Background and Objectives: Type 2 diabetes (T2D), closely associated with obesity, contributes to increased morbidity and mortality due to complications such as cardiometabolic disease. This review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of metabolic and bariatric surgeries (MBS) and endoscopic bariatric therapies (EBTs) in achieving diabetes remission and to examine key predictors influencing remission outcomes. Materials and Methods: This review synthesizes data from studies on MBS and EBT outcomes, focusing on predictors for diabetes remission such as preoperative insulin use, diabetes duration, HbA1c, and C-peptide levels. Additionally, predictive scoring systems, including the Individualized Metabolic Surgery (IMS), DiaRem, Advanced-DiaRem, ABCD, and Robert et al. scores, were analyzed for their utility in forecasting remission likelihood. Results: Key predictors of T2D remission include shorter diabetes duration, lower HbA1c, and higher C-peptide levels, while prolonged insulin use, and higher insulin doses are associated with lower remission rates. Scoring models like IMS and DiaRem demonstrate that lower scores correlate with a higher likelihood of remission, especially for procedures such as Roux-En-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). RYGB generally shows higher remission rates compared to sleeve gastrectomy (SG), particularly among patients with mild disease severity, while EBTs like ESG and IGBs contribute 5-20% total weight loss (TWL) and moderate glycemic control improvements. Conclusions: Both MBS and EBTs are effective for T2D management, with predictive scoring models aiding in individualized patient selection to optimize remission outcomes. Further research to validate these predictive tools across diverse populations could enhance treatment planning for both surgical and endoscopic interventions.

Endoscopic bariatric therapies (EBTs) are minimally invasive and safe procedures with favorable weight loss outcomes in obesity treatment. We aimed to present the weight loss mechanism of action of EBTs and an individualized selection method for patients with obesity. We searched PubMed, Medline, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar databases for studies on the topic from databases inception to July 1, 2023, written in English. We focused on EBTs potential mechanism of action to induce weight loss. We also present an expert opinion on a novel selection of EBTs based on their mechanism of action. EBTs can result in weight loss through variable mechanisms of action. They can induce earlier satiation, delay gastric emptying, restrict the accommodative response of the stomach, decrease caloric absorption, and alter the secretion of gastrointestinal hormones. Selecting EBTs may be guided through their mechanism of action by which patients with abnormal satiation may benefit more from tissue apposition devices and aspiration therapy while patients with fast gastric emptying may be better candidates for intragastric devices, endoscopic anastomosis devices, and duodenal mucosal resurfacing. Consequently, the selection of EBTs should be guided by the mechanism of action which is specific to each type of therapy.

This joint ASGE-ESGE guideline provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) in the management of obesity. The document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. It evaluates the efficacy and safety of EBMT devices and procedures that currently have CE mark or FDA-clearance/approval, or that had been approved within five years of document development. The guideline suggests the use of EBMTs plus lifestyle modification in patients with a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2, or with a BMI of 27.0-29.9 kg/m2 with at least 1 obesity-related comorbidity. Furthermore, it suggests the utilization of intragastric balloons and devices for endoscopic gastric remodeling (EGR) in conjunction with lifestyle modification for this patient population.

This joint ASGE-ESGE guideline provides an evidence-based summary and recommendations regarding the role of endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) in the management of obesity. The document was developed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. It evaluates the efficacy and safety of EBMT devices and procedures that currently have CE mark or FDA-clearance/approval, or that had been approved within five years of document development. The guideline suggests the use of EBMTs plus lifestyle modification in patients with a BMI of ≥ 30 kg/m2, or with a BMI of 27.0-29.9 kg/m2 with at least 1 obesity-related comorbidity. Furthermore, it suggests the utilization of intragastric balloons and devices for endoscopic gastric remodeling (EGR) in conjunction with lifestyle modification for this patient population.

Bariatric surgery has emerged as a highly effective option for individuals with obesity, offering significant and sustainable weight loss outcomes. This surgical approach involves various procedures that alter the anatomy of the gastrointestinal tract, leading to reduced food intake and nutrient absorption. Established procedures such as sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass, adjustable gastric banding, and biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch have proven track records. In contrast, emerging options like intragastric balloons, AspireAssist devices, and endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty show promise but require further investigation. Numerous studies have highlighted the remarkable benefits of bariatric surgery, not only in weight loss but also in the resolution of obesity-related comorbidities and significant improvements in quality of life. However, successful outcomes rely on a multidisciplinary approach, encompassing preoperative evaluation, patient selection, comprehensive postoperative care, nutritional support, and psychological counseling. Regular follow-up and adherence to postsurgical recommendations are crucial for sustained weight loss and positive long-term results. As bariatric surgery continues to evolve, tailored procedures based on individual needs and ongoing research hold the potential for even more refined and effective approaches. Through this ongoing advancement, bariatric surgery is poised to offer improved patient outcomes, transforming lives for those grappling with the challenges of obesity.

