A snare-assisted pure NOTES retrograde cholecystectomy using a single channel flexible endoscope: a pilot experiment in a porcine model

Transgastric versus transrectal: Which access route is the best for NOTES gallbladder-preserving gallstone therapy?

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and safety of transgastric and transrectal pure natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) for cholecystolithotomy.

METHODS

This was a single-center retrospective comparative study of consecutive patients who underwent pure NOTES for either transrectal or transgastric gallbladder-preserving cholecystolithotomy between September 2017 and April 2020. Patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis were assigned for transrectal or transgastric NOTES based on the patients' choice. Treatment success, postoperative pain, peritonitis, time to resume normal diet, and duration of hospitalization were compared.

RESULTS

The technical success rate was 100%. Forty-eight patients underwent successful NOTES cholecystolithotomy via the transrectal (n = 26) or transgastric route (n = 22). One (3.8%) patient in the transrectal NOTES group experienced postoperative abdominal pain compared to 6 (27.3%) in the transgastric NOTES group (P = 0.04). Fever and bile peritonitis developed in one (3.8%) patient in the transrectal NOTES group versus 8 (36.4%) in the transgastric NOTES group (P = 0.005). A postoperative fluid diet was commenced at 6 h with the transrectal approach versus on day 3 for the transgastric NOTES group. The mean postoperative hospitalization for transrectal and transgastric NOTES groups was 4.5 days versus 7 days (P = 0.001). Three patients in the transgastric NOTES group developed postoperative gastric fistula.

CONCLUSIONS

Transrectal NOTES has advantages over transgastric NOTES, including preserved spatial orientation, relatively easier removal of specimens, early food intake, shorter hospitalization, fewer postoperative complications and less pain. Multicenter clinical trials with long-term follow-up are needed to confirm the safety and efficacy of both approaches.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder endoscopic mucosal resection: a pilot porcine study

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided natural orifice transluminal gallbladder polypectomy provides a minimally invasive alternative to cholecystectomy. The study aimed to investigate the feasibility and safety of protocol for gallbladder endoscopic mucosal resection (gEMR) under EUS guidance using a porcine model.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fifteen Bama mini pigs were randomly divided into the control (CG, n = 3) and experimental (EG, n = 12) groups. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration was performed in the CG and used to establish a gallbladder pathway for polyp resection under EUS guidance in the EG. Procedural safety was evaluated using routine blood and biochemical tests, microbial bile cultures, histopathological tests, and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for inflammatory adhesion factors.

RESULTS

EUS-guided metal stents were successfully deployed in all 12 pigs. Two cases of stent displacement occurred postoperatively, and one pig died of infectious peritonitis on the first day after stent implantation. In 11 surviving experimental animals, mature gallbladder paths were formed at 7-14 days after gastro-cholecystostomy, through which gEMR of gallbladder polyps was successfully performed. There were no significant changes in levels of inflammatory and adhesion factors during the postoperative process.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-gEMR may be a safe and effective minimally invasive treatment approach for gallbladder polyps.

Colon Sparing Endoscopic Full-Thickness Resection for Advanced Colorectal Lesions: Is It Time for Global Adoption?

The majority of colon lesions are <10 mm in size and are easily resected by endoscopists with appropriate basic training. Lesions ≥10 mm in size are difficult to remove technically and are associated with higher rates of incomplete resection. Currently, the main endoscopic approaches include endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) for lesions without submucosal invasion, and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) for relatively larger lesions involving the superficial submucosal layer. Both of these approaches have limitations, EMR cannot reliably ensure complete resection for larger tumors and recurrence is a key limitation. ESD reliably provides complete resection and an accurate pathological diagnosis but is associated with risk such as perforation or bleeding. In addition, both EMR and ESD may be ineffective in treating subepithelial lesions that extend beyond the submucosa. Endoscopic full-thickness resection (EFTR) is an emerging innovative endoscopic therapy which was developed to overcome the limitations of EMR and ESD. Advantages include enabling a transmural resection, complete resection of complex colorectal lesions involving the mucosa to the muscularis propria. Recent studies comparing EFTR with current resection techniques and radical surgery for relatively complicated and larger lesion have provided promising results. If the current trajectory of research and development is maintained, EFTR will likely to become a strong contender as an alternative standard of care for advanced colonic lesions. In the current study we aimed to address this need, and highlighted the areas of future research, while stressing the need for multinational collaboration provide the steppingstone(s) needed to bring EFTR to the mainstream.

Snare-assisted flexible endoscope in trans-gastric endoscopic gallbladder-preserving surgery: A pilot animal study

BACKGROUND

Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) gallbladder-preserving surgery by flexible endoscopy is an emerging technology. However, the gallbladder fails to obtain traction and positioning functions during the operation.

AIM

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of a new surgical method, “snare-assisted pure NOTES gallbladder-preserving surgery”.

METHODS

Eight miniature pigs were randomly divided into the experimental group [NOTES gallbladder-preserving surgery using the snare device, snare assisted (SA)] and the control group (NOTES gallbladder-preserving surgery without using the snare device, NC), with four cases in each group. The differences between the two groups of animals in operating time, operating workload, complications, adverse events, white blood cells, and liver function were determined.

RESULTS

No differences were found in the surgical success rate, gallbladder incision closure, white blood cell count, or liver function between the two groups. The total operating time, gallbladder incision blood loss, gallbladder disorientation time, gallbladder incision closure time, and workload scores on the National Aeronautics and Space Administration-Task Load Index were significantly reduced in the SA group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

These results indicated that snare-assisted pure NOTES gallbladder-preservation surgery using standard endoscopic instruments reduced the difficulty of operation, shortened operation time, and did not increase complications in pigs. A new method for pure NOTES gallbladder-preservation surgery was provided.