The Evolution in the Management of Postbariatric Hypoglycemia: A Review and Comparison between International Guidelines from 2017 to 2024

Abstract

Postbariatric hypoglycemia (PBH) is an established complication of bariatric surgery, encountered especially after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). The sole manifestation is postprandial hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia, which often takes place within the immediate 1 to 3 years postsurgery. Over the last decade, the knowledge of the PBH has robustly improved, and the management has evolved following a better understanding of its pathophysiology, advancements in diagnostic options, and the dynamic placement of therapeutic options. This review compares the three major available clinical consensus/guidelines published in 2017, 2022, and 2024, from different societies, respectively. Our report highlights the dramatic unfolding in diagnostic tools, dietary and pharmacological management, and, when needed, surgical interventions. This evolution of the guidelines reflects a consensus trend toward individualized, case-driven decision and management. Lately, the introduction of personalized dietary modification, adopting the approach of continuous glucose monitoring-assisted management response, and the advancement of pasireotide to be the second-line pharmacotherapy after the classical Acarbose were the highlights of the latest guidelines in 2024. This report will help understand and simplify the dynamic science in the relatively new field of PBH.

 

MissingLinkText

Keywords

bariatric surgery - dumping syndrome - guidelines - hypoglycemia - obesity - PBH - postbariatric

Introduction

Bariatric surgery or metabolic surgery has been increasingly accepted and accomplished as a very effective long-term treatment for morbid obesity or obesity with various related comorbidities, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, and fatty liver disease.[1] [2] Among the bariatric procedures, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) has particularly shown robust outcomes, with a benefit scale from improvement to complete resolution of the metabolic-related comorbidities. However, being a major surgery, it has also been associated with absorptive and metabolic consequences, notably vitamin or mineral malabsorption and postbariatric hypoglycemia (PBH).[3] PBH is characterized by an exaggerated insulin response to carbohydrate intake, leading to postprandial hypoglycemia.[4] [5] Over the past decade, several guidelines have been published to guide health care providers to properly manage PBH, with the latest updates presented in the years 2017,[6] 2022,[7] and 2024.[8] The first consensus was released from the American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) in 2017 but not updated afterward. The consensus statement in 2022 was released by the Obesity Group of the Spanish Society of Endocrinology and Nutrition, and the latest guideline is from the Society of Endocrinology in 2024. These guidelines have evolved based on the advancement in understanding PBH's pathophysiology, the limitations of previously used dynamic testing like oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and mixed meal tolerance test (MMTT) as diagnostic tools, and more emerging data for various therapeutic interventions. This review aims to provide an in-depth comparison of the latest three international guidelines on the management of PBH, focusing on the key differences and the evidence supporting these recommendations. By examining the trajectory of PBH management, we highlight the critical importance of individualized care, the use of advanced glucose monitoring technologies, and targeted pharmacological therapies as the latest updates on PBH management.

In this document, we shall refer to the 2017, 2022, and 2024 guidelines.

 

MissingLinkText

Pathophysiological Insights into Postbariatric Hypoglycemia

The pathophysiology of PBH involves a complex interplay of factors that remain incompletely understood.[4] [5] A key contributor is the anatomical restructuring of the gastrointestinal tract, which accelerates nutrient absorption and triggers an exaggerated release of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), a potent insulinotropic hormone.[9] This response often leads to excessive insulin secretion and subsequent hypoglycemia, typically occurring 1 to 3 hours after eating.[5] [10] RYGB surgery introduces further metabolic changes through bypassing the pylorus and proximal small intestine, leading to heightened glycemic variability characterized by rapid glucose spikes and profound troughs. One prevailing hypothesis suggests that some individuals exhibit an amplified incretin and insulin response, resulting in hypoglycemia from insulin “overshooting.”[11] The support for this idea comes from the efficacy of GLP-1 receptor antagonists, such as exendin 9-39, in mitigating hypoglycemic episodes in PBH patients.[12]

Additionally, non-insulin-dependent glucose disposal, insulin sensitivity modulation, inflammatory cytokines, and inadequate counterregulatory mechanisms are thought to exacerbate PBH. Furthermore, RYGB appears to modify β-cell and α-cell responses, with studies showing enhanced postprandial glucagon secretion alongside reduced glucagon release during hypoglycemia, potentially contributing to recurrent episodes of hypoglycemia and diminished hypoglycemia awareness.[13]

