Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in urology: The Chinese experience

Objective:To describe the Chinese experience of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery(NOTES)in urology.Methods:From December 2008 to May 2017,35 animal experiments and 305 clinical surgeries of NOTES or natural orifices specimen extractions(NOSE)were performed in China.The animal experiments included five kidney biopsies,24 nephrectomies and six partial nephrectomies.The clinical surgeries included 12 transvaginal NOSE(TV-NOSE),266 hybrid transvaginal NOTES(TV-NOTES)and 27 pure TV-NOTES.The TV-NOSE procedure was performed in five transumbilical laparoendoscopic single-site(U-LESS)nephrectomies,four suprapubic-assisted laparoendoscopic single-site surgery(SA-LESS)nephroureterectomies,and three laparoscopic radical cystectomies.The hybrid TV-NOTES procedure included 210 nephrectomies,31 adrenalectomies,eight nephroureterectomies,13 partial nephrectomies,and four heminephrectomies.The pure TV-NOTES procedure included five renal cyst decortications and 22 nephrectomies.Results:A total of 29 animal experiments were successfully performed.One partial nephrectomy was converted to standard laparoscopic surgery.Two kidney biopsies and two nephrectomies were unsuccessful.A total of 297 clinical surgeries were successfully performed.Six patients who underwent hybrid TV-NOTES were converted to open surgery.Two patients who underwent pure TV-NOTES were converted to SA-LESS.There were 22 major complications,16 occurred intraoperatively and six postoperatively.The mean visual analog score(VAS)of 48 h after the operation was 2.5 points in TV-NOSE,2.3 points in hybrid TV-NOTES and 1.7 points in pure TV-NOTES.The mean follow-up of 50.6(3.0-87.0)months showed that all patients were in good condition.The umbilicus scars were nearly invisible in TV-NOSE and hybrid TV-NOTES.The vaginal incision healed well.Conclusions:TV-NOSE and TV-NOTES are feasible,safe,and effective with little injury,low pain,fast recovery,and good cosmetic outcomes in properly selected patients.They are worth consideration for urological clinical practice.

Transvaginal Approach for Nongynecologic Intraperitoneal Procedures

The minimally invasive surgery through natural orifices has revolutionized the laparoscopic surgery for abdominal procedures. The use of the vaginal approach is not new for gynecologists but it is a new concept for the non-gynecological laparoscopic surgeons. The use of this new approach has been used to perform some procedures and to extract specimens after a laparoscopic surgery, but we don’t know exactly the number of procedures performed until today. There are few papers with clinical experience and a lot of philosophical papers about NOTES. Our aim is to know how and how often we are using this new approach for non-gynecological abdominal minimally invasive procedures. With the revision of the PubMed publications we obtained a total of 268 articles, of which 125 were included in the analysis (46.64%). Cholecystectomy was the procedure more usually performed: there is a large clinical experience with a total of 2432 transvaginal cholecystectomies. Bariatric surgery, colectomy and appendectomy have been other surgical procedures with some clinical experience in the use of the transvaginal approach. Analyzing the publications on transvaginal approach, we observed that the use of the vaginal route for non-gynecological abdominal surgery was not anecdotal, with accumulative experience of more than 3000 patients reported in published studies. The use of the vaginal route has shown its safety, obtaining some additional benefits such as the aesthetic and the faster functional recovery. Dyspareunia, one of the most feared, has not been reported in studies as a concern to consider.

Infection during transgastric and transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in a live porcine model

Background The infection risk of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery （NOTES） is of concern. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of NOTES by investigating the intraperitoneal bacterial load during transgastric and transvaginal procedures with antiseptic or controling perioperative preparation.Methods Forty-five female pigs were randomly assigned to five equal groups： the transgastric （TG） control group （group A）, the TG middle volume gastric lavage group （group B）, the TG high volume lavage group （group C）, the transvaginal （TV） control group （group D） and the TV study group （group E）. The study groups received gastric or vaginal lavage and abdominal antimicrobial irrigation, while the control groups received neither. All animals were administered intravenous antibiotics, underwent NOTES peritoneoscopy and transumbilical laparoscopic cholecystectomy under NOTES view with sterile instruments. The viscerotomy was closed by laparoscopic suture. The animals were observed until necropsy was performed 14 days postoperatively. Quantitative bacteriologic cultures were taken from the gastric or vaginal aspirate before and after lavage; peritoneal fluid was collected before and after peritoneal irrigation and at necropsy. Results The surgical procedures were completed for all the pigs and all of them survived. The mean operative time of the TG group and the TV group was （81±27） minutes and （66±12） minutes, respectively. All animals survived for 14 days.At necropsy, significantly more peritoneal infections were noted in group A than in group D （5：9 vs. 0：9; P 〈0.05）. Nogross evidence of intra-peritoneal infection was found in groups B, C, D and E. Bacteriological evidence was seen in all pigs in group A, 7 pigs in group B, 6 pigs in group D, and none in groups C and E.Conclusions Without gastric or vaginal lavage and antibiotic peritoneal irrigation, the TG procedure has a higher infection rate than the TV access. After antiseptic preparation, the bacterial load significantly decreased in the TG group,which seems as safe as the sterile TV approach.