AETNA Medicare


Healthy Kids
A total of participants, with BMI of Consensus Development Conference Panel. Shop now Compare plans to find the right one for you. We teach you about good nutrition, activity, and healthy behavior. It covers eyeglasses and contact lenses. Lifestyle management programs are no-cost for eligible individuals.


University Employee Benefit Forms

A preoperative behavior change program with psychological evaluation should be required. Candidates for obesity surgery should begin a weight reduction diet prior to surgery. Obesity itself increases the likelihood of pulmonary complications and wound infections Choban et al, ; Abdel-Moneim, ; Holley et al, ; Myles et al, ; Nair et al, ; Bumgardner et al, ; Perez et al, ; Chang et al, ; Printken et al, Even relatively modest weight loss prior to surgery can result in substantial improvements in pulmonary function, blood glucose control, blood pressure, and other physiological parameters Anderson et al, ; Hakala et al, ; Kansanen et al, ; Pekkarinen et al, Factors such as blood glucose control, hypertension, etc.

Garza explained that the patient should lose weight prior to surgery to reduce surgical risks. Patients ought to be encouraged to lose as much weight as possible before surgery" Garza, Although the long-term effectiveness of weight reduction programs has been questioned, the Institute of Medicine has reported the substantial short-term effectiveness of certain organized physician-supervised weight reduction programs.

For maximal benefit, dieting should occur proximal to the time of surgery, and not in the remote past to reduce surgical risks and improve outcomes. Even if the patient has not been able to keep weight off long-term with prior dieting, the patient may be able to lose significant weight short term prior to surgery in order to improve the outcome of surgery.

Given the importance of patient compliance in diet and self-care in improving patient outcomes after surgery, the appropriateness of obesity surgery in noncompliant patients should be questioned. The American College of Surgeons has stated: These procedures are not for cosmesis but for prevention of the pathologic consequences of morbid obesity. The patient must be committed to the appropriate work-up for the procedure and for continuing long-term postoperative medical management, and understand and be adequately prepared for the potential complications of the procedure.

Screening of the patients to ensure appropriate selection is a critical responsibility of the surgeon and the supporting health care team. The Task Group stated that registered dietitians are best qualified to provide nutritional care, including pre-operative assessment and nutritional education and counseling. The Task Group also noted that weight loss surgery is contraindicated in those who are unable to comprehend basic principles of weight loss surgery or follow operative instructions.

Obesity surgery is not indicated for persons with transient increases in weight Collazo-Clavell, Children and adolescents are rapidly growing, and are therefore especially susceptible to adverse long-term consequences of nutritional deficiencies from the reduced nutrient intake and malabsorption that is induced by obesity surgery. It is not known whether the benefits of obesity surgery in children and adolescents outweigh the increased risks. According to a panel of experts Inge et al, ; Lawson et al, , bariatric surgery may be an appropriate treatment for severe obesity in adolescents who have completed bone growth.

According to the recommendations by the expert panel, potential candidates for bariatric surgery should be referred to centers with multi-disciplinary weight management teams that have expertise in meeting the unique needs of overweight adolescents. Consideration for bariatric surgery is generally warranted only when adolescents have experienced failure of 6 months of organized weight loss attempts and have met certain criteria: Surgery should only be performed at facilities that are equipped to collect long-term data on clinical outcomes.

The panel recommended the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass method of surgery over the simpler, newer technique of implanting an adjustable gastric band since gastric bands are less effective and younger patients would probably need replacement as they age.

There is established evidence that medical supervision of a nutrition and exercise program increases the likelihood of success Blackburn, In cases of suspected cirrhosis, biopsy may be indicated. Cazzo et al stated that non-alcoholic fatty liver disease NAFLD is common among subjects who undergo bariatric surgery and its post-surgical improvement has been reported.

This study aimed to determine the evolution of liver disease evaluated through NAFLD fibrosis score 12 months after surgery. It is a prospective cohort study which evaluated patients immediately before and 12 months following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass RYGB.

Mean score decreased from 1. Resolution was statistically associated with female gender, percentage of excess weight loss, post-surgical BMI, post-surgical platelet count, and diabetes resolution. The authors concluded that as previously reported by studies in which post-surgical biopsies were performed, RYGB leads to a great resolution rate of liver fibrosis. Since post-surgical biopsy is not widely available and has a significant risk, calculation of NAFLD fibrosis score is a simple tool to evaluate this evolution through a non-invasive approach.

Shalhub et al noted that non-alcoholic steatohepatitis NASH commonly occurs in obese patients and predisposes to cirrhosis. Prevalence of NASH in bariatric patients is unknown.

The aim of this study was to determine the role of routine liver biopsy in managing bariatric patients. One pathologist graded all liver biopsies as mild, moderate or severe steatohepatitis. NASH was defined as steatohepatitis without alcoholic or viral hepatitis. Consecutive liver biopsies were compared to those liver biopsies selected because of grossly fatty livers.

The two groups were similar in age, gender, and BMI. Both groups had a similar prevalence of cirrhosis. The authors concluded that routine liver biopsy documented significant liver abnormalities in a larger group of patients compared with selective liver biopsies, thereby suggesting that liver appearance is not predictive of NASH.

Liver biopsy remains the gold-standard for diagnosing NASH. The authors recommended routine liver biopsy during bariatric operations to determine the prevalence and natural history of NASH, which will have important implications in directing future therapeutics for obese patients with NASH and for patients undergoing bariatric procedures. Arun et al stated that NAFLD is a chronic condition that can progress to cirrhosis and hepatocellular cancer. Currently, the only method to diagnose NASH is with a liver biopsy; however, sampling error may limit diagnostic accuracy.