Other proposed mechanisms include impaired suppression of basal insulin secretion during hypoglycemia, excessive insulin release after meals, dysregulated glucagon secretion by α-cells, and altered bile acid (BA) dynamics, which may lead to elevated fibroblast growth factor-19 (FGF-19) levels and influence glucose metabolism.[14] [15] The role of BAs in this process is particularly intriguing, given their impact on glucose metabolism through mechanisms such as farnesoid X receptor activation and G protein-coupled bile acid receptor-mediated GLP-1 secretion.[15]

Having a larger B-cell mass after weight loss, excessive GLP-1 receptor expression in the pancreas, and greater sensitivity of the pancreatic B cells have been denied in the 2022 guidelines since there was no robust evidence supporting those phenomena.[7] The latest guidelines of 2024 have proposed only the hormonal (GLP-1) and the BA hypothesis for the pathophysiology of PBH.[8] A comparison of the three guidelines' explanations of pathophysiology is illustrated in [Table 1].

Table 1 Key differences in diagnostic recommendations across guidelines

Aspect	2017	2022	2024
Definition	Whipple's triad in 1–3 hours post-meal	Whipple's triad in 1–3 hours post-meal	Whipple's triad in 2–4 hours post-meal
Blood glucose cutoff	- No solid cutoff (<60 or <50 mg/dL) spontaneously or after provocation tests - <50 is more reliable after provocation	- <60 mg/dL after provocation test  Or - <50 mg/dL spontaneously	- <54 mg/dL (serum is preferrable)
Pathophysiology	- Rapid nutrients passage - Exaggerated GLP-1 response to nutrients - Impaired glucagon response - To hypoglycemia - Enhanced sensitivity of B cells to GLP-1 - Hyperplasia of B cells - Improvement in insulin sensitivity after weight loss	- Rapid nutrients passage - Exaggerated GLP-1 response to nutrients - Impaired glucagon response - Altered bile acid metabolism and function	- Exaggerated GLP-1 response to nutrients - Impaired B-cells response to hypoglycemia (continues insulin release despite hypoglycemia) - Impaired bile acid metabolism and function
Provocation test	- MMT is needed - Consider CGM for 3 days - Avoid OGTT	- MMTT is highly needed (positive if BG dropped <60 mg/dL) - In case of BG <50 mg/dL, insulin >3–5 mIU/L, and C-peptide >0.6 ng/mL confirms diagnosis - CGM is not very reliable - Avoid OGTT	- Pragmatic approach (Whipple's triad, 1 hour after meal, postbariatric) - CGM is promising (needs further data) - Avoid MMT (not standardized) - Avoid OGTT (not reproducible)
Use of CGM	- Useful (use for 3 days)	Supplementary tool	It is recommended to use as a tool to alter the dietary behavior

Abbreviations: CGM, continuous glucose monitoring; GLP-1, glucagon-like peptide-1; MMTT, mixed meal tolerance test; OGTT, oral glucose tolerance test.

 

MissingLinkText

Prevalence and Diagnostic Considerations

The precise prevalence of PBH remains unclear, largely due to inconsistent diagnostic criteria and the use of different reference ranges across all the studies. Differentiating early dumping syndrome from PBH, which is often referred to as late dumping syndrome, is crucial in patients presenting with adrenergic symptoms following bariatric surgery. Early dumping syndrome manifests through a combination of gastrointestinal symptoms such as abdominal discomfort, bloating, nausea, diarrhea, along with vasomotor responses like fatigue, flushing, palpitations, tachycardia, hypotension, and syncope, notably without hypoglycemia. These reactions are attributed to the rapid entry of hyperosmolar food into the small intestine, prompting fluid shifts, intestinal swelling, reduced vascular volume, and activation of the autonomic and enteroendocrine systems. However, the boundary between early and late dumping syndromes is not always well-defined, with evidence suggesting that both conditions may coexist and share underlying mechanisms.[16]

The diagnostic approach to PBH has significantly evolved over the years. To enhance diagnostic accuracy in distinguishing PBH from other conditions, a more stringent definition of hypoglycemia is recommended for postbariatric patients. This includes neuroglycopenic symptoms such as altered behavior, confusion, cognitive dysfunction, seizures, or unconsciousness accompanied by plasma glucose levels below 54 mg/dL, with symptoms promptly resolving upon glucose administration.[17]

While this approach effectively identified cases of hypoglycemia, for some cases, the yield is limited in capturing the dynamic nature of postprandial glucose fluctuations that characterize PBH or, in the presence of hypoglycemia, unawareness.

