3.8 Article

Evaluation for transvaginal and transgastric NOTES cholecystectomy in human and animal natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery

Journal

JOURNAL OF HEPATO-BILIARY-PANCREATIC SURGERY
Volume 16, Issue 3, Pages 255-260

Publisher

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s00534-009-0090-x

Keywords

Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES); Laparoscopic cholecystectomy; Minimally invasive surgery (MIS); Hybrid method; Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG)

Funding

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science
  2. Japanese Foundation for Research and Promotion of Endoscopy
  3. Teikyo University Tomoko Fujii

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is a novel concept using an endoscope via a translumenal access for abdominal surgery. This study was designed to evaluate the feasibility and technical aspects of NOTES cholecystectomy from our experience on humans and animals. NOTES cholecystectomies were performed in 12 animal experiments, including 8 pigs (6 by transgastric and 2 by transvaginal accesses) and 4 dogs (4 transvaginal accesses), and a human female cadaver. The entire gallbladder could be removed under direct vision in all experiments. The average time was 60 min by transgastric and 40 min by transvaginal in animals. It was 87 min for human transvaginal cholecystectomy. In all animal and human procedures, there was no major complication concerning the operation. The transvaginal route may be the easiest route for abdominal NOTES. Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) allowed the safe performance of a controlled gastric perforation and shortened the time. The hybrid method allowed performance of a safe procedure and shortened the time. Transvaginal and transgastric NOTES cholecystectomy is technically feasible and safe in both humans and animals. New instrumentation needs to be developed to perform a pure NOTES cholecystectomy without transabdominal assistance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available