Video 1.

Obesity rates have increased, and so has the need for more specific treatments. This trend has raised interest in non-surgical weight loss techniques that are novel, safe, and straightforward. Thus, the present review describes the endoscopic bariatric treatment for obesity, its most recent supporting data, the questions it raises, and its future directions. Various endoscopic bariatric therapies for weight reduction, such as intragastric balloons (IGBs), aspiration therapy (AT), small bowel endoscopy, endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty, endoluminal procedures, malabsorption endoscopic procedures, and methods of regulating gastric emptying, were explored through literature sourced from different databases. IGBs, AT, and small bowel endoscopy have short-term effects with a possibility of weight regain. Minor adverse events have occurred; however, all procedures reduce weight. Vomiting and nausea are common side effects, although serious complications have also been observed.

Obesity and diabetes are associated with increased mortality and morbidity. After failure of conservative therapy such as pharmacotherapy and lifestyle management, bariatric treatment is indicated for selected patients. Endoscopic techniques for weight reduction are well-established treatment for obese population who do not qualify for or are not willing to undergo bariatric surgery. This article is an overview of currently applied endoscopic techniques and summarized current published data.

The rising prevalence of obesity, and related morbidity and mortality, has necessitated the development of therapeutic weight loss strategies. Lifestyle modifications alone have only yielded modest benefit, and while bariatric surgery has shown significant short- and long-term results, only a minority of eligible patients end up receiving this treatment. Endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) are a rapidly evolving field, which provides a less invasive middle ground treatment option for weight loss. Here we discuss the efficacy, as well as short- and long-term outcomes with restrictive, malabsorptive/metabolic and aspiration endoscopic techniques, and their effects on metabolic parameters.

The prevalence of obesity and diabetes mellitus (DM) has been consistently increasing worldwide. Sharing powerful genetic and environmental features in their pathogenesis, obesity amplifies the impact of genetic susceptibility and environmental factors on DM. The ectopic expansion of adipose tissue and excessive accumulation of certain nutrients and metabolites sabotage the metabolic balance via insulin resistance, dysfunctional autophagy, and microbiome-gut-brain axis, further exacerbating the dysregulation of immunometabolism through low-grade systemic inflammation, leading to an accelerated loss of functional β-cells and gradual elevation of blood glucose. Given these intricate connections, most available treatments of obesity and type 2 DM (T2DM) have a mutual effect on each other. For example, anti-obesity drugs can be anti-diabetic to some extent, and some anti-diabetic medicines, in contrast, have been shown to increase body weight, such as insulin. Meanwhile, surgical procedures, especially bariatric surgery, are more effective for both obesity and T2DM. Besides guaranteeing the availability and accessibility of all the available diagnostic and therapeutic tools, more clinical and experimental investigations on the pathogenesis of these two diseases are warranted to improve the efficacy and safety of the available and newly developed treatments.

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), including advanced-stage nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), is currently the most common chronic liver disease worldwide and is projected to become the leading indication for liver transplantation (LT). However, there are no effective pharmacological therapies for NAFLD. Endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) are less invasive procedures for the treatment of obesity and its metabolic comorbidities. Several recent studies have demonstrated the beneficial effects of EBMTs on NAFLD/NASH. In this review, we summarize the major EBMTs and their mechanisms of action. We further discuss the current evidence on the efficacy and safety of EBMTs in people with NAFLD/NASH and obese cirrhotic LT candidates. The potential utility of EBMTs in reducing liver volume and perioperative complications in bariatric surgery candidates is also discussed. Moreover, we review the development of liver abscesses as a common serious adverse event in duodenal-jejunal bypass liner implantation.

The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide updated and new evidence-based recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes mellitus to clinicians, diabetes-care teams, other health care professionals and stakeholders, and individuals with diabetes and their caregivers.

The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology selected a task force of medical experts and staff who updated and assessed clinical questions and recommendations from the prior 2015 version of this guideline and conducted literature searches for relevant scientific papers published from January 1, 2015, through May 15, 2022. Selected studies from results of literature searches composed the evidence base to update 2015 recommendations as well as to develop new recommendations based on review of clinical evidence, current practice, expertise, and consensus, according to established American Association of Clinical Endocrinology protocol for guideline development.

