PURPOSE: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is a novel technique that aims at reducing or abolishing skin incisions and potentially also postoperative pain. The purpose of this study was to analyse operative and long-term results of a series of hybrid transvaginal cholecystectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between July 2007 and May 2009, transvaginal NOTES cholecystectomy for symptomatic cholelithiasis was performed by a hybrid technique in 18 women (mean age 54 years), including four women with a body mass index >30 kg/m(2). Dissection was conducted in the first four cases by a round-tip unipolar electrode (UE) introduced through the operative channel of the endoscope coming from the vagina and in the last 14 cases by a ultrasonic scalpel (US) introduced through a 5-mm abdominal port. The short-term outcomes and the long-term results of the two methods were compared. RESULTS: The transvaginal approach entailed no intraoperative complication and no conversion. The overall mean duration of procedures was 75 min (range 40-190). In the first four cases (UE), the operating time was 148 min (range 140-190), whilst in the last 14 (US), it was considerably shorter, 53 min (range 40-60, p < 0.01). We experienced one biliary leak in the UE group, whilst morbidity with US was nil (p < 0.005). The biliary leak healed in 7 days with nasobiliary drainage. No other complications were encountered in either group. The mean follow-up was 12 months (range 1-22), and none of the patients has complained of dyspareunia or other colpotomy-related complications so far. CONCLUSIONS: Until specifically designed endoscopic tools are available for NOTES, the hybrid technique with US dissection conducted through a 5-mm port should be preferred in transvaginal cholecystectomy in order to shorten the duration of surgery and make this approach effective, safe and reproducible. After a mean follow-up of 1 year, none of our patients has complained of any problem related to transvaginal approach.
PURPOSE: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is a novel technique that aims at reducing or abolishing skin incisions and potentially also postoperative pain. The purpose of this study was to analyse operative and long-term results of a series of hybrid transvaginal cholecystectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between July 2007 and May 2009, transvaginal NOTES cholecystectomy for symptomatic cholelithiasis was performed by a hybrid technique in 18 women (mean age 54 years), including four women with a body mass index >30 kg/m(2). Dissection was conducted in the first four cases by a round-tip unipolar electrode (UE) introduced through the operative channel of the endoscope coming from the vagina and in the last 14 cases by a ultrasonic scalpel (US) introduced through a 5-mm abdominal port. The short-term outcomes and the long-term results of the two methods were compared. RESULTS: The transvaginal approach entailed no intraoperative complication and no conversion. The overall mean duration of procedures was 75 min (range 40-190). In the first four cases (UE), the operating time was 148 min (range 140-190), whilst in the last 14 (US), it was considerably shorter, 53 min (range 40-60, p < 0.01). We experienced one biliary leak in the UE group, whilst morbidity with US was nil (p < 0.005). The biliary leak healed in 7 days with nasobiliary drainage. No other complications were encountered in either group. The mean follow-up was 12 months (range 1-22), and none of the patients has complained of dyspareunia or other colpotomy-related complications so far. CONCLUSIONS: Until specifically designed endoscopic tools are available for NOTES, the hybrid technique with US dissection conducted through a 5-mm port should be preferred in transvaginal cholecystectomy in order to shorten the duration of surgery and make this approach effective, safe and reproducible. After a mean follow-up of 1 year, none of our patients has complained of any problem related to transvaginal approach.
Authors: Estevao Lima; Carla Rolanda; José M Pêgo; Tiago Henriques-Coelho; David Silva; José L Carvalho; Jorge Correia-Pinto Journal: J Urol Date: 2006-08 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: S V Kantsevoy; B Hu; S B Jagannath; C A Vaughn; D M Beitler; S S C Chung; P B Cotton; C J Gostout; R H Hawes; P J Pasricha; C A Magee; L J Pipitone; M A Talamini; A N Kalloo Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2006-01-21 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Josiel P Vieira; Marcelo M Linhares; Elesiário M Caetano; Rita M A Moura; Vitor Asseituno; Rogério Fuzyi; Manoel J B Girão; José M Ruano; Alberto Goldenberg; Gaspar de Jesus L Filho; Délcio Matos Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2012-06-23 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Dirk R Bulian; Jurgen Knuth; Kai S Lehmann; Axel Sauerwald; Markus M Heiss Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2015-10-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Edward D Auyang; Byron F Santos; Daniel H Enter; Eric S Hungness; Nathaniel J Soper Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2011-05-07 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Ross S Coomber; Mikael H Sodergren; James Clark; Julian Teare; Guang-Zhong Yang; Ara Darzi Journal: World J Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2012-03-16
Authors: Dirk R Bulian; Linda Trump; Jürgen Knuth; Nicola Cerasani; Markus M Heiss Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2013-03-01 Impact factor: 3.445