechanisms have been developed. Of the available treatment methods, intragastric balloons, introduced in the 1980s, have been shown to be a safe and effective treatment modality; various intragastric balloon products have been developed and are currently being widely used in clinical settings. However, the disadvantages of intragastric balloons, such as unclear long-term weight loss benefits and complications experienced during insertion and removal, preclude their wider use. In this review, we discuss different intragastric balloon products, focusing on those under clinical investigation, and suggest future research directions.