This guideline includes 170 updated and new evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes. Recommendations are divided into four sections: (1) screening, diagnosis, glycemic targets, and glycemic monitoring; (2) comorbidities and complications, including obesity and management with lifestyle, nutrition, and bariatric surgery, hypertension, dyslipidemia, retinopathy, neuropathy, diabetic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease; (3) management of prediabetes, type 2 diabetes with antihyperglycemic pharmacotherapy and glycemic targets, type 1 diabetes with insulin therapy, hypoglycemia, hospitalized persons, and women with diabetes in pregnancy; (4) education and new topics regarding diabetes and infertility, nutritional supplements, secondary diabetes, social determinants of health, and virtual care, as well as updated recommendations on cancer risk, nonpharmacologic components of pediatric care plans, depression, education and team approach, occupational risk, role of sleep medicine, and vaccinations in persons with diabetes.

This updated clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to assist with person-centered, team-based clinical decision-making to improve the care of persons with diabetes mellitus.

To provide evidence-based recommendations regarding the diagnosis and management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) to endocrinologists, primary care clinicians, health care professionals, and other stakeholders.

The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology conducted literature searches for relevant articles published from January 1, 2010, to November 15, 2021. A task force of medical experts developed evidence-based guideline recommendations based on a review of clinical evidence, expertise, and informal consensus, according to established American Association of Clinical Endocrinology protocol for guideline development.

This guideline includes 34 evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for the diagnosis and management of persons with NAFLD and/or NASH and contains 385 citations that inform the evidence base.

NAFLD is a major public health problem that will only worsen in the future, as it is closely linked to the epidemics of obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Given this link, endocrinologists and primary care physicians are in an ideal position to identify persons at risk on to prevent the development of cirrhosis and comorbidities. While no U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved medications to treat NAFLD are currently available, management can include lifestyle changes that promote an energy deficit leading to weight loss; consideration of weight loss medications, particularly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists; and bariatric surgery, for persons who have obesity, as well as some diabetes medications, such as pioglitazone and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, for those with type 2 diabetes mellitus and NASH. Management should also promote cardiometabolic health and reduce the increased cardiovascular risk associated with this complex disease.

Endoscopic bariatric therapies (EBTs) are endoscopic procedures indicated for weight loss in the obese population. They are shown to be safe and effective for patients who do not quality for bariatric surgery. There are currently no randomized controlled studies comparing bariatric surgery with EBTs. However, EBTs are more cost effective and have fewer complications. This review will examine currently available EBTs with published data.

AspireAssist® allows aspiration of ~30% of an ingested meal through a percutaneous gastrostomy tube, reducing caloric uptake. We evaluated the acute effects of gastric aspiration on postprandial glucose tolerance, responses of gluco-regulatory and appetite-regulating hormones, appetite sensations, and food intake.

Seven AspireAssist®-treated individuals underwent two separate experimental days each involving a mixed meal test (MMT) with double-blinded aspiration and sham aspiration, respectively. Seven age and body mass index (BMI)-matched controls underwent one MMT. MMTs were followed by an ad libitum meal.

Postprandial glucose tolerance was improved during aspiration vs. sham visits (median [interquartile range] baseline-subtracted area under the curve (bsAUC) 170 [88.4;356] vs. 388 [239;456] mmol/L × min, p = 0.025). Reduced responses (bsAUCs) of C-peptide (113 [28.4;224] vs. 302 [215;433] nmol/L × min, p = 0.014), cholecystokinin (223 [59.4;402] vs. 467 [416;546] pmol/L × min, p = 0.005), glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (4.63 [1.49;9.04] vs. 15.4 [9.59;18.9] nmol/L × min, p = 0.025), and glucagon-like peptide 1 (532.8 [274.5;1,278] vs. 1,296 [746.2;1,618] pmol/L × min, p = 0.032) were observed during aspiration vs. sham visits. Responses of glucagon, gastrin, ghrelin and peptide YY, appetite sensations, and ad libitum food intake were unaffected by aspiration. Responses of plasma glucose, gut hormones, appetite sensations, and food intake were similar during sham and control visits.

Gastric aspiration improved postprandial glucose tolerance without causing compensatory increases in appetite or food intake, pointing to acute beneficial metabolic effects of aspiration therapy together with previously reported body weight-lowering effects.

