ArticleSurgical endoscopy2016
Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES): emerging trends and specifications for a virtual simulator.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Validation of NOViSE.Surgical innovation · 2017Article
- Graphic and haptic simulation for transvaginal cholecystectomy training in NOTES.Journal of biomedical informatics · 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND STUDY
aimA virtual translumenal endoscopic surgical trainer (VTEST) is being developed to accelerate the development of natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) procedures and devices in a safe and risk-free environment. For a rapidly developing field such as NOTES, a needs analysis must be conducted regularly to discover emerging research trends and areas of potential high impact for a virtual simulator. This paper presents a survey-based study which follows a similar study conducted by this group in 2011 (Sankaranarayanan et al. in Surg Endosc 27:1607-1616, 2013).
methodsA 32-point questionnaire was distributed at the 2012 Natural Orifice Surgery Consortium for Assessment and Research annual meeting. These data were subsequently augmented by an identical online survey, targeted at the members of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons, and analyzed.
resultsTwenty-eight NOTES experts participated in the 2012 study. Cholecystectomy (CE) procedure remained the most commonly performed NOTES technique, with 18 positive responses (64%). In contrast to 2011, the popularity of the NOTES appendectomy (AE) was significantly lower, with only 2 (7%) instances (CE vs. AE, p < 0.001), while the number of peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM, PE) cases had increased significantly, with 11 (39%) positive responses, respectively (PE vs. AE, p = 0.013). Strong preference toward hybrid rather than pure NOTES techniques (82 vs. 11%, p < 0.001) was also expressed. Other responses were similar to those in the 2011 study, with the VTEST™ utility in developing and testing new techniques and instruments ranked particularly high.
conclusionBased on the results of this study, a decision was made to focus exclusively on the transvaginal hybrid NOTES cholecystectomy procedure, including both rigid and flexible scope techniques. The importance of developing a virtual NOTES simulator was reaffirmed, with POEM identified as a promising candidate for future simulator development.
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.