Literature DB >> 27058950

Analysis of the First 217 Appendectomies of the German NOTES Registry.

Dirk R Bulian1, Georg Kaehler, Richard Magdeburg, Michael Butters, Jens Burghardt, Roland Albrecht, Joern Bernhardt, Markus M Heiss, Heinz J Buhr, Kai S Lehmann.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the feasibility and safety of Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES) appendectomy, and to analyze separately the transvaginal appendectomy (TVAE) and the transgastric appendectomy (TGAE) procedures.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic appendectomy has rare but relevant complications, namely incisional hernias and neuralgia at the trocar sites, which can potentially be avoided by the NOTES techniques.
METHODS: The first 217 data sets of the largest NOTES registry worldwide-the German NOTES registry-were analyzed with respect to demographic data, procedural data, and short-term outcomes. Furthermore, TVAEs were compared with TGAEs.
RESULTS: Almost all procedures were performed in hybrid technique (median of percutaneous trocars: 1). Median age (TVAE: 30.5 yrs vs TGAE: 25 yrs; P < 0.017), body mass index (TVAE: 22.8 kg/m vs TGAE: 24.1 kg/m; P < 0.016), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification (I/II/III; TVAE: 57.1%/41.8%/1.0% vs TGAE: 27.8%/69.4%/2.8%; P < 0.003) significantly differed between both access techniques. Whereas the median number of percutaneous trocars (TVAE: 1 vs TGAE: 1; P < 0.450), the need of additional trocars (TVAE: 6.6% vs TGAE: 13.9%; P < 0.156), the intra, and also postoperative rate of complications (TVAE: 0%/5.5% vs TGAE: 0%/11.1%; P < 1.000/0.258), and the median postoperative hospital stay (TVAE: 3 d vs TGAE: 3 d; P < 0.152) were comparable; the median procedural time (TVAE: 35 minutes vs TGAE: 96 minutes; P < 0.001) and conversion to laparotomy rate (TVAE: 0% vs TGAE: 5.6%; P < 0.023) were significantly less after TVAE.
CONCLUSIONS: The evaluation of the largest patient collective so far indicates that hybrid NOTES appendectomy is a safe procedure, with advantages for the transvaginal technique with respect to procedural time and conversion rate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 27058950     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001742

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  5 in total

Review 1.  [NOTES in visceral surgery : Current status].

Authors:  G Kähler
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 0.955

2.  Comparison of Inflammatory Response to Transgastric and Transcolonic NOTES.

Authors:  Tomas Hucl; Marek Benes; Matej Kocik; Alla Splichalova; Jana Maluskova; Martin Krak; Vera Lanska; Marie Heczkova; Eva Kieslichova; Martin Oliverius; Julius Spicak
Journal:  Gastroenterol Res Pract       Date:  2016-06-14       Impact factor: 2.260

Review 3.  Laparoscopic appendectomy for acute appendicitis: How to discourage surgeons using inadequate therapy.

Authors:  Tomohide Hori; Takafumi Machimoto; Yoshio Kadokawa; Toshiyuki Hata; Tatsuo Ito; Shigeru Kato; Daiki Yasukawa; Yuki Aisu; Yusuke Kimura; Maho Sasaki; Yuichi Takamatsu; Taku Kitano; Shigeo Hisamori; Tsunehiro Yoshimura
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-08-28       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 4.  Artificial intelligence in reproductive medicine.

Authors:  Renjie Wang; Wei Pan; Lei Jin; Yuehan Li; Yudi Geng; Chun Gao; Gang Chen; Hui Wang; Ding Ma; Shujie Liao
Journal:  Reproduction       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 3.906

5.  Validation of NOViSE.

Authors:  Przemyslaw Korzeniowski; Daniel C Brown; Mikael H Sodergren; Alastair Barrow; Fernando Bello
Journal:  Surg Innov       Date:  2016-09-26       Impact factor: 2.058

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.