These researchers investigated the discordance of paired liver biopsies in individuals undergoing gastric bypass. The mean specimen size number of PTs for group 1 was The authors concluded that the results demonstrate that significant sampling variability exists in class 2 and 3 obese individuals undergoing screening liver biopsies for NAFLD. The degree and histopathological discordance is dependent upon zonal location and types of injury. Nevertheless, a mm biopsy specimen without zone 3 cellular ballooning or fibrosis appears adequate to exclude the diagnosis of NASH.

Surgery for obesity, termed bariatric surgery, includes gastric restrictive procedures and gastric bypass. The gastric restrictive procedures include vertical banded gastroplasty accompanied by gastric banding which attempt to induce weight loss by creating an intake-limiting gastric pouch by segmenting the stomach along its vertical axis.

The process of digestion is more or less normal. Vertical banded gastroplasty VBG , a purely restrictive procedure, has fallen into disfavor because of inadequate long-term weight loss.

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass RYGB combines restriction and malabsorption principles, and combines gastric segmentation along its vertical axis with a Roux-en-Y procedure, such that the food bypasses the duodenum and proximal small bowel. Long-limb RYGB is similar to standard RYGB, except that the limb through which food passes is longer and is often used to treat super obese individuals.

Because the normal flow of food is disrupted, available literature indicates that there is a greater potential for metabolic complications compared to gastric restrictive surgeries, including iron deficiency anemia, vitamin B deficiency and hypocalcemia, all of which can be corrected by oral supplementation. Several studies have suggested that RYGB is a more effective weight loss procedure than VBG, offering the best combination of maximum weight control and minimum nutritional risk Sugerman et al, ; Howard et al, Pories et al reported Thus, the RYGB is "the current procedure of choice for patients requiring surgery for morbid obesity" Barrow; However, RYGB is associated with significantly more weight loss, and has become the procedure of choice for obesity surgery.

Gentileschi et al systematically reviewed the published literature on open and bariatric laparoscopic obesity surgery and concluded that the available evidence indicates that laparoscopic VBG and laparoscopic RYGB are as effective as their open counterparts. The assessment found that open and laparoscopic RYGB induces similar amounts of weight loss. However, the assessment found that the profile of adverse events differs between the two approaches.

Laparoscopic RYGB is a less invasive approach that results in a shorter hospital stay and earlier return to usual activities.

The assessment found that the estimated mortality rate was low for both procedures, but somewhat lower for laparoscopic surgery than open surgery 0. The report found, on the other hand, that open surgery had higher rates of cardiopulmonary complications 2. Regarding long-term adverse events, the rates of reoperation 9.

A decision memorandum from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services CMS, concluded that the evidence is sufficient that open and laparoscopic RYGB is reasonable and necessary for Medicare beneficiaries who have a BMI greater than 35 and have at least one co-morbidity related to obesity, and have been previously unsuccessful with medical treatment for obesity. The assessment concluded that the evidence is not adequate to conclude that open or laparoscopic vertical banded gastroplasty is reasonable and necessary and they are therefore non-covered for all Medicare beneficiaries.

Procedures that are mainly diversionary e. While appropriate surgical procedures for severe obesity primarily produce weight loss by restricting intake, intestinal bypass procedures produce weight loss by inducing a malabsorptive effect.

The BPD was designed to address some of the drawbacks of the original intestinal bypass procedures, which resulted in unacceptable metabolic complications of diarrhea, hyperoxaluria, nephrolithiasis, cholelithiasis and liver failure. The duodenal switch DS is a variant of the BPD procedure with a vertical subtotal gastrectomy and pylorus preservation, which eliminates the "dumping syndrome". The duodenum is divided just beyond the pylorus.

The small bowel is then divided, and the end going to the cecum of the colon is connected to the short stump of the duodenum. This becomes the "enteral limb". The other end, leading from the gallbladder and pancreatic ducts, is connected onto the enteral limb at about 75 to cm from the iliocecal valve.

This limb is the "biliopancreatic limb". Some have advocated use of the DS procedure in the super-obese i. Patients who have this operation must have lifelong medical follow-up, since the side effects can be subtle, and can appear months to years after the surgery. Gastroplasty, more commonly known as "stomach stapling" and not to be confused with vertical banded gastroplasty VBG , is a technically simple operation, accomplished by stapling the upper stomach to create a small pouch into which food flows after it is swallowed.

The outlet of this pouch is restricted by a band of synthetic mesh, which slows its emptying, so that the person having it feels full after only a few bites of food. According to the available literature, patients who have this procedure seldom experience any satisfaction from eating, and tend to seek ways to get around the operation by eating more.

This causes vomiting, which can tear out the staple line and destroy the operation. Studies have reported that many patients must undergo another revisional operation to obtain the results they seek.

It is often the first step in a 2-stage procedure when performing RYGB or duodenal switch. The report stated that the incidence of gastric sleeve dilatation appears to be an uncommon event, but the evidence is far from conclusive at this point. A randomized controlled clinical trial comparing short-term 1-year outcomes of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy to laparoscopic RYGB found comparable reductions in body weight and BMI Karamanakos et al, This study was poorly reported, failing to discuss inclusion criteria for the trial and adverse events associated with the procedures.

The study also found that sleeve gastrectomy was associated with more severe complications than LASGB. The assessment noted that, due to limited evidence and poor quality of the trials comparing each pair of procedures, these conclusions should be viewed with caution.

The CTAF assessment reported that the results of multiple case series and retrospective studies have suggested that sleeve gastrectomy as a primary procedure is associated with a significant reduction in excess weight loss. The CTAF assessment found few comparative studies of sleeve gastrectomy.