To provide updated evidence on the endoscopic procedures for weight loss and to bring personal insights on the future of endobariatrics.

Intragastric balloons promote significant improvement in histologic and radiologic aspects of non-alcoholic steatohepatitis; the endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty is effective up to 5 years and seems particularly beneficial to patients with BMI≤40kg/m²; distal POSE is a promising technique but still lacks adequate clinical data; aspiration therapy triggers remarkable weight loss, but data on weight trends after removal of the device are still lacking; the satiety-inducing device, the sleeveballoon, the gastric mucosal devitalization, and the endoscopic magnetic partial jejunal diversion are promising procedures still under study and refinements. Several therapeutic options are necessary during obesity's natural history. Therefore, endobariatrics should act in harmony with lifestyle interventions, diet modification, psychological treatment, pharmacotherapy, and bariatric surgery seeking the best outcome in the long term.

▪ Obesity is reaching pandemic proportions globally, with overweight or obesity affecting at least two-thirds of Australian adults. ▪ Bariatric surgery is an effective weight loss strategy but is constrained by high resource requirements and low patient acceptance. ▪ Multiple endoscopic bariatric therapies have matured, with well established and favourable safety and efficacy profiles in multiple randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and are best used within a multidisciplinary setting as an adjuvant to lifestyle intervention. ▪ Three types of intragastric balloon are currently in use in Australia offering average total weight loss ranging from 10% to 18%, with others available internationally. ▪ Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty produces average total weight loss of 15-20% with low rates of severe complications, with RCT data anticipated in December 2021. ▪Bariatric and metabolic endoscopy is rapidly evolving, with many novel, promising therapies currently under investigation.

The prevalence of obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and metabolic syndromes is increasing globally. Minimally invasive metabobariatric (MB) endoscopic therapies are adjunct treatments that can potentially bridge the gap between surgical interventions and medical therapy. A growing number of MB techniques are becoming available, allowing for more personalized and patient-targeted treatment options for specific disease states. MB techniques are less invasive than surgery and can precisely target different parts of the gastrointestinal tract that may be responsible for the pathophysiology of obesity and metabolic syndromes such as type 2 diabetes mellitus. These alternatives should be selected on an individualized patient basis to balance the expected clinical outcomes and desired anatomical targets with the level of invasiveness and degree of acceptable risk. Each MB intervention presents great flexibility allowing for a tailored intervention and different levels of patient engagement. Patient awareness and motivation are essential to avoid therapy withdrawal and failure. Differences between MB procedures in terms of weight loss and metabolic benefit will be discussed in this review, along with the insights on clinical decision-making processes to evaluate the potential of further evolution and growth of bariatric and metabolic endoscopy.

A subcommittee of the Association for Bariatric Endoscopy, a division of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE) comprising experts in the subject area, performed this systematic review and meta-analysis. The systematic review and meta-analysis was reviewed by the ASGE Technology Committee and was ultimately submitted to the ASGE Governing Board for approval. The systematic review and meta-analysis underwent peer review by outside experts in statistics and meta-analysis before receiving final ASGE Governing Board approval. The Preservation and Incorporation of Valuable Endoscopic Innovations (PIVI) initiative is an ASGE program whose objectives are to identify important clinical questions related to endoscopy and to establish a priori diagnostic and/or therapeutic thresholds for endoscopic technologies designed to resolve these clinical questions. Once endoscopic technologies meet an established PIVI threshold, those technologies are appropriate to incorporate into clinical practice, presuming the appropriate training in that endoscopic technology has been achieved. ASGE encourages and supports the appropriate use of technologies that meet its established PIVI thresholds.

Obesity, along with its comorbidities, has become a significant public health concern worldwide. Bariatric surgery is considered the most effective treatment modality; however, only 2% of patients with obesity undergo bariatric surgery. Endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies (EBMTs) are emerging alternatives to traditional bariatric surgery for patients who are not eligible for or do not prefer surgical treatment. EBMTs are generally categorized as space-occupying, gastric restrictive, aspiration, and small bowel therapies. We aimed to review various non-balloon and non-gastroplasty devices with available clinical data and discuss the possible mechanisms of action, efficacy, and safety profile of these EMBTs.

Aspiration therapy (AT) involves endoscopic placement of a gastrostomy tube with an external device that allows patients to drain 30% of ingested calories after meals. Its efficacy for inducing weight loss has been shown. This study aimed to assess the effect of AT on obesity-related comorbidities.

