Literature DB >> 20446249

[Comparison between transvaginal and laparoscopic cholecystectomy - a retrospective case-control study].

M Hensel1, U Schernikau, A Schmidt, G Arlt.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) appears to be established in specialised surgical centres. Potential advantages of these operating techniques include surgery without scars as well as faster and more comfortable recovery. However, to date there are no controlled studies evaluating the assumed advantages of NOTES compared with both minimally invasive and open surgery. PATIENT / 
MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this retrospective case-controlled study 47  women undergoing transvaginal cholecystectomy (TV-ChE) have been compared with 46 women undergoing conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LAP-ChE). Both groups were evaluated with regard to intraoperative respiratory and oxygenation parameters, pain intensity and need for analgesics postoperatively, rate of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), duration of stay in recovery room as well as hospital stay.
RESULTS: Demographic data of both groups were comparable to a great extent. However, in comparison with the women of TV-ChE group those of the LAP-ChE group were 5  years older on average (49 ± 15 vs. 54 ± 16  years). Even so, there were no differences in preoperative risk assessment (ASA classification) as well as intraoperative respiratory and haemodynamic parameters. Compared to the LAP-ChE group, women of TV-ChE group reported less postoperative pain (p < 0.001), less nausea or vomiting (p < 0.001) and a lower analgesic consumption in both opiates (p < 0.001) and non-opiates (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the duration of stay in recovery room was shorter in the TV-ChE group (40  minutes vs. 60  minutes, p < 0.001). Hospital stay in the TV-ChE group was 3  days on average compared to 4  days for the LAP-ChE group. The rate of general and surgical complications was lower in TV-ChE group (1 / 47) compared to the LAP-ChE group (4 / 46). In 9  women undergoing transvaginal cholecystectomy negligible vaginal bleeding was seen which stopped spontaneously in each case.
CONCLUSION: The transvaginal cholecystectomy is a safe and less invasive surgical technique. Compared to laparoscopic cholecystectomy, there seem to be some advantages such as better cosmetic results, lower need for analgesics, faster mobilisation, more comfortable recovery and shorter hospital stay. These effects should be confirmed in prospective controled studies. © Georg Thieme Verlag Stuttgart ˙ New York.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20446249     DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1247332

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Zentralbl Chir        ISSN: 0044-409X            Impact factor:   0.942


  20 in total

1.  Evaluation of the clinical and inflammatory responses in exclusively NOTES transvaginal cholecystectomy versus laparoscopic routes: an experimental study in swine.

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

2.  Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: where are we going?

Authors:  Susan H Whang; Klaus Thaler
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-09-21       Impact factor: 5.742

3.  Systematic analysis of the safety and benefits of transvaginal hybrid-NOTES cholecystectomy.

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

Review 4.  Comprehensive complication index for NOTES procedures: results from a randomized controlled trial and comparison to published NOTES complication data.

Authors:  Dietmar H Borchert; Matthias Federlein; Verena A Müller; Stefan Wagenpfeil; Robert M Eisele
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-12-25       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Less pain after transvaginal/transumbilical cholecystectomy than after the classical laparoscopic technique: short-term results of a matched-cohort study.

Authors:  Dirk Rolf Bulian; Linda Trump; Jürgen Knuth; Robert Siegel; Axel Sauerwald; Michael A Ströhlein; Markus Maria Heiss
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-08-28       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  Natural orifice transluminal endoscopy surgery: A review.

Authors:  João Moreira-Pinto; Estevão Lima; Jorge Correia-Pinto; Carla Rolanda
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2011-09-07       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Transvaginal hybrid NOTES cholecystectomy--results of a randomized clinical trial after 6 months.

Authors:  Dirk Rolf Bulian; Jurgen Knuth; Nicola Cerasani; Jonas Lange; Michael Alfred Ströhlein; Axel Sauerwald; Markus Maria Heiss
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2014-06-22       Impact factor: 3.445

8.  Current Status of Single-Site Robotic Cholecystectomy, its feasibility, economic and overall impact.

Authors:  Dinesh Vyas; Cara Weiner; Arpita K Vyas
Journal:  Am J Robot Surg       Date:  2014-06-01

9.  Long-term results of transvaginal/transumbilical versus classical laparoscopic cholecystectomy--an analysis of 88 patients.

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

10.  Postoperative pain after transvaginal cholecystectomy: single-center, double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Dietmar H Borchert; Matthias Federlein; Frauke Fritze-Büttner; Jens Burghardt; Britta Liersch-Löhn; Yüksel Atas; Verena Müller; Oskar Rückbeil; Stefan Wagenpfeil; Stefan Gräber; Klaus Gellert
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-01-24       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.