The CTAF assessment stated that, "[t]o date, long term outcomes from registry studies are relatively limited, but longer term follow-up will provide additional important information.

Although the basic concept of gastric bypass remains intact, numerous variations are being performed at this time. Recent data demonstrate that surgeons are moving from simple gastroplasty procedures, favoring the more complex gastric bypass procedures as the surgical treatment of choice for the severely obese patient. The gastric bypass operation can be modified, to alter absorption of food, by moving the Roux-en-Y-connection distally down the jejunum, effectively shortening the bowel available for absorption of food.

The weight loss effect is then a combination of the very small stomach, which limits intake of food, with malabsorption of the nutrients, which are eaten, reducing caloric intake even further. In a sense, this procedure combines the least desirable features of the gastric bypass with the most troublesome aspects of the biliopancreatic diversion.

Although patients can have increased frequency of bowel movements, increased fat in their stools, and impaired absorption of vitamins, recent studies have reported good results. The loop gastric bypass developed years ago has generally been abandoned by most bariatric surgeons as unsafe. Although easier to perform than the RYGB, it has been shown to create a severe hazard in the event of any leakage after surgery, and seriously increases the risk of ulcer forrmation, and irritation of the stomach pouch by bile.

Recent advances in laparoscopy have renewed the interest in gastric banding techniques for the control of severe obesity. The claimed advantage of LASGB is the adjustability of the band, which can be inflated or deflated percutaneously according to weight loss without altering the anatomy of the stomach.

This method entails encircling the upper part of the stomach using bands made of synthetic materials, creating a small upper pouch that empties into the lower stomach through a narrow, non-stretchable stoma.

The reduced capacity of the pouch and the restriction caused by the band diminish caloric intake, depending on important technical details, thus producing weight loss comparable to vertical gastroplasties, without the possibility of staple-line disruption and lesser incidence of infectious complications.

However, distension of the pouch, slippage of the band and entrapment of the foreign material by the stomach have been described and are worrisome. Regarding performing adjustable gastric banding as an open procedure, the CMS decision memorandum concluded that the evidence is not adequate to conclude that open adjustable gastric banding is reasonable and necessary and therefore this procedure remains noncovered for Medicare beneficiaries.

The "mini gastric bypass" has been promoted as a new surgical treatment for severe obesity. While the name mini gastric bypass implies "small" and "simple", this is a major surgical procedure. The mini-gastric bypass uses a jejunal loop directly connected to a small gastric pouch, instead of a Roux-en-Y anastomosis.

In this way, the mini-gastric bypass is similar to the loop gastric bypass; the latter procedure that has been abandoned by bariatric surgeons because of its inherent risks. Specifically, performing a loop, rather than a Roux-en-Y, anastomosis to a small gastric pouch in the stomach may permit reflux of bile and digestive juice into the esophagus where it can cause esophagitis and ulceration, and may thus increase the risk of esophageal cancer.

The Roux-en-Y modification of the loop bypass was designed to divert bile downstream, several feet below the gastric pouch and esophagus to minimize the risk of reflux. The trend towards use of Roux-en-Y and away from loop gastric bypass was based on sound surgical experience of multiple surgeons with large series of patients. The published evidence supporting the mini-gastric bypass comes from descriptive reports and case series; the potential biases inherent in reports of case series are well known in clinical epidemiology.

The evidence for the mini gastric bypass has come from a single investigator, thus raising questions about the generalization and validity of the reported findings. The mini-gastric bypass has not been subjected to a prospective clinical outcome study in peer-reviewed publication.

The Fobi pouch, developed by California surgeon Mathias A. Fobi, is a modification of gastric bypass surgery. The modifications to gastric bypass surgery are designed to prevent post-surgical enlargement of the gastric pouch and stoma. In a traditional gastric bypass procedure, surgeons create a smaller stomach by stapling off a large section. A problem with the traditional procedure is that the staples can break down, causing the stomach to regain its original shape -- and patients to start gaining weight again.

Also, the stomach opening that leads into the intestines, which in surgery is made smaller to allow less food to pass through, often stretches as the years go by. With the Fobi pouch, there is no use of staples; rather, the stomach is bisected and hand-sewn them to maintain the separation. A synthetic band is placed around the stomach opening to keep it from stretching.

However, there is a paucity of direct comparative studies of the Fobi pouch to traditional gastric bypass surgery, causing colleagues to "question whether his technique is really an improvement on the traditional procedure" Davis, All of the published literature has been limited to descriptive articles, case series, and a prospective non-randomized controlled study.

These studies were from a single group of investigators, raising questions about the generalization of the findings. The intragastric balloon also known as the silicone intragastric balloon or SIB has been developed as a temporary aid for obese patients who have had unsatisfactory results in their clinical treatment for obesity and super obese patients with higher surgical Fernandes et al, Intragastric balloon is intended to reduce gastric capacity, causing satiety, making it easier for patients to take smaller amounts of food.

Randomized, controlled clinical studies, however, have found no increase in weight loss with the intragastric balloon plus dieting versus dieting alone Rigaud et al, ; Geliebter et al, ; Mathus-Vliegen et al, ; Lindor et al, One non-randomized controlled clinical study that reported positive results reported that results were not maintained after gastric balloon removal Ramhamadany et al, In addition, the intragastric balloon has been associated with potentially severe adverse effects, including gastric erosion, reflux, and obstruction.

This new device is intended to facilitate weight loss in obese adult patients by occupying space in the stomach, which may trigger feelings of fullness, or by other mechanisms that are not yet understood.

The ReShape Dual Balloon device is delivered into the stomach via the mouth through a minimally invasive endoscopic procedure. The outpatient procedure usually takes less than 30 minutes while a patient is under mild sedation.