A meta-analysis of studies that assessed AT outcomes was conducted through December 2018. Primary outcomes were changes in comorbidities at 1 year following AT. Secondary outcomes were the amount of weight loss at up to 4 years and pooled serious adverse events (SAEs).

Five studies with 590 patients were included. At 1 year, there were improvements in metabolic conditions: mean difference (MD) in systolic blood pressure: -7.8 (-10.7 - -4.9) mm Hg; MD in diastolic blood pressure: -5.1 (-7.0 - 3.2) mm Hg; MD in triglycerides: -15.8 (-24.0 - -7.6) mg/dL; MD in high-density lipoprotein: 3.6 (0.7-6.6) mg/dL; MD in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c): -1.3 (-1.8 - -0.8) %; MD in aspartate transaminase: -2.7 (-4.1 - -1.3) U/L; MD in alanine transaminase: -7.5 (-9.8 - -5.2) U/L. At 1 (n=218), 2 (n=125), 3 (n=46), and 4 (n=27) years, the patients experienced 17.8%, 18.3%, 19.1%, and 18.6% total weight loss (TWL), corresponding to 46.3%, 46.2%, 48.0%, and 48.7% excess weight loss (EWL) (p<0.0001 for all). Subgroup analysis of 2 randomized controlled trials (n=225) showed that AT patients lost more weight than did controls by 11.6 (6.5-16.7) %TWL and 25.6 (16.0-35.3) %EWL and experienced greater improvement in HbA1c and alanine transaminase by 1.3 (0.8-1.8) % and 9.0 (3.9-14.0) U/L. The pooled SAE rate was 4.1%.

Obesity-related comorbidities significantly improved at 1 year following AT. Additionally, a subgroup of patients who continued to use AT appeared to experience significant weight loss that persisted up to at least 4 years.

Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is an option for patients with Class I and II obesity or patients who refuse to undergo a laparoscopic bariatric surgery. The aims of this study are as follows: (1) to demonstrate a short-term outcome after primary ESG and (2) to compare the effectiveness of weight loss between Class I and Class II obesity patients.

Patients undergoing ESG at four bariatric centers in Brazil between April 1, 2017 and December 31, 2018 were prospectively enrolled in the study (BMI 30.0-39.9 kg/m²). ESG was performed using Overstitch (Apollo Endosurgery, Austin, TX). Descriptive analysis, t test, Chi-square test, and Mann-Whitney test were used to present the results.

A total of 233 patients underwent primary ESG. The mean age and BMI of the patients were 41.1 years and 34.7 kg/m², respectively. Following ESG, the mean percentage of total weight loss (TWL) was 17.1% at 6 months and 19.7% at 12 months. Percentage of excess BMI loss (EBMIL) was 47.3% at 6 months and 54.8% at 12 months after ESG. The mean EBMIL was significantly greater among patients with Class I obesity than those with Class II obesity at 6 (51.1% vs. 43.7%) and 12 months (60.2% vs. 49.2%). One patient experienced bleeding during the procedure that was managed with sclerotherapy.

Short-term results suggest that ESG is a safe and effective option for patients with Class I and II obesity.

Current bariatric surgical practice has developed from early procedures, some of which are no longer routinely performed. This review highlights how surgical practice in this area has developed over time.

This review outlines early procedures including jejuno-colic and jejuno-ileal bypass, initial experience with gastric bypass, vertical banded gastroplasty and biliopancreatic diversion with or without duodenal switch. The role laparoscopy has played in the widespread utilization of surgery for treatment of obesity will be described, as will the development of procedures which form the mainstay of current bariatric surgical practice including gastric bypass, sleeve gastrectomy and adjustable gastric banding. Endoscopic therapies for the treatment of obesity will be described. By outlining how bariatric surgical practice has developed over time, this review will help practicing surgeons understand how individual procedures have evolved and also provide insight into potential future developments in this field.

In the treatment of epidemic obesity and metabolic disorders, conservative approaches often fail to achieve the treatment goal in patients with very high BMI. To date, bariatric surgery accomplishes the most sustainable results in patients with morbid obesity. This leads to a treatment gap for lower and middle classes of obesity defined by BMI. Primary endoscopic procedures, which are less invasive than surgery, may be able to sufficiently fill this gap. Furthermore, secondary endoscopic procedures have developed into an essential addition regarding complication management of bariatric surgeries. The purpose of this review was to point out the latest developments in the field of bariatric endoscopy, including both primary and secondary procedures.

