Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37010337›Full record

ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2023

The revival of vaginal surgery in the era of endoscopy: V-NOTES initial experience with a series of 32 patients.

J Raquet, L Namèche, M Nisolle, F Closon

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

J Raquet
L Namèche
M Nisolle
F Closon
University of Liège · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (V-NOTES) is an emerging surgical technique in the evolution of minimally invasive surgery. This technique allows different types of surgical procedures to be performed by vaginal access with endoscopic control. The combination of vaginal surgery and laparoscopy brings many advantages, especially the absence of incisions in the abdominal wall and better visualization of the abdominal cavity. Objectives: In this retrospective study we report our initial experience of V-NOTES in benign gynaecologic surgery by describing our first consecutive 32 surgeries. Materials and Methods: From June 2020 to January 2022, 32 gynaecological procedures were performed by V-NOTES by the same surgeon in a university hospital. Perioperative outcomes were evaluated retrospectively. Main outcome measures: Conversion to laparoscopy or laparotomy and peri-operative and post-operative complications. Results: None of the 32 V-NOTES procedures required conversion to conventional laparoscopy or laparotomy. We observed 2 intraoperative complications managed by V-NOTES and 2 post-operative complications (Clavien-Dindo Grade 2). Conclusion: Our results are similar to studies previously published about this subject and are promising concerning the techniques efficacy and safety. We do believe that a short training allows to reach benefits safely. However, further prospective multicentre randomized trials comparing V-NOTES to totally laparoscopic hysterectomy and to vaginal hysterectomy are needed to strengthen the validity of this new approach. What's new?: V-NOTES widens the indications of vaginal hysterectomies by removing limitations such as large uterus, absence of prolapse, and history of caesarean. Moreover, this technique allows adnexal surgery to be performed by vaginal access.

Identifiers

PMID37010337
PMCPMC10392113
OpenAlexW4362470044

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.