Once in place, the balloon device is inflated with a sterile solution, which takes up room in the stomach. Patients are advised to follow a medically supervised diet and exercise plan to augment their weight loss efforts while using the ReShape Dual Balloon and to maintain their weight loss following its removal.

It is meant to be temporary and should be removed 6 months after it is inserted. In the study Ponce et al, , individuals randomly selected to receive the ReShape Dual Balloon lost Six months following the device removal, patients treated with the ReShape Dual Balloon device kept off an average of 9.

Potential side effects for the procedure include headache, muscle pain, and nausea from the sedation and procedure; in rare cases, severe allergic reaction, heart attack, esophageal tear, infection, and breathing difficulties can occur.

Once the device is placed in the stomach, patients may experience vomiting, nausea, abdominal pain, gastric ulcers, and feelings of indigestion. This device should not be used in patients who have had previous gastro-intestinal or bariatric surgery or who have been diagnosed with inflammatory intestinal or bowel disease, large hiatal hernia, symptoms of delayed gastric emptying or active H.

Pylori infection; those who are pregnant or use aspirin daily should also avoid the device FDA, It is unclear what benefit there is from a temporary reduction in weight. Furthermore, an UpToDate review on " Bariatric surgical operations for the management of severe obesity: Descriptions " Lim, lists intragastric balloon as an investigational procedure. Popov and colleagues examined the effect of intra-gastric balloons IGBs on metabolic outcomes associated with obesity.

Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Database were searched through July Dual extraction and quality assessment of studies using Cochrane risk of bias tool were performed independently by 2 authors. Primary outcomes included the change from baseline in metabolic parameters.

A total of 10 RCTs and 30 observational studies including 5, subjects were analyzed. There was moderate-quality evidence for improvement in most metabolic parameters in subjects assigned to IGB therapy as compared to conventional non-surgical therapy in RCTs: The rate of serious AES was 1. The authors concluded that IGBs were more effective than diet in improving obesity-related metabolic risk factors with a low rate of AEs, however the strength of the evidence was limited given the small number of participants and lack of long-term follow-up.

On August 10, , the FDA announced that it has received 5 reports of unanticipated deaths that occurred from to the present in patients who received a liquid-filled intra-gastric balloon system to treat obesity; 4 reports involve the Orbera Intragastric Balloon System Apollo Endosurgery and 1 report involves the ReShape Integrated Dual Balloon System ReShape Medical. All 5 patients died within 1 month or less of balloon placement; 3 patients died 1 to 3 days after the balloon was placed.

The FDA stated that "At this time, we do not know the root cause or incidence rate of patient death, nor have we been able to definitively attribute the deaths to the devices or the insertion procedures for these devices e. The FDA has also received 2 additional reports of deaths from to the present related to potential complications associated with balloon treatment: As part of the ongoing, FDA-mandated post-approval studies for these devices, the FDA will obtain more information to help evaluate the continued safety and effectiveness of these approved medical devices Brooks, Both patients were at a high risk and could not undergo another open or laparoscopic surgery to correct the leaks that were not healing.

In a prospective, single-center, randomized, single-blinded study, Eid et al examined the safety and effectiveness of endoscopic gastric plication with the StomaphyX device versus a sham procedure for revisional surgery in RYGB performed at least 2 years earlier patients to reduce regained weight.

These researchers planned for patients to be randomized 2: Adverse events were recorded. One-year follow-up was completed by 45 patients treated with StomaphyX and 29 patients in the sham treatment group. Primary efficacy outcome was achieved by There was one causally related adverse event with StomaphyX, that required laparoscopic exploration and repair. The authors concluded that StomaphyX treatment failed to achieve the primary efficacy target and resulted in early termination of the study.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists' practice bulletin on bariatric surgery and pregnancy ACOG, stated that bariatric surgery should not be considered a treatment for infertility. Fridley et al reviewed the literature on the effectiveness of bariatric surgery for obese patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension IIH with regard to both symptom resolution and resolution of visual deficits.

The published literature was reviewed using manual and electronic search techniques. Data from each relevant manuscript were gathered, analyzed, and compared. These included demographic data, pre- and post-operative symptoms, pre- and post-operative visual field deficits, bariatric procedure type, absolute weight loss, changes in BMI, and changes in cerebrospinal fluid CSF opening pressure.

A total of 11 relevant publications including 6 individual case reports were found, reporting on a total of 62 patients. The Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was the most common bariatric procedure performed. In 13 patients both pre- and post-operative CSF pressures were recorded, with an average post-operative pressure decrease of mm H 2 O. Changes in weight loss and BMI varied depending on the reported post-operative follow-up interval.

The authors concluded that the published Class IV evidence suggested that bariatric surgery may be an effective treatment for IIH in obese patients, both in terms of symptom resolution and visual outcome. They stated that prospective, controlled studies are needed for better elucidation of its role. Levin and colleagues stated that IIH occurs most frequently in young, obese women. Gastric bypass surgery has been used to treat morbid obesity and its co-morbidities, and IIH has recently been considered among these indications.

These investigators presented a case report of a year old female with a maximum BMI of She also developed migraine headaches. After a waxing and waning course and various medical treatments, the patient underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery with anterior repair of hiatal hernia.

Dramatic improvement in IIH headaches occurred by 4 months post-procedure and was maintained at 1 year, when she reached her weight plateau with a BMI of This added to the small number of case reports and retrospective analyses of the successful treatment of IIH with gastric bypass surgery, and brought this data from the surgical literature into the neurological domain. It offered insight into an early time course for symptom resolution, and explored the impact of weight-loss surgery on migraine headaches.

