Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Bariatric Surgery

Current evidence and future perspectives on magnet-assisted bariatric surgery (MABS): a systematic review

International Journal of Obesity (2025)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Background

Magnet-assisted bariatric surgery (MABS) represents a novel advancement in minimally invasive surgical techniques. It addresses challenges associated with obesity-related anatomical complexities, such as hepatomegaly and fatty liver disease, by enhancing surgical exposure and site visualization.

Objectives

This systematic review aimed to: (1) compare the efficacy of MABS and conventional bariatric surgery for weight loss and postoperative outcomes; (2) assess their safety profiles; and (3) evaluate perioperative recovery, hospital stay, and patient-reported outcomes like quality of life and satisfaction.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Web of science, Google scholar and Cochrane databases. Data were extracted and synthesized to provide quantitative assessment of MABS’s performance.

Results

A total of 12 articles comprising 1305 participants were included. The findings confirmed MABS’s feasibility and safety, with significant advantages across varying BMI ranges. Notable benefits included improved surgical exposure, shorter or comparable operative times, reduced postoperative pain, shorter hospital stays, low complication rates and no procedure-related mortality.

Conclusion

MABS demonstrated strong potential as an innovative tool in minimally invasive bariatric surgery, offering significant benefits for both patients and surgical teams. Its ability to address obesity-related challenges and enhance surgical outcomes supports its continued use and refinement. Future research should focus on stratified analyses, long-term outcomes, and economic evaluations to establish standardized criteria for patient selection and expand its applicability to other minimally invasive procedures.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on SpringerLink
  • Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Das S, Debnath M, Das S, Sarkar S, Rumana AS. Association of overweight and obesity with hypertension, diabetes and comorbidity among adults in Bangladesh: evidence from nationwide Demographic and Health Survey 2017–2018 data. BMJ Open. 2022;12:e052822.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Alterki A, Abu-Farha M, Al Shawaf E, Al-Mulla F, Abubaker J. Investigating the Relationship between Obstructive Sleep Apnoea, Inflammation and Cardio-Metabolic Diseases. Int J Mol Sci. 2023;24:6807.

  3. World Health Organization (WHO). Obesity and overweight. World Health Organization; 2025. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/obesity-and-overweight.

  4. Courcoulas AP, Daigle CR, Arterburn DE. Long term outcomes of metabolic/bariatric surgery in adults. BMJ. 2023;383:e071027.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Davis M, Davalos G, Ortega C, Chen S, Schimpke S, Jain-Spangler K, et al. Magnetic Liver Retraction: an Incision-Less Approach for Less Invasive Bariatric Surgery. Obes Surg. 2019;29:1068–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cadière G-B, Poras M, Maréchal M-T, Pau L, Muteganya R, Gossum MV, et al. Sleeve gastrectomy with duodenoileal bipartition using linear magnets: feasibility and safety at 1-year follow-up. J Gastrointest Surg. 2024;28:640–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gagner M, Abuladze D, Koiava L, Buchwald JN, Van Sante N, Krinke T. First-in-Human Side-to-Side Magnetic Compression Duodeno-ileostomy with the Magnet Anastomosis System. Obes Surg. 2023;33:2282–92.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg. 2003;73:712–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. FDA. De novo classification request for levita magnetic surgical system. FDA; 2015. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/reviews/DEN150007.pdf.

  10. Haskins IN, Strong AT, Allemang MT, Bencsath KP, Rodriguez JH, Kroh MD. Magnetic surgery: first U.S. experience with a novel device. Surg Endosc. 2018;32:895–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. C J. Medical-Grade Magnets for Implantable and Wearable Devices: Design, Safety, and Applications. Magnetstek. https://magnetstek.com/medical-grade-magnets-for-implantable-and-wearable-devices-design-safety-and-applications/#:~:text=,the%20lifespan%20of%20the%20device.

