MARKERS OF COMPLICATIONS AFTER LAPAROSCOPIC GASTRIC BYPASS IN PATIENTS WITH OBESITY

Abstract

Introduction. Bariatric surgery is one of the most effective methods of treating morbid obesity, which allows for a long-lasting result. Along with the increase in the number of operative methods of obesity treatment, the relevance of issues related to postoperative complications is increasing. In recent years, the issue of using special checklists after surgery has been actively investigated. This will help optimize the process of monitoring patients' condition in the postoperative period. The aim of the study: to develop a check-list model to prevent the detection of complications after laparoscopic gastric bypass in obese patients. Materials and methods. On the basis of the developed checklist, a study of the condition of obese patients, who underwent laparoscopic gastric bypass during 2019-2023, was conducted on the basis of the Department of General Surgery No. 2 of the Bogomolets National Medical University. The checklist included the following criteria: the level of pain on the VAS scale, the level of nausea, eating, mobility, whether there is a desire to be discharged home, abdominal muscle tension, pain in the calf muscles, heart rate, oxygen saturation in the blood, the number drainage discharge within 24 hours, temperature, systolic blood pressure, central venous pressure, laboratory diagnosis, decrease in hemoglobin concentration, leukocyte level after surgery, C-reactive protein level after surgery, blood procalcitonin level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate level, the presence of a shift in the leukocyte formula to the left. The presence of complications was assessed, the parameters of the checklist were analyzed using univariate logistic regression and ROC analysis for early detection of complications and determination of the chance of complications in the future. Results. Complications occurred in 18/218 (8.2%). The most frequent complication was bleeding in 6/18 (33.3%). Reoperation was performed in 12 cases of 12/18 (66.6%), endoscopic treatment was performed in 1 case, and conservative methods were used in 5 cases. According to the checklist, 31.81% had a positive predictive value (PPV) and 99.56% had a negative predictive value (NPV). The optimal cut-off point of the total score of the checklist was 6. Patients with a positive prognosis of the checklist have a higher chance of developing complications of VSH – 4.5 (95% CI 1.8-9.72), p <0.001. Conclusions. The complication rate was 18/218 (8.2%). According to the checklist, heart rate, systolic blood pressure and mobility are very good predictors of postoperative complications. The checklist is the best option for determining the readiness of patients to be discharged from the hospital due to a high prognostic negative result. Due to the low prognostic positive result, the evaluated checklist needs additional modification and optimization taking into account the results already obtained.