Innovative devices and their possible applications will be discussed. These include various endoscopic suturing techniques as well as newly developed implants for the upper gastrointestinal tract to counteract the obesity epidemic. The growing understanding of the pathophysiology of obesity and the role of the gastrointestinal tract allows for the development of more effective endoscopic procedures regarding obesity treatment.

Obesity is among the most common and costly chronic disorders worldwide. Estimates suggest that in the United States obesity affects one-third of adults, accounts for up to one-third of total mortality, is concentrated among lower income groups, and increasingly affects children as well as adults. A lack of effective options for long-term weight reduction magnifies the enormity of this problem; individuals who successfully complete behavioral and dietary weight-loss programs eventually regain most of the lost weight. We included evidence from basic science, clinical, and epidemiological literature to assess current knowledge regarding mechanisms underlying excess body-fat accumulation, the biological defense of excess fat mass, and the tendency for lost weight to be regained. A major area of emphasis is the science of energy homeostasis, the biological process that maintains weight stability by actively matching energy intake to energy expenditure over time. Growing evidence suggests that obesity is a disorder of the energy homeostasis system, rather than simply arising from the passive accumulation of excess weight. We need to elucidate the mechanisms underlying this "upward setting" or "resetting" of the defended level of body-fat mass, whether inherited or acquired. The ongoing study of how genetic, developmental, and environmental forces affect the energy homeostasis system will help us better understand these mechanisms and are therefore a major focus of this statement. The scientific goal is to elucidate obesity pathogenesis so as to better inform treatment, public policy, advocacy, and awareness of obesity in ways that ultimately diminish its public health and economic consequences.

Aspiration therapy is a novel, endoscopic bariatric therapy that allows patients to remove a portion of an ingested meal through a modified percutaneous gastrostomy tube, called an A-Tube. Weight loss results from both fewer calories consumed, and from modifications in lifestyle and mealtime behaviors that patients make as a result of having the device installed. The first commercially available device for aspiration therapy, the AspireAssist (Aspire Bariatrics, King of Prussia, PA), was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2016 for weight loss for greater than 6 months duration in patients with a body mass index of 35-55. Multiple studies have demonstrated the effectiveness and safety of aspiration therapy, with low rates of adverse events related to the procedure, including no reported deaths, as well as no evidence of eating disorders developed during therapy. This chapter will describe our experience with aspiration therapy. We will describe how we select appropriate candidates for aspiration therapy, how we perform the procedure including a summary of the equipment used, and how we mitigate and manage complications of the procedure. This article will highlight the effectiveness of aspiration therapy as a novel and safe approach for weight loss in patients in obesity.

Despite its recent approval by the US Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada, aspiration therapy-one of the latest weight loss treatments-remains controversial. Critics have expressed concerns that the therapy could lead to bulimia and other binge eating disorders. Meanwhile, proponents argue that the therapy is less invasive, reversible, and cheaper than bariatric surgery. Cost-effectiveness of this therapy, however, is not yet established.

We developed a Markov model to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness of aspiration therapy relative to 2 most common bariatric surgery procedures (gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy) and no treatment over a lifetime horizon. Costs were estimated from the health system's perspective using US data. Effectiveness was measured in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).

Despite being a cheaper procedure than bariatric surgery, aspiration therapy costs more than bariatric surgery in the long term because of its high maintenance costs (i.e., periodic replacement of device parts). It also yields lower QALYs than bariatric surgery because of its smaller weight loss effects. Thus, the therapy is dominated by bariatric surgery. In particular, compared with gastric bypass, it costs US$5,318 more and yields 1.31 fewer QALYs. However, aspiration therapy is cost-effective relative to no treatment with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$17,532 per QALY gained.

Given its high lifetime costs and its modest weight loss effects, aspiration therapy is not cost-effective relative to bariatric surgery. However, it is a cost-effective treatment option for patients who lack access to bariatric surgery.

The endoscopic armamentarium against obesity and metabolic syndrome is rapidly growing and improving. Novel devices have been tested and recent data either support or reject their use. We aim to discuss current data on new endoscopic procedures addressing overweight, diabetes, and metabolic syndrome.

Four-year follow-up of the aspiration therapy have shown efficacy and safety at long term. A recent consensus on intragastric balloon gathered experience from more than 40 000 procedures and standardized most steps of the treatment. The TransPyloric Shuttle has been proven effective at short term but carries high rates of adverse events. The endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty promotes similar weight loss to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy in mildly obese patien. The endoluminal magnetic partial jejunal diversion promoted good weight loss and a significant reduction in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) but most cases required laparoscopic assistance to couple the magnets. One-year follow-up demonstrated that the duodenal mucosal resurfacing carried a 1.0% reduction in HbA1c.