Hypoglycemia provocation tests were addressed in the 2017 guidelines, and the authors stated that the OGTT showed a significant proportion of false-positive cases.[18] Therefore, it was less favored as a provocative test for PBH. The MMTT (a meal containing carbohydrates, proteins, and fats that better simulates typical food to provoke hypoglycemia) has been suggested as the primary diagnostic tool.[19] The MMTT is considered positive for PBH when the blood glucose is <55 mg/dL, and the detectable insulin level is more than 3 μU/mL. On a larger scale, the 2017 guidelines consider the PBH when the symptoms appear after at least 1 year from surgery, normal fasting glucose and insulin levels, symptomatic hypoglycemia that resolved spontaneously, and a positive provocation test. In 2022, the guidelines focused on the MMTT and considered it to be the preferred diagnostic tool as the evidence supported a better detection of PBH by providing a more physiological simulation and tending to capture postprandial glucose excursions more accurately.[7] In the latest guidelines of 2024, for the first time, it has been proposed to diagnose PBH pragmatically with the presence of Whipple's triad, >1 hour after a meal, and history of bypass surgery. They recommended against the provocation tests.[8]

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) is a helpful tool with variable data on accuracy, sensitivity, and cost-effectiveness.[20] This technology facilitates the timely and frequent correlation of symptoms with the hypoglycemic episodes, as well as the relation to different additional variables like physical activity and meal timing, offering a broader view of a patient's glycemic patterns than intermittent glucose testing or the MMTT.[21] Studies have shown that CGM can detect hypoglycemia that might go unnoticed with traditional testing methods, making it a possible diagnostic tool in a subset of patients with hypoglycemia unawareness.[22] [23] Any CGM could be used (e.g., Dexcom sensor system or Medtronic's Guardian system) or the intermittent scanning system (Abbott FreeStyle Libre sensor). The latest guidelines do not currently recommend CGM for diagnosing PBH due to several limitations, including insufficient accuracy of CGM devices in the hypoglycemic range.[8] There is a lack of clarity on the expected glycemic response following bariatric surgery; potential oversensitivity of CGM, detecting asymptomatic interstitial hypoglycemia postsurgery with unclear clinical relevance[24]; incidental detection of hypoglycemia <3.9 mmol/L (70 mg/dL) in healthy individuals; and absence of standardized metrics for PBH identification via CGM.[25] Further research is needed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and cost-effectiveness of CGM for PBH.

Dietary Management: From General Recommendations to Personalized Nutrition

Dietary modifications have always been the fundamental tool for managing PBH; the vast majority of patients may respond to it with no pharmacological intervention. In the 2017 guidelines, the primary recommendation was to have a small, frequent meal rich in complex carbohydrates and proteins to slow down the rapid absorption. This will prevent large postprandial glycemic spikes, which are believed to trigger the exaggerated insulin response leading to hypoglycemia. The 2022 guidelines elaborated on a more nuanced nutritional approach, recommending low glycemic index (GI) diets emphasizing the consumption of complex carbohydrates and high protein foods, which will avoid the postprandial glucose spike and, consequently, the hyperglycemia pathway. More specifically, ingestion of soluble fibers, like guar gum and pectin, was also recommended to slow glucose absorption and prevent postprandial hypoglycemia.[26] [27] [28]

Further emphasis on the timelines for food intake, frequency, and content was clearly elaborated in these guidelines, summarized in [Table 2]. In 2024, dietary recommendations emphasized more precisely and in-depth on dietary modification, reflecting the increased use of CGM to monitor individual patient responses to different types of foods.[8] The 2024 guidelines focused on more specific carbohydrate and protein targets ([Table 2]).[29] Moreover, it introduced the concept of CGM-assisted individualized dietary intervention, where the personalization of dietary intervention tackles the various biological variations between patients.[21]

