ArticleSurgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques2017
Feasibility and Technique for Transvaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery Liver Resection: A Porcine Model.
Article in Surgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Gasless transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for hysterectomy and salpingectomy on a robot platform with flexible devices in a porcine model.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Endoscopic trans-esophageal submucosal tunneling surgery: A new therapeutic approach for diseases located around the aorta ventralis.World journal of gastroenterology · 2019Article
- Postoperative outcomes of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery-assisted vaginal hysterectomy and conventional laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy: a comparative study.Obstetrics & gynecology science · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNatural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is a challenging minimally invasive procedure. Although laparoscopic techniques for liver resection are gaining acceptance worldwide, few studies have investigated NOTES liver resection. We used a porcine model to assess the feasibility and safety of transvaginal NOTES liver resection (TV NOTES LR). MATERIALS AND
methodsNine female pigs underwent TV NOTES LR. A nonsurvival acute porcine model with general anesthesia was used in all cases. Using hybrid NOTES technique, we placed only 1 umbilical 12-mm umbilical trocar in the abdominal wall, which was used to create pneumoperitoneum. A laparoscope was then advanced to obtain intra-abdominal visualization. A 15-mm vaginal trocar was inserted under direct laparoscopic vision, and a flexible endoscope was introduced through the vaginal trocar. A long, flexible grasper and endocavity retractor were used to stably retract the liver. The liver edge was partially transected using energy devices inserted through the umbilical trocar. To transect the left lateral lobe, a flexible linear stapler was inserted alongside the vaginal trocar. A specimen extraction bag was deployed and extracted transvaginally. Blood loss, bile leakage, operative time, and specimen size were evaluated. Necropsy studies were performed after the procedures.
resultsEighteen transvaginal NOTES partial liver resections and 4 transvaginal NOTES left lateral lobectomies were successfully performed on 9 pigs. Mean operative time was 165.8 minutes, and mean estimated blood loss was 76.6 mL. All TV NOTES LRs were performed without complications or deaths. Necropsy showed no bile leakage from remnant liver.
conclusionsOur porcine model suggests that TV NOTES LR is technically feasible and safe and has the potential for clinical use as a minimally invasive alternative to conventional laparoscopic liver resection.
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.