  12. Luengas R, Galindo J, Castro M, Marambio A, Watkins G, Rodriguez del Rey M, et al. First prospective clinical trial of reduced incision bariatric procedures using magnetic liver retraction. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2021;17:147–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Borjas G, Sánchez N, Urdaneta A, Maldonado A, Ramos E, Ferrigni C, et al. Magnetic device in reduced port and single port bariatric surgery: First 170 cases experience. Cir Esp. 2022;100:614–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Borjas G, Sánchez N, Urdaneta A, Maldonado A, Ramos E. Magnetic-Assisted Reduced-Port Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: a Comparative Study. Obes Surg. 2023;33:2261–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Romero-Velez G, Robles I, Jiménez J, Cabrera C, Luengas R, Portenier D, et al. Robotic Magnetic Surgery: Results From the First Prospective Clinical Trial. Ann Surg Open. 2022;3:e225.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Borjas G, Urdaneta A, Ramos E, Maldonado A. Magnetic liver retraction in bariatric surgery: Is it possible?. Cir Esp. 2024;102:331–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gagner M, Almutlaq L, Cadiere G-B, Torres AJ, Sanchez-Pernaute A, Buchwald JN, et al. Side-to-side magnetic duodeno-ileostomy in adults with severe obesity with or without type 2 diabetes: early outcomes with prior or concurrent sleeve gastrectomy. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2024;20:341–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Gagner M, Fried M, Michalsky D, Dolezalova K, Sramkova P, Brezina J, et al. First-in-Human Linear Magnetic Jejuno-Ileal Bipartition: Preliminary Results with Incisionless, Sutureless, Swallowable Technique. Obes Surg. 2025;35:2067–80.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Gagner M, Almutlaq L, Gnanhoue G, Buchwald JN. First-in-human side-to-side linear magnetic compression gastroileostomy: feasibility and early outcomes in adults with obesity. J Gastrointest Surg. 2025;29:102067.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Bhandari M, Neto MG, Brunaldi VO, Bhandari M, Mathor W, Reddy M, et al. Immediately-Patent Magnetic Duodeno-Ileal Anastomosis (IMPA-DI): The First-in-Human Study. Obes Surg. 2025;35:2053–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Liu R, Guo Y, Yin G, Tuo H, Zhu Y, Yang W, et al. Magnetic anchoring device assisted-laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus conventional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: A retrospective cohort study. Heliyon. 2024;10:e26875.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Welsh LK, Davalos G, Diaz R, Narvaez A, Perez JE, Castro M, et al. Magnetic Liver Retraction Decreases Postoperative Pain and Length of Stay in Bariatric Surgery Compared to Nathanson Device. J Laparoendoscopic Adv Surg Tech. 2021;31:194–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hiramatsu K, Aoba T, Kamiya T, Mohri K, Kato T. Novel use of the Nathanson liver retractor to prevent postoperative transient liver dysfunction during laparoscopic gastrectomy. Asian J Endosc Surg. 2020;13:293–300.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Romero-Velez G, Portenier D, Roberts J, Oviedo RJ, Rodriguez-Navarro A, Kroh MD. Magnetic-assisted surgery: the road from laparoscopy to robotics. Mini Invasive Surg. 2022;6:56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Nigicser I, Oldfield M, Haidegger T. Magnetic Anchoring Considerations for Retractors Supporting Manual and Robot-Assisted Minimally Invasive Surgery. Machines. 2022;10:745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Bernier GV, Sanchez JE. Surgical simulation: the value of individualization. Surg Endosc. 2016;30:3191–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tian B, Zhang M, Ren Y, Zhang Y, Lyu Y, Yan X. Clinical application of magnetic anchor technique in laparoscopic cholecystectomy: the first retrospective study in China. Front Surg. 2024;10:1335805.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Fulla J, Small A, Kaplan-Marans E, Palese M. Magnetic-Assisted Robotic and Laparoscopic Renal Surgery: Initial Clinical Experience with the Levita Magnetic Surgical System. J Endourol. 2020;34:1242–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Diaz R, Davalos G, Welsh LK, Portenier D, Guerron AD. Use of magnets in gastrointestinal surgery. Surg Endosc. 2019;33:1721–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to all the authors who supported and contributed to this research.

Funding

Zhiyong Dong was supported by “Guangzhou Science and Technology Plan Project (2024A03J1037)”. The funding bodies had no role in the study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, the writing of the manuscript and the decision to submit the paper for publication. The corresponding authors had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.

Author information

Author notes

  1. These authors contributed equally: Yuhan Chen, Dong Shiliang, Yang Liu.

  2. These authors jointly supervised this work: Wenhui Chen, Zhiyong Dong.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Jinan University, Guangzhou, China

    Yuhan Chen, Dong Shiliang, Yang Liu, Wenhui Chen & Zhiyong Dong

  2. Xiangyang Central Hospital affiliated to Hubei University of Arts and Sciences, Xiangyang, China

    Xiaodie Zhou

  3. Department of General Surgery II, The Affiliated Hospital of Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming, Yunnan, China

    Bian Wu

  4. Department of General Surgery, Dalang Hospital, Dongguan, Guangdong Province, China

    Xiaoguan Zhang

Authors
  1. Yuhan Chen
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dong Shiliang
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yang Liu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Xiaodie Zhou
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Bian Wu
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Xiaoguan Zhang
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Wenhui Chen
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Zhiyong Dong
    View author publications

    Search author on:PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

YC, SD, and YL conceptualized the study and drafted the initial manuscript. XZ, BW, and XZ were responsible for literature search and synthesis of findings. WC and ZD reviewed the results, and revised the initial draft. All authors critically reviewed and approved the final submitted version. WC and ZD are the guarantors of the work. The corresponding author confirms that all listed authors meet authorship criteria and that no others meeting the criteria have been omitted.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Zhiyong Dong.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, Y., Shiliang, D., Liu, Y. et al. Current evidence and future perspectives on magnet-assisted bariatric surgery (MABS): a systematic review. Int J Obes (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-025-01966-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Version of record:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41366-025-01966-4

Search

Advanced search

Quick links