ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2022
V-NOTES hysterectomy under spinal anaesthesia: A pilot study.
Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2022. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Spinal anaesthesia has not been widely adopted for laparoscopic surgeries until now. There are a few studies that have shown that spinal anaesthesia is at least as safe as general anaesthesia. The need for additional analgesics can be reduced by utilising early postoperative analgesic effects of spinal anaesthesia, and maximum benefit can be obtained from minimally invasive approaches when V-NOTES surgery is performed under spinal anaesthesia. Objective: Combining V-NOTES with spinal anaesthesia to improve minimally invasive surgical techniques and provide maximum benefit to patients. Materials and Methods: Patients who were found to have benign pelvic organ pathologies, required a hysterectomy and were considered suitable for V-NOTES hysterectomy under spinal anaesthesia were included in this study. Spinal anaesthesia was achieved with 12.5 mg 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine in the sitting position. Perioperative events and complications related to spinal anaesthesia were noted. Postoperatively, the pain was evaluated using a visual analogue scale at the 6th, 12th, and 24th hours. Main outcome measures: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of spinal anaesthesia in VNOTES hysterectomy and to increase the advantages of minimally invasive surgical procedures. Results: No conversion to conventional laparoscopy or laparotomy was required in all six operated patients. Conversion from spinal anaesthesia to general anaesthesia was unnecessary, and no major perioperative incident occurred in any of the cases. Conclusion: In the current study by our team, we demonstrated that V-NOTES hysterectomy could be performed safely under spinal anaesthesia in well-selected patients. The need for additional analgesics can be reduced by utilising early postoperative analgesic effects of spinal anaesthesia, and maximum benefit can be obtained from minimally invasive approaches when VNOTES surgery is performed under spinal anaesthesia. What is new?: V-NOTES hysterectomy could be performed safely under spinal anaesthesia in well-selected patients.
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.