Presented by IFSO
Controversies exist when solutions are not evident or universally agreed upon. Resolution cannot always depend upon RCT's; sometimes philosophical discussions are necessary to expose our individual prejudices and decisions and subsequent policies serve the greater good. The following topics are selected for their relevance to clinical practice.The audience will be expected to participate in this discussion.
Target Audience: Bariatric/metabolic surgeons/Integrated Health professionals.
- Understand the arguments for and against using BMI as an indication for surgical intervention.
- Understand the importance of future and present endoscopic interventions in a surgical practice.
- Understand the importance of a multidisciplinary team for improved performance.
The "Bariatrics" in Bariatric Surgery is no longer relevant - Pro: Indications for surgery should not be based on BMI
Kelvin Higa, MD FASMBS
The "Bariatrics" in Bariatric Surgery is no longer relevant - Con: Indications for surgery should include BMI
Accreditation is important on the International level - Pro: Accreditation drives quality and performance
Samer Mattar, MD
Accreditation is important on the International level - Con: Accreditation is a poor surrogate for quality improvement programs
Amir A Ghaferi, MD MS
Endoscopic interventions are the future of IFSO/ASMBS -Pro: Endoscopic solutions are right around the corner and are set to overwhelm traditional laparoscopic procedures
Manoel Galvao, MD IFASMBS
Endoscopic interventions are the future of IFSO/ASMBS - Con: We've heard this before
Multidisciplinary teams - Pros: The standard of care
Multidisciplinary teams - Con: Show me the evidence!
Natan Zundel, MD