The authors concluded that this treatment modality should be further investigated prospectively to analyze the rate of headache improvement with weight loss, the amount of weight loss needed for clinical improvement, and the possible correlation with improvement in papilledema. Handley et al systematically reviewed the effect of bariatric weight reduction surgery as a treatment for IIH.

These investigators performed a comprehensive literature search using the following databases: No restrictions were placed on these searches, including the date of publication. A total of 85 publications were identified, and after initial appraisal, 17 were included in the final review. Post-operative lumbar puncture opening pressure was shown to decrease by an average of The authors concluded that bariatric surgery for weight loss is associated with alleviation of IIH symptoms and a reduction in intracranial pressure.

Furthermore, an improvement was observed in patients where conventional treatments, including neurosurgery, were ineffective. They stated that further prospective randomized studies with control groups and a larger number of participants are lacking within the published studies to date. Pujol Gebelli et al stated that laparoscopic gastric plication is a new technique derived from sleeve gastrectomy. Plication of the greater curvature produces a restrictive mechanism that causes weight loss.

The results of the first cases where this technique has been applied in this hospital were presented. Plication of the gastric greater curvature was performed under general anesthetic and by laparoscopy using 3 lines of sutures and with an orogastric probe as a guide. Results of the morbidity, mortality and weight loss were presented. A total of 13 patients were operated on 7 women. The maximum BMI varied between The most frequently found morbidity was nausea and vomiting.

The authors concluded that laparoscopic gastric plication is a new surgical technique which gives equivalent short-term results as vertical gastrectomy. It is a reproducible and reversible technique with results and indications still to be validated.

Brethauer et al presented the results of a feasibility study using laparoscopic gastric plication for weight loss achieved without stapling or banding. After institutional review board approval, 2 methods were used to achieve laparoscopic gastric volume reduction.

In the 1st group anterior plication [AP] , the anterior gastric wall was folded inward from the fundus to the antrum using 2 rows of running sutures. The greater and lesser curvatures were approximated to create an intraluminal fold of the stomach.

In the 2nd group greater curvature plication [GCP] , the short gastric vessels were divided, and the greater curvature was folded inward, with 2 suture lines to reduce the gastric capacity by a large intraluminal gastric fold.

The average pre-operative body mass index was Of the 15 patients, 9 underwent AP. For the 9 patients who underwent AP, the 6- and month endoscopic evaluations demonstrated comparable-size plications over time, except for in 1 patient, who had a partially disrupted fold. Of the 6 patients who underwent GCP, the 6- and month follow-up endoscopic examinations demonstrated a durable intraluminal fold, except for in 1 patient, with a partial disruption at the distal fold owing to a broken suture.

For patients completing 1 year of follow-up, the percentage of excess weight loss was No bleeding or infectious complications developed. The 1st patient in the GCP group required re-operation and plication reduction owing to gastric obstruction. The early weight loss results have been encouraging, with better weight loss in patients who underwent GCP.

Both cases were corrected by reoperation. No mortality was observed. The authors concluded that laparoscopic adjustable gastric banded plication provides both restrictive and reductive effects and is reversible.

The technique is safe, feasible, and reproducible and can be used as an alternative bariatric procedure. Ji et al conducted a systematic review of the currently available literature regarding the outcomes of laparoscopic gastric plication LGP for the treatment of obesity.

The authors' systematic review yielded 14 studies encompassing 1, LGP patients. Peri-operative data were collected from each study and recorded. Mean pre-operative BMI ranged from Operative time ranged from 50 to Hospital stay varied from 0. The authors concluded that early reports with LGP were promising with a favorable short-term safety profile. However, it remains unclear if weight loss following LGP is durable in the long-term. They stated that additional prospective comparative trials and long-term follow-up are needed to further define the role of LGP in the surgical management of obesity.

In a prospective study, Zeinoddini evaluated safety and effectiveness of LGP on adolescents. Laparoscopic gastric plication was performed in 12 adolescents 9 females and 3 males.

Mean SD age of the patients was Mean pre-operative weight and BMI were All medical co-morbidities were improved after LGP. There were no deaths. One patient required replication 4 days post-operatively due to obstruction at the site of the last knot. No other major complications were observed. No patient required re-hospitalization.

The authors concluded that LGP has the potential of being an ideal weight loss surgery for adolescents, resulting in excellent weight loss and minimal psychological disruption. It is associated with a minimal risk of leakage, bleeding, and nutritional deficiency. However, they stated that large well-designed studies with long-term follow-up are needed. It is thought that these patients lose restriction because of the dilated gastrojejunostomy and thus overeat.

Surgeons have tried endoscopic injection of sclerosing agents to create scar and a smaller anastomosis, with variable effects. In , Loewen and Barba evaluated the injection of morrhuate sodium as sclerotherapy to decrease the diameter of the gastrojejunostomy anastomosis following gastric bypass. A total of 71 patients underwent sclerotherapy at their gastrojejunostomy from July to August A retrospective review was performed of this group, including chart review, follow-up data with weight checks, and telephone interview findings.

The average age of the patients was 45 years and all but 4 patients were women. Sclerotherapy was done an average of 2. The starting weight at endoscopy was an average of lb lb heavier than the average nadir weight. The average diameter of the gastrojejunostomy was 2. An average of 13 mL morrhuate sodium was injected circumferentially. No hospital admissions or complications occurred in relation to the procedure. The analysis showed a high body mass index at endoscopy to be the only predictive factor for successful weight maintenance or loss.

