Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28842761›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2018

Inflammatory response and peritoneal contamination after transrectal natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) versus mini-laparotomy: a porcine in vivo study.

Jonas D Senft, Tilman Dröscher, Philip Gath, Philip C Müller, Adrian Billeter, Beat P Müller-Stich, Georg R Linke

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05740267 (Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery for Colorectal Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
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.

NCT05740267 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery for Colorectal Cancer (NOSE for CRC)

TypeinterventionalSponsorChang Gung Memorial HospitalRan2023 to 2025Enrolled318ConditionsColorectal CancerArmsNatural Orifice Specimen Extraction
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Robotic natural orifice specimen extraction surgery I-type F methodWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jonas D SenftDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Tilman DröscherDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Philip GathDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Philip C MüllerDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Adrian BilleterDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Beat P Müller-StichDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
Georg R LinkeDepartment of General, Visceral and Transplant Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. georg.linke@spitalstsag.ch.
Heidelberg University · DESpital STS · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTransrectal natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) avoids abdominal organ retrieval during laparoscopic procedures and may reduce surgical trauma. However, this has not been proven clinically and transrectal peritoneal contamination is feared to cause infectious complications. This experimental study was designed to evaluate inflammatory response and peritoneal contamination after transrectal NOSE versus mini-laparotomy.

methods24 German Landrace pigs underwent transrectal NOSE (N = 12) or mini-laparotomy (N = 12) for standardized extraction of water-instilled balloon. Blood samples were taken for analysis of leucocytes, CRP, IL-6, IL-10, and TNFα at 6, 12, 24, 48, 72 h as well as 7 and 14 days postoperatively. After 14 days laparoscopy was performed to inspect the abdomen and for microbiological swab sampling.

resultsLeucocytes were higher in the NOSE group at 72 h (19.3 ± 3.9/nl vs. 15.8 ± 4.2/nl, p = 0.046). IL-6 was lower in the NOSE group at day 7 (165 ± 100/nl vs. 306 ± 70/nl, p = 0.030). No difference was found comparing inflammatory parameters at all other time points. No difference was found regarding peritoneal contamination, which was 58.3% (7/12) in the NOSE group and 41.7% (5/12) in the MiniLap group (p = 0.414).

conclusionsThe results suggest a pronounced acute inflammatory response after transrectal NOSE compared to mini-laparotomy, while late cytokine response seems to be less after transrectal NOSE, which may reflect less intense wound healing process. Using standardized rectal decontamination and endolumenal colon occlusion transrectal NOSE seems to be safe and comparable to mini-laparotomy with regard to peritoneal contamination. Clinical evidence is needed now to weight transrectal NOSE against mini-laparotomy during laparoscopic surgery.

Indexed as

AnimalsInflammationLaparotomyNatural Orifice Endoscopic SurgeryPeritoneumPostoperative ComplicationsRectumSwineEndoscopyNatural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE)Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES)TransanalTransrectal

Identifiers

PMID28842761
OpenAlexW2746321084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.