article · Obesity Surgery
BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) is a widely performed metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) procedure with proven efficacy. However, significant variability exists in its technical execution. This study aimed to evaluate global practice patterns among surgeons affiliated with the International Federation for the Surgery and Other Therapies for Obesity (IFSO), identifying key variations and factors influencing intraoperative decision-making. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was distributed between January and November 2025 to active IFSO members performing RYGB. The survey explored techniques related to the gastric pouch configuration, intestinal limb lengths, gastrojejunostomy, ring augmentation, and adjunct use. Responses from 245 surgeons across 47 countries were analyzed using descriptive statistics, subgroup comparisons, and multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Technical variability was widespread. Only 53.5% routinely measured gastric pouch length; 67.3% described their pouches as "short" or "small," with variable anatomical endpoints. Bougie sizes ranged from 28 to 46 Fr, with 36 Fr being most common (41.2%). Only 21.6% of respondents reported routinely measuring total bowel length. Ring-augmentation was used by 20.4%, with significant regional and experiential variation. Linear stapling was preferred for gastrojejunostomy (81.2%), but stoma size and suture materials varied. Routine closure of both Petersen's space and the jejunojejunal mesenteric defect was common (69%) yet non-uniform. High-volume surgeons had shorter hospital stays and longer follow-up, but technical patterns were similar. CONCLUSION: Global RYGB practice exhibits heterogeneity in several key operative steps. Improved reporting of intraoperative technical variables may help clarify which differences are most relevant to perioperative, long-term, and registry-based outcomes, and may support future consensus-building in areas where standardization is clinically justified.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.1007/s11695-026-08724-z
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