In a article, Spaulding, Osler and Patlak studied endoscopic sclerotherapy with sodium morrhuate of a dilated gastrojejunostomy in gastric bypass patients. Their weight trends before and after treatment were assessed by paired t test. A total of 32 patients who were gaining weight after gastric bypass underwent sclerotherapy of their dilated gastrojejunostomy. The timing of treatment ranged from 10 to months average 56 after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Before sclerotherapy, patients were gaining weight at a rate of.

After treatment, they were losing weight at a rate of. Endoscopic duodenal-jejunal bypass is the endoscopic placement of a duodenal-jejunal bypass sleeve eg, EndoBarrier which lines the first section of the small intestine causing food to be absorbed further along the intestine. Once implanted, the device is purported to influence gastrointestinal hormones and satiety. It is suggested to promote weight loss in individuals who are potential candidates for bariatric surgery, but are too heavy to safely undergo the procedure.

An UpToDate review on " Bariatric surgical operations for the management of severe obesity: The EndoBarrier is cm long and it extends from the proximal duodenum to the mid-jejunum and thus mimics a duodenojejunal bypass. The ValenTx is a cm barrier device that extends from the gastroesophageal junction to the jejunum.

The EndoBarrier, an endoscopically delivered duodeno-jejunal bypass liner DJBL , is a plastic flexible tube that is placed in the duodenal bulb, directly behind the pylorus. It extends from the duodenum to the proximal jejunum. Recent studies have suggested that the use of EndoBarrier has resulted in significant weight reduction in comparison to control-diet patients.

Schouten et al noted that the endoscopically placed duodenal-jejunal bypass sleeve or EndoBarrier Gastrointestinal Liner has been designed to achieve weight loss in morbidly obese patients. These researchers reported on the first European experience with this device. A multi-center, randomized clinical trial was performed. A total of 41 patients were included and 30 underwent sleeve implantation; 11 patients served as a diet control group.

All patients followed the same low-calorie diet during the study period. The purpose of the study was to determine the safety and effectiveness of the device. A total of 26 devices were successfully implanted. In 4 patients, implantation could not be achieved. The remaining patients all completed the study. Mean procedure time was 35 mins range of 12 to for a successful implantation and 17 mins range of 5 to 99 for explantation.

There were no procedure related adverse events. Initial mean BMI was Mean excess weight loss after 3 months was Absolute change in BMI at 3 months was 5. Type 2 diabetes mellitus was present at baseline in 8 patients of the device group and improved in 7 patients during the study period lower glucose levels, HbA1c, and medication requirements.

The authors concluded that the EndoBarrier Gastrointestinal Liner is a feasible and safe non-invasive device with excellent short-term weight loss results. The device also has a significant positive effect on type 2 diabetes mellitus. Moreover, they stated that long-term randomized and sham studies for weight loss and treatment of diabetes are necessary to determine the role of the device in the treatment of morbid obesity.

Escalona et al evaluated safety, weight loss, and cardio-metabolic changes in obese subjects implanted with the DJBL for 1 year. Morbidly obese subjects were enrolled in a single-arm, open-label, prospective trial and implanted with the DJBL. Primary endpoints included safety and weight change from baseline to week Secondary endpoints included changes in waist circumference, blood pressure, lipids, glycemic control, and metabolic syndrome.

Three subjects could not be implanted due to short duodenal bulb. There were no procedure-related complications and there were 15 early endoscopic removals. In the week completer population, total body weight change from baseline was There were also significant improvements in waist circumference, blood pressure, total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, triglycerides, and fasting glucose.

The authors concluded that the DJBL is safe when implanted for 1 year, and results in significant weight loss and improvements in cardio-metabolic risk factors. They stated that these results suggested that this device may be suitable for the treatment of morbid obesity and its related comorbidities.

Verdam et al stated that the prevalence of obesity is increasing worldwide. Its primary treatment consists of lifestyle changes. Operations such as the placement of a gastric band or a gastric bypass can, however, lead to complications and necessitate secondary interventions.

In search of less invasive treatments, placement of the EndoBarrier duodenal jejunal bypass liner appears to be a promising, safe and effective method for facilitating weight loss. Concomitant positive effects on cardiovascular risk factors including diabetes type 2 were observed. The authors noted that a multi-center trial is currently underway to examine the mechanism behind these effects.

Mathus-Vliegen stated that the EndoBarrier is a unique concept that starts to ameliorate the symptoms of diabetes mellitus type 2, soon after positioning. Sufficient implant training is required, but problems can still occur e.

The stability of the anchors and the tolerability of the device still leave much to be desired. Only 7 studies on the EndoBarrier are available and these are mostly small in size, short-term and with limited follow-up, and many questions regarding the safety and long-term effects of the device remain.

The author concluded that this calls for a large, long-term, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial. Lessons should have been learned from the disastrous results with intra-gastric balloon implantation before commercializing another such product. Bolton et al stated that weight regain secondary to VBG pouch dilation is a typical referral for bariatric surgeons. A retrospective review was completed for patients with a previous VBG presenting with weight regain between to Complications following RYGB include: The median length of stay following RYGB was 6 days compared to 1.

The authors concluded that the findings of this study suggested that while RYGB revision may achieve greater weight loss, the complication rates and severity is discouraging. StomaphyX may be a safe alternative. Moreover, they stated that further technical modifications of the device and longer follow-up may clarify the role of this approach. Goyal et al examined if endoluminal reduction of gastric pouch and stoma using StomaphyX results in sustained weight loss in patients who regain weight after gastric bypass.

