期刊文献+

Patient and physician perception of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic appendectomy 被引量:1

Patient and physician perception of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic appendectomy
下载PDF
导出
摘要 AIM:To investigate perception of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery(NOTES)as a potential technique for appendectomy.METHODS:One hundred patients undergoing endoscopy and 100 physicians were given a questionnaire describing in detail the techniques of NOTES and laparoscopic appendectomy.They were asked about the reasons for their preference,choice of orifice,and extent of complication risk they were willing to accept.RESULTS:Fifty patients(50%)and only 21 physicians(21%)preferred NOTES(P<0.001).Patients had previously heard of NOTES less frequently(7%vs73%,P<0.001)and had undergone endoscopy more frequently(88%vs 36%,P<0.001)than physicians.Absence of hernia was the most common reason for NOTES preference in physicians(80%vs 44%,P= 0.003),whereas reduced pain was the most common reason in patients(66%vs 52%).Physicians were more likely to refuse NOTES as a novel and unsure technique(P<0.001)and having an increased risk of infection(P<0.001).The preferred access site in both groups was colon followed by stomach,with vagina being rarely preferred.In multivariable modeling,those with high-school education[odds ratio(OR):2.68,95% confidence interval(CI):1.23-5.83]and prior colonoscopy(OR:2.10,95%CI:1.05-4.19)were more likely to prefer NOTES over laparoscopic appendectomy.There was a steep decline in NOTES preference with increased rate of procedural complications.Male patients were more likely to consent to their wives vaginal NOTES appendectomy than male physicians(P=0.02).CONCLUSION:The preference of NOTES for appendectomy was greater in patients than physicians and was related to reduced pain and absence of hernia rather than lack of scarring. AIM:To investigate perception of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery(NOTES)as a potential technique for appendectomy.METHODS:One hundred patients undergoing endoscopy and 100 physicians were given a questionnaire describing in detail the techniques of NOTES and laparoscopic appendectomy.They were asked about the reasons for their preference,choice of orifice,and extent of complication risk they were willing to accept.RESULTS:Fifty patients(50%)and only 21 physicians(21%)preferred NOTES(P0.001).Patients had previously heard of NOTES less frequently(7%vs73%,P0.001)and had undergone endoscopy more frequently(88%vs 36%,P0.001)than physicians.Absence of hernia was the most common reason for NOTES preference in physicians(80%vs 44%,P= 0.003),whereas reduced pain was the most common reason in patients(66%vs 52%).Physicians were more likely to refuse NOTES as a novel and unsure technique(P0.001)and having an increased risk of infection(P0.001).The preferred access site in both groups was colon followed by stomach,with vagina being rarely preferred.In multivariable modeling,those with high-school education[odds ratio(OR):2.68,95% confidence interval(CI):1.23-5.83]and prior colonoscopy(OR:2.10,95%CI:1.05-4.19)were more likely to prefer NOTES over laparoscopic appendectomy.There was a steep decline in NOTES preference with increased rate of procedural complications.Male patients were more likely to consent to their wives vaginal NOTES appendectomy than male physicians(P=0.02).CONCLUSION:The preference of NOTES for appendectomy was greater in patients than physicians and was related to reduced pain and absence of hernia rather than lack of scarring.
出处 《World Journal of Gastroenterology》 SCIE CAS CSCD 2012年第15期1800-1805,共6页 世界胃肠病学杂志(英文版)
基金 Supported by Grant NT 11234-3 of the Czech Ministry of Health the Institutional Research Plan AV0Z10300504
关键词 切除术 医生 内镜 自然 胃镜检查 风险程度 多变量模型 调查问卷 Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery Patient perception Physician perception Appendectomy Laparoscopy
  • 相关文献

参考文献1

二级参考文献46

  • 1Decarli LA, Zorron R, Branco A, Lima FC, Tang M, Pioneer SR, Sanseverino JI, Menguer R, Bigolin AV, Gagner M. New hybrid approach for NOTES transvaginal cholecystectomy: preliminary clinical experience. Surg Innov 2009; 16:181-186.
  • 2Federlein M, Borchert D, Muller V, Atas Y, Fritze F, Burghardt J, Elling D, Gellert K. Transvaginal video-assisted cholecystectomy in clinical practice. Surg Endosc 2010; 24: 2444-2452.
  • 3Salinas G, Saavedra L, Agurto H, Quispe R, Ramirez E, Grande J, Tamayo J, Sanchez V, Malaga D, Marks JM. Early experience in human hybrid transgastric and transvaginal endoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 2010; 24:1092-1098.
  • 4Sotelo R, de Andrade R, Fernandez G, Ramirez D, Di Grazia E Carmona O, Moreira O, Berger A, Aron M, Desai MM, Gill IS. NOTES hybrid transvaginal radical nephrectomy for tumor: stepwise progression toward a first successful clinical case. Eur Urol2010; 57:138-144.
  • 5Lehmann KS, Ritz JP, Wibmer A, Gellert K, Zornig C, Burghardt J, Biasing M, Runkel N, Kohlhaw K, Albrecht R, Kirchner TG, Arlt G, Mall JW, Butters M, Bulian DR, Bretschneider J, Holmer C, Buhr HJ. The German registry for natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery: report of the first 551 patients. Ann Surg 2010; 252:263-270.
  • 6Zorron R, Palanivelu C, Galvao Neto MP, Ramos A, Salinas G, Burghardt J, DeCarli L, Henrique Sousa L, Forgione A, Pugliese R, Branco AJ, Balashanmugan TS, Boza C, Corcione F, D' Avila Avila F, Arturo Gomez N, Galvao Ribeiro PA, Martins S, Filgueiras M, Gellert K, Wood Branco A, Kondo W, Inaeio Sanseverino J, de Sousa JA, Saavedra L, Ramirez E, Campos J, Sivakumar K, Rajan PS, Jategaonkar PA, Ranagrajan M, Parthasarathi R, Senthilnathan P, Prasad M, Cuccurullo D, Muller V. International multicenter trial on clinical natural orifice surgery--NOTES IMTN study: preliminary results of 362 patients. Surg Innov 2010; 17:142-158.
  • 7Nau P, Anderson J, Happel L, Yuh B, Narula VK, Needleman B, Ellison EC, Melvin WS, Hazey JW. Safe alternative transgastric peritoneal access in humans: NOTES. Surgery 2011; 149:147-152.
  • 8Nau P, Anderson J, Yuh B, Muscarella P Jr, Christopher El- lison E, Happel L, Narula VK, Melvin WS, Hazey JW. Diagnostic transgastric endoscopic peritoneoscopy: extension of the initial human trial for staging of pancreatic head masses. Surg Endosc 2010; 24:1440-1446.
  • 9Nikfarjam M, McGee MF, Trunzo JA, Onders RP, Pearl JP, Poulose BK, Chak A, Ponsky JL, Marks JM. Transgastric natural-orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery peritoneoscopy in humans: a pilot study in efficacy and gastrotomy site selection by using a hybrid technique. Gastrointest Endosc 2010; 72:279-283.
  • 10Asakuma M, Perretta S, Allemann P, Cahill R, Con SA, Solano C, Pasupathy S, Mutter D, Dallemagne B, Marescaux J. Challenges and lessons learned from NOTES cholecystectomy initial experience: a stepwise approach from the laboratory to clinical application. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 2009; 16:249-254.

共引文献13

同被引文献12

引证文献1

二级引证文献14

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部