INTRODUCTION: Transvaginal/transumbilical cholecystectomy using rigid instruments (TVC) is an alternative to the traditional laparoscopic technique (LC). Due to a lack of long-term data, the transvaginal approach is still controversial. METHODS: Our first 50 TVC patients and 50 LC patients from the same time period with the same limits according to age, BMI and ASA classification were asked 48 questions 2 years postoperatively (mean) about resuming sexual intercourse, the domains "satisfaction" and "pain" of the German Female Sexual Function Index, resuming everyday life, postoperative abdominal pain, subjective impairment, incisional hernias, satisfaction with the aesthetic result, the overall postoperative result, and others. Postoperative sexual satisfaction and pain were defined as main outcome. Forty-six TVC patients and 42 LC patients answered the questions (36 TVC patients and 25 LC patients could answer the questions about sexual function). RESULTS: No significant differences were found for postoperative sexual function, change in menorrhea, vaginal discharge and postoperative abdominal pain. TVC patients felt significantly less impaired postoperatively (p = 0.034). Two patients in the LC group developed a trocar hernia (p = 0.225). TVC patients could resume everyday life significantly earlier (p < 0.001) and were significantly more satisfied with the aesthetic (p < 0.001) and the overall postoperative result (p = 0.001). Significantly more TVC patients would recommend the applied surgical technique to friends and family (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This long-time prospective data acquisition from 88 or, for some data, 61 patients accounts for the safety of TVC, particularly with regard to sexual function. Additionally, it found less postoperative impairment, quicker recovery and improved satisfaction for TVC as compared to LC.
INTRODUCTION: Transvaginal/transumbilical cholecystectomy using rigid instruments (TVC) is an alternative to the traditional laparoscopic technique (LC). Due to a lack of long-term data, the transvaginal approach is still controversial. METHODS: Our first 50 TVC patients and 50 LC patients from the same time period with the same limits according to age, BMI and ASA classification were asked 48 questions 2 years postoperatively (mean) about resuming sexual intercourse, the domains "satisfaction" and "pain" of the German Female Sexual Function Index, resuming everyday life, postoperative abdominal pain, subjective impairment, incisional hernias, satisfaction with the aesthetic result, the overall postoperative result, and others. Postoperative sexual satisfaction and pain were defined as main outcome. Forty-six TVC patients and 42 LC patients answered the questions (36 TVC patients and 25 LC patients could answer the questions about sexual function). RESULTS: No significant differences were found for postoperative sexual function, change in menorrhea, vaginal discharge and postoperative abdominal pain. TVC patients felt significantly less impaired postoperatively (p = 0.034). Two patients in the LC group developed a trocar hernia (p = 0.225). TVC patients could resume everyday life significantly earlier (p < 0.001) and were significantly more satisfied with the aesthetic (p < 0.001) and the overall postoperative result (p = 0.001). Significantly more TVC patients would recommend the applied surgical technique to friends and family (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This long-time prospective data acquisition from 88 or, for some data, 61 patients accounts for the safety of TVC, particularly with regard to sexual function. Additionally, it found less postoperative impairment, quicker recovery and improved satisfaction for TVC as compared to LC.
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
Authors: G R Linke; I Tarantino; T Bruderer; J Celeiro; R Warschkow; P E Tarr; B P Müller-Stich; A Zerz Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2012-04-23 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: Carrie Y Peterson; Sonia Ramamoorthy; Barbara Andrews; Santiago Horgan; Mark Talamini; Alana Chock Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2008-12-05 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: A Cardoso Ramos; A Murakami; M Galvão Neto; M Santana Galvão; A C Souza Silva; E Gonzalo Canseco; Y Moyses Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 10.093
Authors: C Zornig; H Mofid; L Siemssen; A Emmermann; M Alm; H-A von Waldenfels; C Felixmüller Journal: Endoscopy Date: 2009-05-05 Impact factor: 10.093
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: Harry C Alexander; Cindy H Nguyen; Matthew R Moore; Adam S Bartlett; Jacqueline A Hannam; Garth H Poole; Alan F Merry Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: K S Lehmann; C Zornig; G Arlt; M Butters; D R Bulian; R Manger; J Burghardt; N Runkel; A Pürschel; J Köninger; H J Buhr Journal: Chirurg Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 0.955
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
Authors: Stephanie G Wood; Feng Dai; Susan Dabu-Bondoc; Hosni Mikhael; Nalini Vadivelu; Andrew Duffy; Kurt E Roberts Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-10-08 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Garth R Jacobsen; Juan S Barajas-Gamboa; Alisa M Coker; Joslin Cheverie; C Aitor Macias; Bryan J Sandler; Mark A Talamini; Santiago Horgan Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2013-10-23 Impact factor: 4.584