Transvaginal hybrid-NOTES vs. traditional laparoscopic sigmoid resection for diverticulitis: a short-term comparative study

Transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery in simple nephrectomy

Introduction

Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES), particularly transvaginal NOSES, is an innovative approach in laparoscopic urological surgery. This study aims to assess the feasibility, safety, and outcomes of transvaginal NOSES in women undergoing laparoscopic simple nephrectomy in an Indian cohort.

Methods

A prospective observational study was conducted from September 2022 to May 2024 in the department of urology, including 15 women with prior vaginal deliveries undergoing simple nephrectomy. Exclusion criteria were vaginal scarring, previous pelvic surgeries, active intravaginal infections, cervical neoplasia, unresolved pelvic inflammation, and patient refusal. Parameters assessed included operative time, specimen extraction time, blood loss, postoperative recovery metrics, Female Sexual Function Index, and Pelvic Floor Impact Questionnaire scores at the baseline and at 3 months.

Results

The mean age of the patients was 45.73 years. The average operative time, including the specimen extraction was 127.8 min and the average extraction time was 30.13 min. None required conversion to open surgery, and the average blood loss was 68.0 mL with no intraoperative transfusions. The postoperative recovery was rapid, with milestones achieved within 1 day, and the average hospital stay was 2.2 days. Pain scores were low (Visual Analog Scale: 2.87 at 24 h and 1.47 at 48 h). The complication rate was 6.67%, with one case of vaginal bleeding which was managed conservatively. Postoperative pelvic floor and sexual functions were preserved without significant adverse effects.

Conclusion

Transvaginal NOSES is a feasible and safe technique for nephrectomy, offering reduced postoperative pain, minimal blood loss, and rapid recovery, enhancing surgical outcomes and patient satisfaction.

The vaginal route for minimally invasive surgery: a practical guide for general surgeons

INTRODUCTION

Vaginal approaches have become routine in the field of gynecologic surgery, whereas in general surgery vaginal wall transection is an infrequent practice typically reserved for extensive tumor resections. Approximately two decades ago, natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) revolutionized conventional boundaries by accessing the peritoneal cavity transorally, transrectally, or transvaginally, enabling general surgery without visible scars. Although transvaginal approaches have been successfully used for various abdominal procedures by general surgeons, a gap remains in comprehensive training to fully exploit the potential of this route.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus databases were searched to retrieve relevant articles illustrating how general surgeons can adeptly manage vaginal approaches.

RESULTS

The article presents a practical framework for general surgeons to execute a complete vaginal approach, addressing the management of vaginal specimen extraction and vaginal cuff closure, even in the absence of an experienced gynecologist.

CONCLUSION

The evolution of abdominal surgery is moving towards less invasive techniques, emphasizing the importance of understanding the nuances and challenges associated with the vaginal route. This approach is linked to minimal oncological, sexual, and infective complications, and to the absence of pregnancy-related complications. Such knowledge becomes increasingly crucial, particularly with the renewed demand for transvaginal access in robot-assisted NOTES procedures.

Feasibility and safety of hybrid transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for colon cancer: Protocol for a multicenter, single-arm, phase II trial (vNOTESCA)

INTRODUCTION

It has been a decade since the first patient with colon cancer underwent colectomy by hybrid transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (hvNOTES). However, the efficacy and safety of this procedure is not well established.

METHODS

This study is an open-label, multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 trial undertaken at six centers in China. Female patients aged over 18 years and below 80 years old with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, with pathologically proven, resectable, cT1-3N0-2M0 disease who have previously untreated colon cancer are eligible for inclusion. The primary endpoint is a composite of major intraoperative and postoperative complications (greater than grade III, the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE], version 5.0). Secondary endpoints include conversion to laparoscopic or open surgery, postoperative concentration of C-Reactive Protein and procalcitonine, complete pathological assessment of complete mesocolic excision specimens, postoperative pain, amount of narcotic pain medication administered, time to first flatus after surgery, number of harvested lymph nodes, R0 resection rate, length of hospital stay, sexual function assessment, quality of recovery, satisfaction with surgical scars, quality of life, postoperative recurrence patterns, relapse-free survival, and overall survival.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, China, number: WDRY2022-K053. All patients will receive written information of the trial and provide informed consent before enrollment. The results of this trial will be disseminated in academic conferences and peer-reviewed medical journals.Trial registration number NCT04048421.

