To review natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) applications in clinical practice and assess the evidence base for each application as reported in the literature. An electronic literature search was performed. Inclusion criteria were publications relating to NOTES applications in humans. For each type of operation the highest level of evidence available for clinical NOTES publications was evaluated. Morbidity and short-term operative outcomes were compared with gold standard published evidence where available. Finally, registered trials recruiting patients for NOTES applications were identified. Human NOTES publications with the highest level of evidence in each application are identified. There were no RCTs in the literature to date. The strongest evidence came in the form of large, multi-centre trials with 300-500 patients. The results are encouraging, comparable with gold standard techniques on morbidity and mortality. While short-term operative outcomes were also similar when compared to the gold standard techniques, other than improved cosmesis little else can definitely be concluded as a clear benefit of a NOTES procedure. The most common procedures are cholecystectomy, appendicectomy and peritoneoscopy mainly performed via transvaginal access. It is evident that morbidity appears to be higher when the transgastric route is used. The safety profile of hybrid NOTES transvaginal procedures is beginning to be confirmed as is evident from the large number of procedures presented in this review. A number of authors have presented work on pure NOTES procedures but the results are inconsistent and thus the vast majority of NOTES procedures worldwide are performed in a hybrid fashion with a variable amount of laparoscopy. This review of the clinical applications of NOTES summarises the growing evidence behind this surgical discipline and highlights NOTES procedures with an acceptable safety profile.
A 28-year-old Romanian woman, presented 2 weeks postnatally with pain in her left hip. Plain radiography suggested a left intracapsular, subcapital hip fracture. A CT scan of the pelvis showed diffuse osteopaenia with bilateral subcapital fractures of both femurs. From this imaging and subsequent investigation, a diagnosis of transient osteoporosis of pregnancy was made. The patient was treated with a closed reduction and cannulated screw fixation. Rehabilitative treatment, vitamin D, calcium and bisphosphonate therapy were initiated. She remains under close follow-up from orthopaedic, rheumatological and endocrine teams. Multiple opportunities were missed to identify the source of the patient's pain and inability to weight bear. Early detection and management of this condition is crucial because of the associated morbidity, including debilitating pain, reduced mobility, fractures and avascular necrosis. Cessation of breastfeeding, adequate pain relief, early use of bisphosphonates and rehabilitative treatment are essential.
Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) aims to reduce the number and size of skin incisions. The authors compared systemic stress and perioperative outcome of SILS and laparoscopic (LAP) cholecystectomy. Twenty-nine subjects (8 males and 21 females; mean age = 47 years; mean body mass index = 27) were included in the study. There was no statistical difference in mean operative time (LAP = 89 minutes; SILS = 113 minutes; P = ns), and no intraoperative complications were reported. There were no statistically significant differences observed in white cell count, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and tumor necrosis factor-α between SILS and LAP groups. The mean hospital length of stay (LAP = 1.8 days; SILS = 1.4 days) and Visual Analogue Scale scores for pain at 6 hours (LAP = 5.14; SILS = 4.46) and 24 hours (LAP = 3.9; SILS = 2.815) were similar with no perioperative morbidity. These results suggest that the systemic stress response in LAP and SILS cholecystectomy does not appear to be significantly different. SILS cholecystectomy appears safe with no perioperative morbidity or complications encountered in this series.
Current evidence is experimental and therefore limited, but there appears to be some clarification in the direction of the innovative process in this area outlining favorable characteristics of an ideal system. Based on the studies examined in this review, a standardized assessment method is summarized for future in vivo studies, necessary prior to phase 1 trials.
INTRODUCTION The Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCS) has issued guidance regarding the use of reoperation rates in the revalidation of UK-based orthopaedic surgeons. Currently, little has been published concerning acceptable rates of reoperation following primary surgical management of orthopaedic trauma, particularly with reference to revalidation. METHODS A retrospective review was conducted of patients undergoing clearly defined reoperations following primary surgical management of trauma between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2011. A full case note review was undertaken to establish the demographics, clinical course and context of reoperation. A review of the imaging was performed to establish whether the procedure performed was in line with accepted trauma practice and whether the technical execution was acceptable. RESULTS A total of 3,688 patients underwent primary procedures within the time period studied while 70 (1.90%, 99% CI: 1.39-2.55) required an unplanned reoperation. Thirty-nine (56%) of these patients were male. The mean age of patients was 56 years (range: 18-98 years) and there was a median time to reoperation of 50 days (IQR: 13-154 days). Potentially avoidable reoperations occurred in 41 patients (58.6%, 99% CI: 43.2-72.6). This was largely due to technical errors (40 patients, 57.1%, 99% CI: 41.8-71.3), representing 1.11% (99% CI: 0.73-1.64) of the total trauma workload. Within RCS guidelines, 28-day reoperation rates for hip, wrist and ankle fractures were 1.4% (99% CI: 0.5-3.3), 3.5% (99% CI: 0.8%-12.1) and 1.86% (99% CI: 0.4-6.6) respectively. CONCLUSIONS We present novel work that has established baseline reoperation rates for index procedures required for revalidation of orthopaedic surgeons.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2023 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.