Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23519494›Full record

ReviewSurgical endoscopy2013

The EURO-NOTES clinical registry for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: a 2-year activity report.

Alberto Arezzo, Carsten Zornig, Hamid Mofid, Karl-Hermann Fuchs, Wolfram Breithaupt, José Noguera, Georg Kaehler, Richard Magdeburg, Silvana Perretta, Bernard Dallemagne and 12 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Surgical endoscopy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. [Transvaginal cholecystectomy: results of a randomized study].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2014
    Trial
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Advances in gastrointestinal surgical endoscopy.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Emerging Techniques in Minimally Invasive Surgery. Pros and Cons.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2015
    Review
  19. Article
  20. [Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in Germany: Data from the German NOTES registry].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2015
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors.

Alberto ArezzoDepartment of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Corso Dogliotti 14, 10126 Turin, Italy. alberto.arezzo@unito.it
Carsten Zornig
Hamid Mofid
Karl-Hermann Fuchs
Wolfram Breithaupt
José Noguera
Georg Kaehler
Richard Magdeburg
Silvana Perretta
Bernard Dallemagne
Jacques Marescaux
Catalin Copaescu
Florin Graur
Andrei Szasz
Antonello Forgione
Raffaele Pugliese
Gerhard Buess
Hemanga K Bhattacharjee
Giuseppe Navarra
Mario Godina
Kirill Shishin
Mario Morino

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe EURO-NOTES Clinical Registry (ECR) was established as a European database to allow the monitoring and safe introduction of Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES). The aim of this study was to analyze different techniques applied and relative results during the first 2 years of the ECR.

methodsThe ECR was designed as a voluntary database with online access. All members of the European Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery were requested to participate in the registry. Demographic and therapy data as well as data on the postoperative course are recorded in the ECR in an anonymous way.

resultsA total of 533 patients who underwent NOTES procedures were included in the study. Four different hybrid techniques for 435 cholecystectomies were described, registering postoperative complications in 2.8% of patients, addition of a single trocar in 5.3%, and conversions to laparoscopy in 0.5%. Both flexible endoscopic and rigid laparoscopic cholecystectomy techniques proved to be safe and effective with minor differences. There was a shorter operative time in the rigid laparoscopic group. Thirty-three appendectomies were reported by transgastric and transvaginal techniques, with transvaginal techniques scoring shorter operative time and hospital stay, but with a frequent need to add more trocars. Overall complications occurred in 14.7% of patients but they did not differ significantly among the different techniques. One transvaginal and 31 transanal sigmoidectomies were included for prolapse and diverticulitis, with four postoperative complications (12.5%), but none needing further treatment. Twenty peroral esophageal myotomies were included with three postoperative complications (15.0%), but none needing further treatment.

conclusionsFive years since the introduction of NOTES into clinical practice, hybrid techniques have gained considerable clinical application. Several NOTES hybrid cholecystectomy and appendectomy techniques are practicable and safe alternatives to laparoscopic procedures. Also, sigmoidectomies and peroral esophageal myotomies were described, proving feasibility and safety. Nevertheless, the real benefit of NOTES for patients still needs to be assessed.

Indexed as

Outcome and Process Assessment, Health CareRegistriesEuropeHumansNatural Orifice Endoscopic Surgery

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.