The goal of this clinical trial is to compare two variations of the same procedure used to assist with weight loss in patients who have a history of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass who have experienced weight regain. The procedure being studied is called the Transoral Outlet Reduction (TORe), and the trial will compare two different ways to complete the TORe procedure. The main question\[s\] it aims to answer are: * Which variation of the TORe procedure results in more weight loss? * Which variation of the TORe is safer? Participants who are eligible and willing to undergo the TORe procedure to assist with weight loss will have the procedure completed either one of the two ways. All other care will be exactly the same between the two groups. Researchers will compare outcomes between the two procedure variations, looking at which one results in more weight loss, is more successful, and safer.
Weight regain after having a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass is common. One of the primary reasons for weight regain after bypass is stretching out or "dilation" of the surgical connection created between what is left of the stomach and the small intestine (called the anastamosis). As the ability to suture with the help of a scope inserted through the mouth into the stomach instead of surgery, the transoral outlet reduction (TORe) was developed. The TORe involves suturing around the stretched out anastamosis, allowing it to be pulled tighter and shrink down, resulting in weight loss, and is an entirely endoscopic and reversible procedure. As the procedure advanced, "burning" of the stomach lining using a technique called argon plasma coagulation (APC), in addition to suturing, became the standard way to perform the TORe procedure. The APC helps the stomach tissue shrink even more and heal into place better, causing even more weight loss. This is now the classic way to perform the TORe (hereby called the "c-TORe"), and is now widely used to help patients who have regained weight after gastric bypass. Multiple studies report the c-TORe results in an average of 8-9% total body weight loss. However more recently, another variation of the TORe was developed, which uses endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD). In the ESD-TORe (hereby called the E-TORe), the physician makes a small cut in the surface layer of the anastamosis in addition to APC and suturing. In the only study comparing c-TORe to E-TORe, E-TORe resulted in significantly more weight loss. However, there are several limitations to this study that require more investigation. This clinical trial will compare the c-TORe and the E-TORe. Patients who are eligible and willing to undergo a TORe procedure will be assigned to get either the c-TORe or the E-TORe. They will undergo the procedure with a physician experienced in both types of the procedure. Participants will be followed for one year after the procedure to compare which procedure type results in more weight loss.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE
Enrollment
70
The E-TORe utilizes ESD in addition to APC prior to endoscopic suturing. In this approach, a standardized solution of normal saline or hetastarch mixed with methylene blue and epinephrine is injected into the gastric rim of the GJA outlet. The mucosa is then carefully incised to expose the underlying muscular layer for a width of approximately 1cm around the GJA circumference. Following ESD, APC is then applied to the inner and outer mucosal margins of the ESD tract. Finally, endoscopic sutures are then placed in purse string fashion and cinched closed around a 6mm TTS balloon.
The c-TORe will be completed utilizing APC prior to endoscopic suturing. In this approach, the gastric rim of the anastomosis is circumferentially ablated using APC (forced APC, flow of 0.8 L/min and power of 30-70 watts) extending an average of 1-2 cm from the outlet. Following ablation, endoscopic sutures are placed in a purse string fashion within the ablated area and the outlet cinched closed over a 6mm through-the scope (TTS) balloon.
Cleveland Clinic Foundation
Cleveland, Ohio, United States
RECRUITINGWeight change at 6 months
Percent total body weight change 6 months following TORe procedure
Time frame: 6 months from procedure date
Weight change at 12 months
Percent total body weight change 12 months following TORe procedure
Time frame: 12 months from procedure date
Technical success
Rates of technical success of the procedure as determined by the experienced endoscopist performing the TORe procedure
Time frame: Day of procedure
Procedure time
Mean time to complete each procedure type
Time frame: Day of procedure
Adverse event rate
Rate of adverse events related to each procedure type
Time frame: One year from date of procedure
5% total body weight loss
Proportion of subjects who achieved at least 5% total body weight loss
Time frame: One year from date of procedure
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.