Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36309743›Full record

Trial reportBMC urology2022

Cosmesis and feasibility of transvaginal natural orifice Specimen extraction (NOSE) for large organ specimen: a prospective pilot study.

Woo Yeon Hwang, Dong Hoon Suh, Sangchul Lee

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05113134 (A Prospective Clinical Study of Transvaginal Versus Transabdominal Extraction of Laparoscopically-excised Specimen), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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.

NCT05113134 nacompletednot on this map

A Prospective Clinical Study of Transvaginal Versus Transabdominal Extraction of Laparoscopically-excised Specimen (STTELS)

TypeinterventionalSponsorSeoul National University Bundang HospitalRan2015 to 2020Enrolled38ConditionsColorectal Neoplasms, Urologic Neoplasms, Gastrointestinal Neoplasms, Neoplasms by SiteArmsTransvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery in simple nephrectomy.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India
    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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Woo Yeon HwangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.
Dong Hoon SuhDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea. sdhwcj@naver.com.
Sangchul LeeDepartment of Urology, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, Republic of Korea. uromedi@naver.com.
Seoul National University Bundang Hospital · KRSeoul National University · KR

Funding

Seoul National University Bundang Hospital 02-2014-0055
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to evaluate cosmetic outcomes and feasibility of transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) in patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic surgery for the treatment of benign or malignant diseases of the kidney, liver, stomach, adrenal gland, and bladder.

methodsThis prospective study was conducted at a tertiary hospital between March 2015 and May 2020. The main outcome was cosmetic outcomes of scars assessed using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) 1 and 8 weeks after surgery. The secondary outcomes were postoperative pain, operating time, and complications. Sexual function was assessed using the Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) questionnaire 6 months after surgery in 17 patients who were sexually active at the time of surgery.

resultsA total of 38 transvaginal NOSE procedures were performed for the extraction of 33 kidneys, 2 livers, 1 stomach, 1 adrenal gland, and 1 bladder. Observers rated pigmentation and relief scores as most deviant from normal skin (2.9 ± 1.7, 3.0 ± 2.1 at postoperative 1 week; 3.6 ± 1.9, 3.5 ± 2.2 at postoperative 8 weeks, respectively), but the overall scores of each item were low. The patients' overall satisfaction with postoperative scars was high, and the mean scores for pain and itching were low, with significant improvement from the first week to the eighth week (P = 0.014 and P = 0.006, respectively). Patients also reported low scores on vaginal assessment items, indicating better symptoms, and bleeding improved significantly between the two time points (P = 0.001). Postoperative pain was reduced from moderate during the first 24 h after surgery to mild after 24 h. The mean operative time of the transvaginal NOSE procedure was 28.3 ± 13.3 min. No postoperative complications were associated with the procedure. The mean FSFI total score was 21.2 ± 8.7 (cutoff score for dysfunction is 21), with higher scores indicating better sexual functioning.

conclusionTransvaginal NOSE seems to be a feasible procedure with promising cosmetic benefits, for patients who undergo minimally invasive surgery for large organs including the kidney, liver, stomach, adrenal gland, and bladder. A prospective randomized clinical trial is needed to provide solid evidence to support transvaginal NOSE.

trial registrationThis trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05113134).

Indexed as

LaparoscopyNatural Orifice Endoscopic SurgeryCicatrixFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansPilot ProjectsPostoperative PainProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeCosmesisLaparoscopic surgeryNatural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE)Transvaginal

Identifiers

PMID36309743
PMCPMC9617319
OpenAlexW4307811015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.