Innovative endoscopic procedures focused on the treatment of overweight and related diseases are available and there is growing evidence supporting their use. Nonetheless, a multidisciplinary approach is mandatory. VIDEO ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/COG/A25.

Obesity is increasing at an alarming rate and now poses a global threat to humankind. In recent years, we have seen the emergence of medical devices to combat the obesity epidemic. These therapeutic strategies are discussed in this review dividing them into gastric and duodenal therapies.

Traditionally, medical devices for obesity such as the intragastric balloon have focused on reducing gastric size, but more recently there has been a shift towards developing devices that modulate neural and hormonal responses to induce early satiety thus reducing oral intake. Medical devices for obesity treatment may have a role in those patients who are struggling to control their weight despite significant lifestyle modifications such as diet and exercise and who decline or are unfit for bariatric surgery. For the wider adoption and integration of these devices in the obesity treatment paradigm, more long-term efficacy and safety data from randomised controlled trials are required.

The AspireAssist System® (Aspire Bariatrics, Inc. King of Prussia, PA) is a new endoscopic procedure used to treat obese patients. The aim of this dedicated video is to present a case that required revision surgery due to failure of the AspireAssist System®, and to show how the cannula was removed from the abdomen, and why sleeve gastrectomy (SG) was a good option for revisional surgery in that patient. We aim to discuss technical aspects.

A 43-year-old female patient who underwent a placement in 2016. Her initial BMI (body mass index) was 38 kg/m², with a follow-up period of 26 months. A revisional surgery was performed including dissection of the previous gastric fistula and adhesiolysis from the previous AspireAssist System® placement. A complete dissection of the gastrostomy, including removal of all the system, was done. A decision was made, once the incisura angularis and the placement of a 40 Fch bougie showed that the transection could be performed. SG was done. Patients showed an uneventful postoperative course and 4 months follow-up with 45% EWL.

In case of having the device in place, the surgeon must be aware to remove intraoperatively or endoscopically, the device. Surgeons should consider endoscopic removal of the AspireAssist System® before conversion to another procedure (SG or GBP) at least 6 months of the removal. Removal of the AspireAssist System® should be performed endoscopically but direct conversion to another bariatric procedure can be considered, either to SG or GBP depending on the technical intraoperative aspects.

The AspireAssist is the first Food and Drug Administration-approved endoluminal device indicated for treatment of class II and III obesity.

We earlier reported 1-year results of the PATHWAY study. Here, we report 4-year outcomes.

United States-based, 10-center, randomized controlled trial involving 171 participants with the treatment arm receiving Aspiration Therapy (AT) plus Lifestyle Therapy and the control arm receiving Lifestyle Therapy (2:1 randomization).

AT participants were permitted to continue in the study for an additional year up to a maximum of 5 years providing they maintained at least 10% total weight loss (TWL) from baseline at each year end. For AT participants who continued the study, 5 medical monitoring visits were provided at weeks 60, 68, 76, 90, and 104 and thereafter once every 13 weeks up to week 260. Exclusion criteria were a history of eating disorder or evidence of eating disorder on a validated questionnaire. Follow-up weight, quality of life, and co-morbidities were compared with the baseline levels. In addition, rates of serious adverse event, persistent fistula, withdrawal, and A-tube replacement were reported. All analyses were performed using a per-protocol analysis.

Of the 82 AT participants who completed 1 year, 58 continued to this phase of the trial. Mean baseline body mass index of these 58 patients was 41.6 ± 4.5 kg/m². At the end of first year (at the beginning of the follow-up study), these 58 patients had a body mass index of 34.1 ± 5.4 kg/m² and had achieved an 18.3 ± 8.0% TWL. On a per protocol basis, patients experienced 14.2%, 15.3%, 16.6%, and 18.7% TWL at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years, respectively (P < .01 for all). Forty of 58 patients (69%) achieved at least 10% TWL at 4 years or at time of study withdrawal. Improvements in quality of life scores and select cardiometabolic parameters were also maintained through 4 years. There were 2 serious adverse events reported in the second through fourth years, both of which resolved with removal or replacement of the A tube. Two persistent fistulas required surgical repair, representing approximately 2% of all tube removals. There were no clinically significant metabolic or electrolytes disorders observed, nor any evidence for development of any eating disorders.