Table 2 Key differences in dietary management recommendations across guidelines

Aspect	2017	2022	2024
Broad guidance	- Rich in complex carbs	- Low GI carbs, high protein, soluble fibers	- <30 g carbs/meal, CGM-guided
Meal's timings	- Not mentioned	- Small meals, five to six times/day	- Small frequent meals: six per day
Eating patterns	- Small, frequent meals - Rich in complex carbs	- Slow chewing, rest after meal - No liquids 30 minutes pre- or post-meals	- Slow chewing - No liquids 30 minutes pre- or post-meals
Carbs contents	–	- Complex carbs and whole grains - 15–30 g/meal - 5–15 g/snack - Avoid carbs in snacks	- Personalization - CGM for personalization - Complex carbs and whole grains - Avoid sugar and simple carbs - Technology (Applications)
Proteins contents	–	- 60–80 g/day	- 60 g/day
Healthy fat contents	–	- 15 g/meal - 5 g/snack	–
Other recommendations	–	–	- Avoid alcohol, avoid water 30 minutes before and after a meal, fast-acting CHO after exercise

Abbreviations: CGM, continuous glucose monitoring; GI, glycemic index; CHO, Carbohydrates.

 

MissingLinkText

 

MissingLinkText

Pharmacological Interventions

Pharmacological interventions have been the most dynamic area of research and evidence development over the last decade. That would be attributed to a better understanding of the pathophysiology. In the 2017 guidelines, Acarbose, an α-glucosidase inhibitor, was classically recommended as the first-line pharmacological therapy for PBH.[6] Acarbose delays the absorption of carbohydrates in the small intestine, thereby minimizing the postprandial glucose surge and the subsequent insulin response and hypoglycemia.[30] The 2022 guidelines expanded the pharmacological options, retaining Acarbose as the first-line therapy and stressing other therapies, such as somatostatin analogs, adding pasireotide, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, and insulin receptor modulators as potential therapeutic options.[31] [32] [33] [34] [35] Similar to the earlier guidelines, these therapies were recommended for patients with suboptimal responses to dietary modifications and Acarbose.[36] [37] By 2024, pharmacological therapies had become even more targeted, with pasireotide, a long-acting somatostatin analog, recommended as a second-line therapy for patients unresponsive to Acarbose.[8] Somatostatin analogs include octreotide, lanreotide, and pasireotide.[38] These analogs vary in somatostatin receptors (SRs) affinity: Octreotide and lanreotide preferentially target SR subtype 2, whereas pasireotide activates both SR subtypes 2 and 5. Pasireotide's heightened hyperglycemic effect stems from its stronger SR subtype 5 activation compared with subtype 2. While both pasireotide and octreotide suppress insulin release, pasireotide is less effective at suppressing glucagon, as insulin inhibition involves both subtypes, whereas glucagon inhibition depends primarily on subtype 2.[36]

Diazoxide, an adenosine-triphosphate-dependent potassium channel agonist, has also been recommended, in addition to calcium channel blockers and somatostatin analogs.[37] Avexitide, a pioneering GLP-1 receptor antagonist, has received FDA Breakthrough Therapy designation. It has demonstrated robust statistical efficacy and a consistent, well-tolerated safety profile across multiple clinical trials.[39] GLP-1 receptor antagonists were also suggested as a potential treatment in current guidelines, although these are still under phase II trials ([Table 3]).[40] The 2024 guidelines also emphasized using CGM to guide the patients in behavioral and dietary modifications as the first-line step to tailor their carbohydrate intake based on real-time glucose data.[41] Other new modalities like glucagon, glucagon pumps, and insulin receptor modulators are currently in trials.[42] However, the highlight was having the pasireotide recommended as the second-line therapy for Acarbose use. This approach represents a significant and dynamic advancement in PBH pharmacological management.

Table 3 Key differences in pharmacological management recommendations across guidelines

Aspect	2017	2022	2024
Pharmacological management	Acarbose first-line, GLP-1 antagonist	- Acarbose, then Ca-channel blockers - Then octreotide LAR or lanreotide - Keep paseriotide or diazoxide for refractory cases	- Acarbose, pasireotide, diazoxide - Future options include (AVEXITIDE) Glucagon pump, Xoma 358 (insulin receptor modulator), IL-1β blocker
Surgical management	- Gastrostomy tube - Gastric outlet restriction - Conversion of RYGB to SG - Pancreatectomy	- Transoral outlet reduction endoscopy - Gastrostomy tube - Conversion of RYGB to SG	Gastrostomy tube in remnant stomach

Abbreviations: CGM, continuous glucose monitoring; GLP-1, glucagon-like peptide-1; IL-1, interleukin-1; LAR, long-acting release; RYGB, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; SG, sleeve gastrectomy.

 

MissingLinkText

Surgical Management

Surgical interventions for PBH have classically been reserved for the most severe cases, where dietary and pharmacological therapies have failed to provide adequate control.

