ArticleSurgical endoscopy2013
Transrectal peritoneal access with the submucosal tunnel technique in NOTES: a porcine survival study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- New device for transrectal trocar placement and rectal sealing for NOTES: a porcine in vivo and human cadaver study.Surgical endoscopy · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNatural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) procedures have been performed via transgastric, transvaginal, or transcolonic approaches. However, the transcolonic approach has potential disadvantages including intraperitoneal infection. To avoid such disadvantages, we applied the submucosal tunnel technique to transrectal peritoneal access in this study. Study aims are to clarify the technical feasibility of a submucosal tunnel method for transrectal abdominal access and to assess the healing process of the submucosal tunnel histopathologically.
methodsThe study comprised six female pigs. The following procedures were performed: (1) The mucosa was cut after injection of sodium hyaluronate into the submucosa at the upper rectum. (2) Submucosal tunneling was performed by endoscopic submucosal dissection technique. (3) A small incision was made at the end of the tunnel. (4) After transrectal peritoneoscopy, the mucosal incision site was closed with endoclips.
resultsTransrectal peritoneoscopy was successfully performed in all pigs. Necropsy revealed no findings of peritonitis. Histopathologic examination showed good healing of the submucosal tunnel. The wound healing process of the submucosal tunnel on postoperative day 7 was mainly in the inflammatory phase at the mucosal incision site, the proliferative phase at the submucosal tract, and the proliferative/remodeling phase at the seromuscular incision site.
conclusionsThe submucosal tunnel technique appears to be useful and safe for transrectal peritoneal access because healing at the seromuscular incision site proceeded rapidly.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.