The results of this midterm study have shown that AT is a safe, effective, and durable weight loss alternative for people with class II and III obesity and who are willing to commit to using the therapy and adhere to adjustments in eating behavior.

The overall effectiveness of aspiration therapy (AT) for obesity relies on optimal aspiration timing after a meal, which can vary depending on a patient's rate of gastric emptying (GE). Our aim was to identify if baseline GE rates were associated with differences in aspiration efficiency (AE).

Subjects from an ongoing AT clinical trial were enrolled in this study. AE was calculated as the absolute gastric residual and calories aspirated at 20 and 40 min. Participants were then divided by baseline GE rate into two groups (slow vs fast). Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare AE at 20 and 40 min between the groups. Exploratory linear regression was used to assess relationship between GE and AE.

7 patients (85% female) were coenrolled in the study. Mean age and body mass index were 39.8±9.44 and 43±5, respectively. AE did not significantly differ between the 20 and 40 min time points for the group as a whole (34.3% vs 36.9%; p>0.5). However, those with fast GE aspirated more calories than those with slow GE (20 min: 200 kcal vs 72.5 kcal; 40 min: 154 kcal vs 63 kcal) (p=0.05). On linear regression, delayed GE was associated with poorer aspiration (20 min: β=-107 calories; p=0.019; R2=0.7). 4/7 patients had significant differences in residual/caloric aspiration across the two time points.

Patients undergoing AT may benefit from a GE test to optimise their AE. Paradoxically faster GE times saw better aspiration. Prospective studies are revealing a personalised approach to obesity.

Endoscopic bariatric therapies (EBTs) have been identified as a group of procedures that can bridge the treatment gap between bariatric surgical procedures and non-procedural treatments such as pharmacotherapy and lifestyle therapy. We will review the recent progress that has been made in this important area in the past several years.

Traditional intragastric balloons (IGB) that are both placed and removed endoscopically have been the fixture of IGB therapy. They have been shown to be safe and effective, when kept in place for 6 months. Newer IGBs, both currently FDA approved and those in clinical trials, have unique features. The Obalon gastric balloon system is gas filled and does not require endoscopy for placement. The Elipse balloon system that is in clinical trials neither requires endoscopy for placement nor removal. The Spatz3 balloon is in clinical trials and can be adjusted endoscopically by adding or subtracting volume to titrate balloon volume to symptoms and weight loss. In addition to IGBs, several other promising therapies have continued to evolve. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a promising gastric restriction technique that has efficacy and durability. POSE is a gastric plication technique that is available in Europe and in clinical trials in the USA. Aspiration therapy is a novel approach to weight loss that requires patient compliance but can be very effective and used long term. EBTs are an evolving effective and safe approach for patients who do not qualify for or do not want bariatric surgery. There are multiple EBTs currently FDA approved as well as prospective endoscopic therapies in clinical trials that appear promising.

The worldwide rise in the prevalence of obesity supports the need for an increased interaction between ongoing clinical research in the allied fields of gastrointestinal medicine/surgery and diabetes mellitus. There have been a number of clinically-relevant advances in diabetes, obesity, and metabolic syndrome emanating from gastroenterological research. Gastric emptying is a significant factor in the development of upper gastrointestinal symptoms. However, it is not the only mechanism whereby such symptoms occur in patients with diabetes. Disorders of intrinsic pacing are involved in the control of stomach motility in patients with gastroparesis; on the other hand, there is limited impact of glycemic control on gastric emptying in patients with established diabetic gastroparesis. Upper gastrointestinal functions related to emptying and satiations are significantly associated with weight gain in obesity. Medications used in the treatment of diabetes or metabolic syndrome, particularly those related to pancreatic hormones and incretins affect upper gastrointestinal tract function and reduce hyperglycemia and facilitate weight loss. The degree of gastric emptying delay is significantly correlated with the weight loss in response to liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 analog. Network meta-analysis shows that liraglutide is one of the two most efficacious medical treatments of obesity, the other being the combination treatment phentermine-topiramate. Interventional therapies for the joint management of obesity and diabetes mellitus include newer endoscopic procedures, which require long-term follow-up and bariatric surgical procedure for which long-term follow up shows advantages for individuals with diabetes. Newer bariatric procedures are presently undergoing clinical evaluation. On the horizon, combination therapies, in part directed at gastrointestinal functions, appear promising for these indications. Ongoing and future gastroenterological research when translated to care of individuals with diabetes mellitus should provide additional options to improve their clinical outcomes.