PURPOSE: The proposed advantages of NOTES are aimed to assess the comparison with standard procedures. Complications are a major focus of its evaluation. We initiated a prospective comparison between transvaginal hybrid appendectomy versus laparoscopic appendectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: For each, NOTES and laparoscopic appendectomy, 10 consecutive female patients participated in the study with follow-up documentation for 35 days and after 1 year. Transvaginal appendectomy was considered a non-standard medical procedure and required individual patient's consent. Pre- and postoperative gynecological examinations were performed. Questionnaire-based evaluation included issues related to quality of life in addition to objective clinical findings. The study is approved by the ethics committee of the University of Rostock. RESULTS: All women returned questionnaires for evaluation. Age and BMI are comparable. Overall procedure time was significantly shorter in laparoscopy. The only postoperative complication consisted of an intra-abdominal abscess after laparoscopic appendectomy. One patient of the NOTES group suffered from new abdominal pain 3 weeks postoperatively; a mini-laparoscopy showed a normal situation. Significant differences (p < 0.05) of the questionnaire-based comparison with advantages for the NOTES group were found in following items: reduced activity at day 1-14, postoperative pain at day 1, general health conditions at day 1-3 and quality of life at day 3. NOTES patients wished significantly earlier to be discharged and started significantly earlier with activities, but no differences existed after 4 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Transvaginal flexible appendectomy appears to be a safe procedure performed in hybrid technique. Data from the study point to shortened recovery intervals and improved quality of life.
PURPOSE: The proposed advantages of NOTES are aimed to assess the comparison with standard procedures. Complications are a major focus of its evaluation. We initiated a prospective comparison between transvaginal hybrid appendectomy versus laparoscopic appendectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: For each, NOTES and laparoscopic appendectomy, 10 consecutive female patients participated in the study with follow-up documentation for 35 days and after 1 year. Transvaginal appendectomy was considered a non-standard medical procedure and required individual patient's consent. Pre- and postoperative gynecological examinations were performed. Questionnaire-based evaluation included issues related to quality of life in addition to objective clinical findings. The study is approved by the ethics committee of the University of Rostock. RESULTS: All women returned questionnaires for evaluation. Age and BMI are comparable. Overall procedure time was significantly shorter in laparoscopy. The only postoperative complication consisted of an intra-abdominal abscess after laparoscopic appendectomy. One patient of the NOTES group suffered from new abdominal pain 3 weeks postoperatively; a mini-laparoscopy showed a normal situation. Significant differences (p < 0.05) of the questionnaire-based comparison with advantages for the NOTES group were found in following items: reduced activity at day 1-14, postoperative pain at day 1, general health conditions at day 1-3 and quality of life at day 3. NOTES patients wished significantly earlier to be discharged and started significantly earlier with activities, but no differences existed after 4 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Transvaginal flexible appendectomy appears to be a safe procedure performed in hybrid technique. Data from the study point to shortened recovery intervals and improved quality of life.
Authors: Anthony N Kalloo; Vikesh K Singh; Sanjay B Jagannath; Hideaki Niiyama; Susan L Hill; Cheryl A Vaughn; Carolyn A Magee; Sergey V Kantsevoy Journal: Gastrointest Endosc Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 9.427
Authors: Michael F McGee; Michael J Rosen; Jeffrey Marks; Raymond P Onders; Amitabh Chak; Ashley Faulx; Victor K Chen; Jeffrey Ponsky Journal: Surg Innov Date: 2006-06 Impact factor: 2.058
Authors: Kerstin S Schick; Thomas P Hüttl; Jan M Fertmann; Hans-Martin Hornung; Karl-Walter Jauch; Johannes N Hoffmann Journal: World J Surg Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 3.352