The 2017 guidelines recommended reversal of RYGB or, perhaps, partial pancreatectomy for patients with refractory PBH. However, these procedures carried significant risks, including weight regain and long-term morbidity, and were therefore considered last-resort options.[43] The 2021 guidelines made few changes to the surgical recommendations, continuing to endorse RYGB reversal and pancreatectomy in extreme cases.[44] However, the lack of long-term data on these procedures' efficacy and safety limited their widespread use.[45] [46] By 2024, the guidelines introduced a less invasive surgical option, such as gastrostomy tube placement in the remnant stomach, allowing for controlled feeding into the remnant stomach, bypassing the hyperactive jejunal response to food that characterizes PBH.[47] Gastrostomy tube placement may offer a less invasive approach than RYGB reversal or pancreatectomy, providing symptomatic relief without requiring complete surgical reversal.[48] Studies have shown that gastrostomy tube placement can effectively reduce the frequency and severity of hypoglycemic episodes in patients with refractory PBH.[48]

 

MissingLinkText

Summary of the Evolution of the Guidelines

The management of PBH has been evolving over the past decade following the progressive advancements in our understanding of PBH's pathophysiology and the tools available for its diagnosis and treatment. From early reliance on dietary modifications and intermittent glucose testing, the field has shifted toward individualized, technology-driven care, with CGM playing an important role in the early identification of hypoglycemia, response to nutrition adjustment, and subsequent adherence to those behavioral modifications by response monitoring.

Though there is no approved pharmacological therapy yet, the role of interventions have expanded to include therapeutic options, targeting the hormonal mechanisms of PBH, particularly SR blockade and GLP-1 antagonist. In contrast, surgical interventions have become less favored in clinical practice and are reserved for highly refractory cases.

 

MissingLinkText

 

MissingLinkText

Conflict of Interest

None declared.

Authors' Contributions

E.A. conceptualized the idea and wrote the initial body of the document. F.R. and B.M. wrote the rest of the document. All authors reviewed the document and complied with ethics principles.