Transvaginal versus transabdominal specimen extraction surgery for right colon cancer: A propensity matching study

Background

The transvaginal route for specimen extraction is considered ideal for colorectal surgery, but its safety is still questioned. There has been little research on transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) in the right hemicolectomy. As a result, we conducted a study comparing transvaginal NOSES to traditional transabdominal specimen extraction surgery.

Patients and methods

Data on female patients who underwent radical right hemicolectomy at the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University between January 2015 and December 2020 were collected retrospectively. A total of 847 patients were compliant, with 51 undergoing the transvaginal specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) group and 796 undergoing the transabdominal specimen extraction surgery (TISES) group. A propensity score matching method (1:2) was used to balance the clinicopathological characteristics of the two groups.

Results

Finally, 138 patients were enrolled in our study, with 46 in the NOSES group and 92 in the TISES group. Compared to the TISES group, the NOSES group had less intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.036), shorter time to first flatus (p < 0.001), shorter time to first liquid diet (p < 0.001), lower postoperative white blood cell counts (p = 0.026), lower C-reactive protein levels (p = 0.027), and lower visual analog scale (VAS) scores (p < 0.001). Regarding the quality of life after surgery, the NOSES group had better role function (p < 0.01), emotional function (p < 0.001), and improved symptoms of postoperative pain (p < 0.001) and diarrhea (p = 0.024). The scar satisfaction was significantly higher in the NOSES group than in the TISES group. Overall survival and disease-free survival in two groups were similar.

Conclusion

The short-term results of transvaginal NOSES were superior to conventional transabdominal specimen extraction surgery. At the same time, transvaginal NOSES could improve the abdominal wall appearance and quality of life. The long-term survival was similar in the two surgical approaches. Therefore, transvaginal NOSES is worthy of our implementation and promotion.

Technical feasibility and perioperative outcome of laparoscopic resection rectopexy with natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) and intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA)

Purpose

Laparoscopic rectosigmoid resection rectopexy (LRR) is the most effective treatment of obstructive defecation syndrome but is associated with a higher postoperative morbidity compared to transanal approaches. Natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) has been described as a promising technique to lower morbidity in colorectal cancer surgery. In this study, we analyze the technical challenges of adapting this technique to LRR and compare the perioperative results to the conventional laparoscopic technique with specimen extraction via minilaparotomy and extracorporeal anastomosis.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 45 patients who underwent laparoscopic rectosigmoid resection rectopexy due to obstructive defecation syndrome at our institutions. From September 2020 to July 2021, we treated 17 consecutive patients with NOSE-LRR and compared the results to a historic cohort of 28 consecutive patients treated with conventional laparoscopic rectosigmoid resection rectopexy plus minilaparotomy (LAP-LRR) for specimen extraction between January 2019 and July 2020. Assessed were patient- and disease-specific parameters, operative time, hospital and postoperative complications and subjective patient satisfaction after 6 months of follow-up.

Results

Both groups were comparable in terms of gender distribution, age, and comorbidities. The median operating time was similar and the perioperative morbidity was comparable in both groups. The length of stay in hospital was significantly shorter in the NOSE-LRR group (median 6 vs 8 days).

Conclusion

NOSE-LRR can be implemented safely, performed in a comparable operating time, and is associated with a comparable rate of postoperative complications. The technique offers the a potentially fast postoperative recovery compared to the conventional laparoscopic technique.