Retrospective chart review was performed on 59 post-gastric bypass patients who underwent revision of gastric pouch using StomaphyX from to Post-procedure weight at 1 week, 1 month, and 6 months follow-up as well as weight at the time of the review was recorded for each patient. Average weight loss and excess body weight loss EBWL were 2. At the time of review, the average follow-up was 41 months, average weight loss was 1. Endoscopy in 12 patients at average 18 months follow-up showed no sustained reduction in pouch and stoma size.

The authors concluded that StomaphyX resulted in weight loss that is not sustained on long-term follow-up. Pouch and stoma tend to regain their pre-procedure size on follow-up. They stated that StomaphyX cannot be recommended as a weight loss strategy in post-gastric bypass patients who regain weight.

There is currently no well-defined management protocol for this complication. Through systematic review, these investigators analyzed the results of endoscopic dilation in patients with stenosis, including complication and success rates.

The PubMed database was searched for relevant studies published each year from to , and 23 studies were identified for analysis. Only papers describing the treatment of anastomotic stricture after RYGB were included, and case-reports featuring less than 3 patients were excluded. The mean age of the trial populations was Through-the-scope balloons were used in 16 studies Other complications were also reported: The authors concluded that endoscopic treatment of stenosis is safe and effective; however, further high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Thompson et al stated that weight regain or insufficient loss after RYGB is common. This is partially attributable to dilatation of the gastro-jejunostomy, which diminishes the restrictive capacity of RYGB.

Endoluminal interventions for GJ reduction are being explored as alternatives to revision surgery. These researchers performed a randomized, blinded, sham-controlled trial to evaluate weight loss after sutured transoral outlet reduction TORe.

Intra-operative performance, safety, weight loss, and clinical outcomes were assessed. Subjects who received TORe had a significantly greater mean percentage weight loss from baseline 3.

As-treated analysis also showed greater mean percentage weight loss in the TORe group than controls 3. The groups had similar frequencies of adverse events. These results were achieved using a superficial suction-based device; greater levels of weight loss could be achieved with newer, full-thickness suturing devices. These researchers stated that TORe is one approach to avoid weight regain; moreover, they noted that a longitudinal multi-disciplinary approach with dietary counseling and behavioral changes are needed for long-term results.

Jirapinyo et al evaluated the technical feasibility, safety, and early outcomes of a procedure using a commercially available endoscopic suturing device to reduce the diameter of the GJA. An endoscopic suturing device was used to place sutures at the margin of the GJA in order to reduce its aperture. On chart review, clinical data were available at 3, 6, and 12 months. Average anastomosis diameter was The mean weight loss in successful cases was There were no major complications.

The authors concluded that this case series demonstrated the technical feasibility, safety, and effectiveness of performing GJ reduction using a commercially available endoscopic suturing device. They stated that this technique may represent an effective and minimally invasive option for the management of weight regain in patients with RYGB. Dakin and colleagues noted that weight recidivism after RYGB is a challenging problem for patients and bariatric surgeons alike.

Traditional operative strategies to combat weight regain are technically challenging and associated with a high morbidity rate. Endoluminal interventions are thus an attractive alternative that may offer a good combination of results coupled with lower peri-procedure risk that might one day provide a solution to this increasingly prevalent problem.

These investigators systematically reviewed the available literature on endoluminal procedures used to address weight regain after RYGB, with specific attention to the safety profile, effectiveness, cost, and current availability. This retrospective review focused only on endoluminal procedures that were performed for weight regain after RYGB, as opposed to primary endoluminal obesity procedures.

Several methods of endoluminal intervention for weight regain were reviewed, ranging from injection of inert substances to suturing and clipping devices. The literature review showed the procedures on the whole to be well-tolerated with limited effectiveness. The majority of the literature was limited to small case-series. Most of the reviewed devices were no longer commercially available. The authors concluded that endoluminal therapy represents an intriguing strategy for weight regain after RYGB.

However, the current and future technologies must be rigorously studied and improved such that they offer durable, repeatable, cost-effective solutions. Pauli et al stated that despite advances in many areas of therapeutic endoscopy, the development of an effective endoscopic suturing device has been elusive.

These researchers evaluated the safety and effectiveness of a suturing device to place and secure sutures within normal, in-vivo human colonic tissue prior to surgical resection. Patients undergoing elective colectomy were enrolled in this treat-and-resect model. The OverStitch endoscopic suturing device Apollo Endosurgery, Austin, TX was used to place sutures in healthy colonic tissue during a min, time-limited period.

Clinical and operative data were recorded. Seven sutures were successfully placed, incorporating a total of 10 tissue bites in a mean of On inspection of the explanted tissue, all sutures were found to be located sub-serosal no full thickness bites were taken. The suture and cinch elements were judged to be effective in the majority of cases. One device-related issue did not inhibit the ability to oppose tissue or place the cinch.

There were no intra-operative or post-operative complications. The authors concluded that the OverStitch permitted safe and effective suturing in an in-vivo human colon model. The sutures were placed at a consistent sub-serosal depth and at no point risked iatrogenic injury to adjacent structures. Technical issues with the device were infrequent and did not inhibit the ability to place sutures effectively. This clinical trial is designed to study the Apollo OverStitch endoscopic suturing device that has already been approved by the FDA as an option for bariatric surgery revision without having to re-operate on the patient.

The investigators believe that the endoscopic technique may be able to provide weight loss without having to re-operate on the patient. A total of 22 obese patients mean age of After dissecting the greater omentum and short gastric vessels, the gastric greater curvature plication with 2 rows of non-absorbable suture was performed under the guidance of a F bougie. The data were collected during follow-up examinations performed at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months post-operatively.

All procedures were performed laparoscopically. The mean operative time was There were no deaths or post-operative major complications that needed re-operation. Decreases in the index for homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance HOMA-IR and in insulin and glucose concentrations were observed. The authors concluded that the early outcomes of LGCP as a novel treatment for obese Chinese with a relatively low BMI were satisfactory with respect to the effectiveness and low incidence of major complications.

