ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2024
Feasibility and safety of transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (V-NOTES) panhysterectomy: a polycentric retrospective study.
Article in European journal of medical research, 2024. 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.
- Complex vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery hysterectomy for symptomatic giant polymyomatous uteri in nulliparous women.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2026Article
- Percutaneous endoscopy in the management of intra-abdominal complex disorders.BMC gastroenterology · 2025Article
- Analysis of the learning curve for transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in ovarian cystectomy.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the feasibility and safety of Transvaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (V-NOTES) panhysterectomy.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on the data of 75 patients who underwent panhysterectomy for hysteromyoma in the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology of Tongxiang Maternal and Child Health Hospital; Department of Gynecology, The Affiliated Changzhou Second People's Hospital of Nanjing Medical University and Department of Gynecology, The First Affiliated Hospital of USTC from June 2019 to June 2020. According to the operation mode, the patients were divided into two groups: the traditional multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) group (n = 45) and the Transvaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (V-NOTES) group (n = 30). The operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative exsufflation time, postoperative activity time, hospital stay, treatment cost, 6 h activities of daily living (ADL) score after the operation, cosmetic score, visual analog score, and complications were observed in the two groups.
resultsPerioperative period related indicators: Compared with the MPLS group, the total treatment cost and cosmetic score of the V-NOTES group were significantly better than those of the MPLS group, but the operation duration was longer, and the HB decreased more significantly (P < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference in intraoperative blood loss, postoperative exsufflation time, postoperative activity time, 6 h ADL score after the operation, and hospital stay between the two groups (P > 0.05). Postoperative pain: The VAS score 1 h, 6 h, 12 h, and 24 h after the operation was lower in the V-NOTES group than in the MPLS group (P < 0.05). Postoperative complications: The complication rate of the V-NOTES group was significantly lower than that of the MPLS group (P < 0.05).
conclusionsIn treating panhysterectomy patients, both V-NOTES and MPLS can achieve satisfactory efficacy and prognosis, and both have advantages and disadvantages. Specifically, the V-NOTES surgery has significant advantages such as a lower treatment cost, lower incidence of postoperative complications, less pain, and more beautiful wounds.
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.