• References

• 1 Buchwald H, Estok R, Fahrbach K. et al. Weight and type 2 diabetes after bariatric surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Med 2009; 122 (03) 248-256.e5
• 2 Sjöström L. Review of the key results from the Swedish Obese Subjects (SOS) trial - a prospective controlled intervention study of bariatric surgery. J Intern Med 2013; 273 (03) 219-234
• 3 Salehi M, Vella A, McLaughlin T, Patti ME. Hypoglycemia after gastric bypass surgery: current concepts and controversies. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2018; 103 (08) 2815-2826
• 4 Service GJ, Thompson GB, Service FJ, Andrews JC, Collazo-Clavell ML, Lloyd RV. Hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia with nesidioblastosis after gastric-bypass surgery. N Engl J Med 2005; 353 (03) 249-254
• 5 Lee CJ, Brown TT, Cheskin LJ. et al. Effects of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass vs. gastric banding on glucose and β-cell function in obese adults with type 2 diabetes. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2012; 20 (06) 1290-1296
• 6 Eisenberg D, Azagury DE, Ghiassi S, Grover BT, Kim JJ. ASMBS position statement on postprandial hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia after bariatric surgery. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2017; 13 (03) 371-378
• 7 Vilarrasa N, Bretón I, Ballesteros-Pomar M. et al; GOSEEN (Grupo de Obesidad de la Sociedad Española de Endocrinología y Nutrición). Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of hypoglycaemia after bariatric surgery. Endocrinol Diabetes Nutr (Engl Ed) 2022; 69 (09) 723-731
• 8 Hazlehurst J, Khoo B, Lobato CB. et al. Society for Endocrinology guidelines for the diagnosis and management of post-bariatric hypoglycaemia. Endocr Connect 2024; 13 (05) e230285
• 9 Patti ME, Goldfine AB. Hypoglycemia after gastric bypass: the dark side of GLP-1. Gastroenterology 2014; 146 (03) 605-608
• 10 Goldfine AB, Mun EC, Devine E. et al. Patients with neuroglycopenia after gastric bypass surgery have exaggerated incretin and insulin secretory responses to a mixed meal. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2007; 92 (12) 4678-4685
• 11 Salehi M, Woods SC, D'Alessio DA. Gastric bypass alters both glucose-dependent and glucose-independent regulation of islet hormone secretion. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2015; 23 (10) 2046-2052
• 12 Salehi M, Gastaldelli A, D'Alessio DA. Blockade of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor corrects postprandial hypoglycemia after gastric bypass. Gastroenterology 2014; 146 (03) 669-680.e2
• 13 Lobato CB, Pereira SS, Guimarães M. et al. A potential role for endogenous glucagon in preventing post- bariatric hypoglycemia. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 2020; 11: 608248
• 14 van den Broek M, de Heide LJM, Sips FLP. et al. Altered bile acid kinetics contribute to postprandial hypoglycaemia after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery. Int J Obes (Lond) 2021; 45 (03) 619-630
• 15 Mulla CM, Goldfine AB, Dreyfuss JM. et al. Plasma FGF-19 levels are increased in patients with post-bariatric hypoglycemia. Obes Surg 2019; 29 (07) 2092-2099
• 16 van Furth AM, de Heide LJM, Emous M, Veeger N, van Beek AP. Dumping syndrome and postbariatric hypoglycemia: Supporting evidence for a common etiology. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2021; 17 (11) 1912-1918
• 17 Cryer PE, Axelrod L, Grossman AB. et al; Endocrine Society. Evaluation and management of adult hypoglycemic disorders: an Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2009; 94 (03) 709-728
• 18 Andrade HF, Pedrosa W, Diniz MdeF, Passos VM. Adverse effects during the oral glucose tolerance test in post-bariatric surgery patients. Arch Endocrinol Metab 2016; 60 (04) 307-313
• 19 Kössler T, Bobrov P, Strassburger K. et al; GDS Group. Impact of mixed meal tolerance test composition on measures of beta-cell function in type 2 diabetes. Nutr Metab (Lond) 2021; 18 (01) 47
• 20 Rodríguez Flores M, Cruz Soto RC, Vázquez Velázquez V, Soriano Cortés RR, Aguilar Salinas C, García García E. Continuous glucose monitoring in the management of patients after gastric bypass. Endocrinol Diabetes Metab Case Rep 2019; 2019 (01) 1-6
• 21 Cummings C, Jiang A, Sheehan A. et al. Continuous glucose monitoring in patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia reduces hypoglycaemia and glycaemic variability. Diabetes Obes Metab 2023; 25 (08) 2191-2202
• 22 Lindner N, Kuwabara A, Holt T. Non-invasive and minimally invasive glucose monitoring devices: a systematic review and meta-analysis on diagnostic accuracy of hypoglycaemia detection. Syst Rev 2021; 10 (01) 145
• 23 Kefurt R, Langer FB, Schindler K, Shakeri-Leidenmühler S, Ludvik B, Prager G. Hypoglycemia after Roux-En-Y gastric bypass: detection rates of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) versus mixed meal test. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2015; 11 (03) 564-569
• 24 Lupoli R, Lembo E, Rainone C. et al. Rate of post-bariatric hypoglycemia using continuous glucose monitoring: A meta-analysis of literature studies. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2022; 32 (01) 32-39
• 25 Lobato CB, Pereira SS, Guimarães M. et al. Use of flash glucose monitoring for post-bariatric hypoglycaemia diagnosis and management. Sci Rep 2020; 10 (01) 11061