They stated that additional long-term follow-up and prospective, comparative trials are still needed. In a pilot study, Legner et al examined the effectiveness of transoral mucosal excision sutured gastroplasty for the treatment of gastro-esophageal reflux disease GERD and obesity.

Obese patients BMI greater than 35 underwent a psychological evaluation and tests for co-morbidities. Under general anesthesia, a procedure was performed at the gastro-esophageal junction including mucosal excision, suturing of the excision beds for apposition, and suture knotting. One patient with micrognathia could not undergo the required pre-procedural passage of a 60 F dilator and was excluded. The first 2 GERD patients had incomplete procedures due to instrument malfunction. The subsequent 5 subjects had a successfully completed procedure.

Four patients were treated for obesity and had an average excess weight loss of Of these patients, 1 had an 8-mm outlet at the end of the procedure recognized on video review -- a correctable error -- and another vomited multiple times post-operatively and loosened the gastroplasty sutures.

The treated GERD patient had resolution of reflux-related symptoms and is off all anti-secretory medications at 2-year follow-up. Her DeMeester score was 8. The authors concluded that the initial human clinical experience showed promising results for effective and safe GERD and obesity therapy.

Georgiadou et al summarized the available evidence about the efficacy and safety of laparoscopic mini-gastric bypass LMGB. These investigators performed a systematic search in the literature, and PubMed and reference lists were scrutinized end-of-search date: For the assessment of the eligible articles, the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale was used.

A total of 10 eligible studies were included in this study, reporting data on 4, patients. Moreover, resolution or improvement in all major associated medical illnesses and improvement in overall Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index score were recorded. Major bleeding and anastomotic ulcer were the most commonly reported complications. The latter were conducted due to a variety of medical reasons such as inadequate or excessive weight loss, malnutrition, and upper gastro-intestinal bleeding.

The authors concluded that LMGB represents an effective bariatric procedure; its safety and minimal post-operative morbidity seem remarkable. They stated that randomized comparative studies seem mandatory for the further evaluation of LMGB. These researchers included 10 studies with a total of patients that primarily investigated a prototype of the DJBL. In high-grade obese patients, short-term excess weight loss was observed. For the remaining patient-relevant endpoints and patient populations, evidence was either not available or ambiguous.

The authors do not yet recommend the device for routine use. Parikh et al compared bariatric surgery versus intensive medical weight management MWM in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus T2DM who do not meet current National Institutes of Health criteria for bariatric surgery and examined if the soluble form of receptor for advanced glycation end products sRAGE is a biomarker to identify patients most likely to benefit from surgery.

A total of 57 patients with T2DM and BMI 30 to 35, who otherwise met the criteria for bariatric surgery were randomized to MWM versus surgery bypass, sleeve or band, based on patient preference. For , our MAPD plans earned an overall weighted average rating of 4. We are proud that 87 percent of our Medicare members are enrolled in plans rated 4. Medicare evaluates plans based on a 5-Star rating system. Star Ratings are calculated each year and may change from one year to the next.

If we remove drugs from our list or add prior authorization, quantity limits or step therapy restrictions on a drug or move a drug to a higher cost-sharing tier, we must notify you. This must be at least 60 days before the change is effective. Or it may be when you request a refill of the drug. Request an exception online. You may be on drugs that aren't on our drug list or covered with added requirements or limits.

Your doctor can help you decide if you should switch to a covered drug or request a drug exception. It may help to share your formulary with your doctor. In the meantime, we may cover a temporary supply of your drug in certain cases during your first 90 days. For any of your drugs not on our drug list or covered with additional requirements or limits, we'll cover up to a day supply. This temporary supply should allow you to work with your doctor to either transition to a new drug or request an exception to continue your current drug.

After your day transition supply, we won't pay for these drugs unless you get approval for a drug exception. This is even if you're a plan member less than 90 days. Details about our transition process. Transition of coverage enrollment letter. Transition of coverage enrollment letter Spanish. This may depend on drug maker packaging or if you have a prescription written for fewer days. Participating physicians, hospitals and other health care providers are independent contractors.

They're neither agents nor employees of Aetna. The availability of any particular provider can't be guaranteed. Provider network make-up is subject to change. Email us or call Member Services at the number on your ID card.

Find a phone number. We have free interpreter services to answer questions you may have about our health or drug plan. Visite nuestro sitio en espaƱol. Enrollment in our plans depends on contract renewal.

See Evidence of Coverage for a complete description of plan benefits, exclusions, limitations and conditions of coverage. Plan features and availability may vary by service area. The lower costs advertised in our plan materials for these pharmacies may not be available at the pharmacy you use.

You will receive notice when necessary. The information you will be accessing is provided by another organization or vendor. If you do not intend to leave our site, please click 'Close. You are leaving our Medicare website and going to our non-Medicare website. Resources in your community. Aetna Medicare Star Ratings. How Medicare meets my needs. Explore your coverage options. I'm new to Medicare.

I'm a caregiver for a loved one. I have Original Medicare. I have Medicare Advantage. I have a different Medicare plan. Help me understand Medicare. Learn more about the basics. Choosing the right plan. Enrolling in a plan. Let us help find a plan for your needs. Find a doctor or prescription. Find a doctor, dentist or hospital.

Check our drug list. Medication Therapy Management Programs. Employer or group coverage. Check claims Link leads to secure site. Get an ID card Link leads to secure site. Assign or change doctors. Change address or telephone. Change, cancel or leave your plan.

Explore what we have to offer