Ring-Augmented Versus Standard Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass

11 أغسطس 2026
عبدالله الحربي
Ring-Augmented Versus Standard Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass


The benefit–risk profile of prophylactic non-adjustable ring augmentation added to primary Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (ring-augmented RYGB) remains uncertain. We conducted a PRISMA 2020–reported systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of prospective randomized trials comparing ring-augmented (rRYGB) versus standard non-ring-augmented RYGB (nrRYGB) in adults. PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, and CENTRAL were searched from inception through December 2025. Five randomized trials including 920 patients from the USA, Mexico, Brazil, the Netherlands, and Egypt were included. Rings were typically placed 2–3 cm above the gastrojejunostomy, most commonly with a 6.5 cm circumference. rRYGB did not improve % excess weight loss (%EWL) at 6 months (MD 1.99, 95% CI − 1.15 to 5.13; moderate-certainty evidence) but was associated with a modest increase in %EWL at 12 months (MD 3.27, 95% CI 0.55 to 5.98; low-certainty evidence), 24 months (MD 2.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 4.86; moderate-certainty evidence), and 36 months (MD 4.10, 95% CI 1.40 to 6.79; moderate-certainty evidence). At 60 months, %EWL was not significantly different (MD 2.64, 95% CI − 3.18 to 8.47; very low-certainty evidence); however, this estimate was based on only 173 patients and the prediction interval spanned − 35 to + 40% points, limiting the interpretability of the pooled result at this timepoint. Overall complications were similar (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.45; moderate-certainty evidence), but vomiting was more frequent with augmentation (RR 2.80, 95% CI 1.71 to 4.59; moderate-certainty evidence) and a preliminary signal of higher re-operation was observed (RR 1.69, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.86; moderate-certainty evidence), although trial sequential analysis indicated that the required information size had not been reached. Hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes resolution did not differ materially between groups, and overall quality of life was generally comparable; one trial reported worse GERD-HRQL at 3 years with augmentation. rRYGB yields a modest mid-term %EWL advantage up to 3 years, of about 3 to 4% points, without a clear 5-year benefit, while increasing vomiting risk and showing a preliminary signal of higher re-operation, with no evident comorbidity or overall quality-of-life advantage.

Graphical Abstract

Key Points

• Weight loss: Similar early outcomes, but rRYGB shows a modest %EWL advantage at 12–36 months, not clearly sustained by 60 months.

• Harms: Vomiting is about 3× more frequent with augmentation; a preliminary signal suggests higher reoperation versus standard RYGB, but the required information size has not been reached.

• Metabolic effects: Comorbidity resolution (diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia) and overall QoL are broadly similar between approaches.

• Clinical takeaway: Current randomized evidence does not define a validated subgroup most likely to benefit from ring augmentation; therefore, any selective use should be regarded as expert opinion rather than an evidence-based recommendation, and must be weighed against intolerance and device-related interventions.


This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution


to check access.

Similar content being viewed by others

Ring Augmentation of the Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis of 5-Year Follow-Up Results

Article Open access

30 January 2025

One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass Versus Roux‑en‑Y Gastric Bypass for Obesity: An Updated Meta‑analysis and Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Article 14 March 2025

Combined Proximal Revision and Moderate Distalization After Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass: A Retrospective Single-Center Case Series

Article 18 March 2026

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, books and news in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

Data Availability

Data is available on reasonable request.


References

  1. NCD Risk Factor Collaboration. Worldwide trends in underweight and obesity from 1990 to 2022: a pooled analysis of 3663 population-representative studies with 222 million children, adolescents, and adults. Lancet. 2024;403(10431):1027–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(23)02750-2.
  2. Article
  4. Google Scholar
  5. Aly A, Mori K. Laparoscopic Roux en Y gastric bypass in the super obese. Ann Transl Med. 2020;8(Suppl 1):S6. https://doi.org/10.21037/atm.2020.02.167.
  6. Article
  8. PubMed
  10. PubMed Central
  12. Google Scholar
  13. Noria SF, Shelby RD, Atkins KD, Nguyen NT, Gadde KM. Weight regain after bariatric surgery: scope of the problem, causes, prevention, and treatment. Curr Diab Rep. 2023;23(3):31–42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-023-01498-z.
  14. Article
  16. PubMed
  18. PubMed Central
  20. Google Scholar
  21. Ribeiro S et al. Ten-Year Weight Regain after Bariatric Surgery: Prevalence, Predictors, and Metabolic Impact., Obes. Facts, pp. 1–16, 2025, https://doi.org/10.1159/000549498
  22. Hehl SJ, et al. Gastric pouch resizing for recurrent weight gain after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass-does it have its rational? Obes Surg. 2024;34(12):4369–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-024-07581-y.
  23. Article
  25. PubMed
  27. PubMed Central
  29. Google Scholar
  30. Abu Dayyeh BK, Lautz DB, Thompson CC. Gastrojejunal stoma diameter predicts weight regain after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011;9(3):228–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cgh.2010.11.004.
  31. Article
  33. PubMed
  35. Google Scholar
  36. Maleckas A, Gudaitytė R, Petereit R, Venclauskas L, Veličkienė D. Weight regain after gastric bypass: etiology and treatment options. Gland Surg. 2016;5(6):617–24. https://doi.org/10.21037/gs.2016.12.02.
  37. Article
  39. PubMed
  41. PubMed Central
  43. Google Scholar
  44. Mahawar KK, Parikh C, Carr WRJ, Jennings N, Balupuri S, Small PK. Primary banded Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a systematic review. Obes Surg. 2014;24(10):1771–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-014-1346-3.
  45. Article
  47. PubMed
  49. Google Scholar
  50. Arceo-Olaiz R, España-Gómez MN, Montalvo-Hernández J, Velázquez-Fernández D, Pantoja JP, Herrera MF. Maximal weight loss after banded and unbanded laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2008;4(4):507–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2007.11.006.
  51. Article
  53. PubMed
  55. Google Scholar
  56. Rasera I, et al. A comparative, prospective and randomized evaluation of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with and without the Silastic ring: a 2-year follow up preliminary report on weight loss and quality of life. Obes Surg. 2016;26(4):762–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-015-1851-z.
  57. Article
  59. PubMed
  61. Google Scholar
  62. Shoar S, Khorgami Z, Brethauer SA, Aminian A. Banded versus nonbanded Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2019;15(5):688–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soard.2019.02.011.