| Literature DB >> 27403157 |
Tomas Hucl1, Marek Benes1, Matej Kocik2, Alla Splichalova3, Jana Maluskova4, Martin Krak5, Vera Lanska6, Marie Heczkova1, Eva Kieslichova5, Martin Oliverius2, Julius Spicak1.
Abstract
Aims. The aim of our study was to determine the physiologic impact of NOTES and to compare the transgastric and transcolonic approaches. Methods. Thirty pigs were randomized to transgastric, transcolonic, or laparoscopic peritoneoscopy. Blood was drawn and analyzed for C-reactive protein (CRP), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), interleukin- (IL-) 1β, IL-6, WBCs, and platelets. Results. Endoscopic closure with an OTSC was successful in all 20 animals. The postoperative course was uneventful in all animals. CRP values rose on day 1 in all animals and slowly declined to baseline levels on day 14 with no differences between the groups (P > 0.05, NS). The levels of TNF-α were significantly increased in the transcolonic group (P < 0.01); however this difference was already present prior to the procedure and remained unchanged. No differences were observed in IL1-β and IL-6 values. There was a temporary rise of WBC on day 1 and of platelets on day 7 in all groups (P > 0.05, NS). Conclusions. Transgastric, transcolonic, and laparoscopic peritoneoscopy resulted in similar changes in systemic inflammatory markers. Our findings do not support the assumption that NOTES is less invasive than laparoscopy.Entities:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27403157 PMCID: PMC4923531 DOI: 10.1155/2016/7320275
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gastroenterol Res Pract ISSN: 1687-6121 Impact factor: 2.260
Figure 1OTSC closure in stomach and colon at autopsy. (a) Serosal site of stomach closure. (b) Mucosal site of stomach closure. (c) Serosal site of colon closure. (d) Mucosal site of colon closure.
OTSC closure, healing, and complications of NOTES procedures.
| Transgastric ( | Transcolonic ( | |
|---|---|---|
| Mean time of closure (min) | 8.3 | 5.8 |
| Transmural healing ( | 10 | 10 |
| Adhesions, minor ( | 4 | 2 |
| Adhesions, major ( | 0 | 2 |
| Fistula ( | 0 | 0 |
| Macroscopic signs of infection ( | 0 | 0 |
| Microscopic signs of infection ( | 4 | 3 |
| Gram-positive staining ( | 4 | 3 |
Figure 2Histopathology of closure site (H&E, 50x). (a) Purulent exudate at site of closure, 10x. (b) Gram-positive staining at closure site, 20x.
Figure 3Comparison between transgastric, transcolonic, and laparoscopic peritoneoscopy in levels of (a) C-reactive protein; (b) TNF-α; (c) leukocytes; (d) platelets. Values are shown as means and vertical bars representing SEM.