• 26 Jenkins DJ, Gassull MA, Leeds AR. et al. Effect of dietary fiber on complications of gastric surgery: prevention of postprandial hypoglycemia by pectin. Gastroenterology 1977; 73 (02) 215-217
• 27 Nguyen NQ, Debreceni TL, Burgstad CM. et al. Effects of fat and protein preloads on pouch emptying, intestinal transit, glycaemia, gut hormones, glucose absorption, blood pressure and gastrointestinal symptoms after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Obes Surg 2016; 26 (01) 77-84
• 28 Kellogg TA, Bantle JP, Leslie DB. et al. Postgastric bypass hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia syndrome: characterization and response to a modified diet. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2008; 4 (04) 492-499
• 29 Kandel D, Bojsen-Møller KN, Svane MS. et al. Mechanisms of action of a carbohydrate-reduced, high-protein diet in reducing the risk of postprandial hypoglycemia after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery. Am J Clin Nutr 2019; 110 (02) 296-304
• 30 Sivakumar T, Sivakumar S, Chaychi L, Comi RJ. A review of the use of acarbose for the treatment of post-prandial syndrome (reactive hypoglycemia). Endocrinol Metab Syndr 2012; ;(S1): 1-5
• 31 Øhrstrøm CC, Worm D, Højager A. et al. Postprandial hypoglycaemia after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and the effects of acarbose, sitagliptin, verapamil, liraglutide and pasireotide. Diabetes Obes Metab 2019; 21 (09) 2142-2151
• 32 Arts J, Caenepeel P, Bisschops R. et al. Efficacy of the long-acting repeatable formulation of the somatostatin analogue octreotide in postoperative dumping. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 7 (04) 432-437
• 33 Ferreira A, Schönenberger KA, Potoczna N. et al. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial of once daily empagliflozin 25 mg for the treatment of postprandial hypoglycemia after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Diabetes Technol Ther 2023; 25 (07) 467-475
• 34 Abrahamsson N, Engström BE, Sundbom M, Karlsson FA. GLP1 analogs as treatment of postprandial hypoglycemia following gastric bypass surgery: a potential new indication?. Eur J Endocrinol 2013; 169 (06) 885-889
• 35 Johnson KW, Gordon A, Neale AC. et al. Single administration of XOMA 358, an insulin receptor attenuator, improves post-meal and nighttime hypoglycemia profiles in post-gastric bypass hypoglycemia (PGBH) patients. Paper presented at: 99th Annual Meeting of the Endocrine Society, ENDO 2017, Orlando, FL: Endocrine Society; 2017
• 36 Øhrstrøm CC, Hansen DL, Kielgast UL, Hartmann B, Holst JJ, Worm D. A low dose of pasireotide prevents hypoglycemia in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass-operated individuals. Obes Surg 2020; 30 (04) 1605-1610
• 37 Gonzalez-Gonzalez A, Delgado M, Fraga-Fuentes MD. Use of diazoxide in management of severe postprandial hypoglycemia in patient after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2013; 9 (01) e18-e19
• 38 Tack J, Aberle J, Arts J. et al. Safety and efficacy of pasireotide in dumping syndrome-results from a phase 2, multicentre study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2018; 47 (12) 1661-1672
• 39 Tan M, Lamendola C, Luong R, McLaughlin T, Craig C. Safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of repeat subcutaneous dosing of avexitide (exendin 9-39) for treatment of post-bariatric hypoglycaemia. Diabetes Obes Metab 2020; 22 (08) 1406-1416
• 40 Craig CM, Liu LF, Nguyen T, Price C, Bingham J, McLaughlin TL. Efficacy and pharmacokinetics of subcutaneous exendin (9-39) in patients with post-bariatric hypoglycaemia. Diabetes Obes Metab 2018; 20 (02) 352-361
• 41 Ritz P, Vaurs C, Bertrand M, Anduze Y, Guillaume E, Hanaire H. Usefulness of acarbose and dietary modifications to limit glycemic variability following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring. Diabetes Technol Ther 2012; 14 (08) 736-740
• 42 Mulla CM, Zavitsanou S, Laguna Sanz AJ. et al. A randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind trial of a closed-loop glucagon system for postbariatric hypoglycemia. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2020; 105 (04) e1260-e1271
• 43 Dapri G, Cadière GB, Himpens J. Laparoscopic reconversion of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass to original anatomy: technique and preliminary outcomes. Obes Surg 2011; 21 (08) 1289-1295
• 44 Ma P, Ghiassi S, Lloyd A. et al. Reversal of Roux en Y gastric bypass: largest single institution experience. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2019; 15 (08) 1311-1316
• 45 Mala T. Postprandial hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia after gastric bypass surgical treatment. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2014; 10 (06) 1220-1225
• 46 Tsai C, Steffen R, Kessler U, Merki H, Zehetner J. Endoscopic gastrojejunal revisions following gastric bypass: lessons learned in more than 100 consecutive patients. J Gastrointest Surg 2019; 23 (01) 58-66
• 47 Davis DB, Khoraki J, Ziemelis M, Sirinvaravong S, Han JY, Campos GM. Roux en Y gastric bypass hypoglycemia resolves with gastric feeding or reversal: Confirming a non-pancreatic etiology. Mol Metab 2018; 9: 15-27
• 48 Zanley E, Shah ND, Craig C, Lau JN, Rivas H, McLaughlin T. Guidelines for gastrostomy tube placement and enteral nutrition in patients with severe, refractory hypoglycemia after gastric bypass. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2021; 17 (02) 456-465

Publication History

Article published online:
27 May 2025