2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2007.12.047
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of a novel access and closure device for NOTES applications: a transcolonic survival study in the porcine model (with video)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
26
0
2

Year Published

2010
2010
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
26
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Endoclips are only capable of mucosal (not full-thickness) closure, resulting in air and fluid leak under pressure [11]. Inadequate closure of the gastric wall incision with endoclips resulted in septic intraperitoneal complications in 40% of animals in a previously reported study [13].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 92%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Endoclips are only capable of mucosal (not full-thickness) closure, resulting in air and fluid leak under pressure [11]. Inadequate closure of the gastric wall incision with endoclips resulted in septic intraperitoneal complications in 40% of animals in a previously reported study [13].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 92%
“…To achieve a secure endoluminal gastrotomy closure for NOTES procedures, different endoscopic techniques have been described in nonsurvival and survival animal studies, such as those using endoclips, T tags, pursestring modified T tags, flexible stapler, prototype endoscopic suturing devices, and an over-the-scope clip system [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]. However, the effective closure methods require new and sometimes expensive and complex devices that are not widely available.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several survival studies in swine evaluating NOTES procedures via transcolonic and transrectal access have demonstrated the feasibility and safety of this approach if safe colotomy closure can be achieved, with a cumulative incidence of septic complications in one of 39 animals [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. Relative to transvaginal NOTES or laparoscopic surgery, any potential clinical benefits of transrectal access need to be weighed against infectious risks from inadequate colotomy closure.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Em outras pequenas séries de uso de cirurgia por orifícios naturais para câncer, não foi registrada implantação tumoral nos acessos, mas sem dúvida é uma possibilidade em se tratando de ressecções oncológicas. Embora vários investigadores tenham escolhido para pesquisa os acessos NOTES para a cavidade abdominal através de via transgástrica ou vaginal, poucos investigaram o acesso transcolônico [3][4][5][6][7][8] . A abordagem transcolônica tem várias vantagens teóricas sobre a via transgástrica, pela eliminação da necessidade de retroflexão do endoscópio, permitindo um acesso mais direto, além de o anoreto permitir a passagem de espécimes e instrumental de diâmetro maior que a via peroral 37 .…”
Section: A B C Dunclassified
“…Cirurgias utilizando o acesso colônico para realização de cirurgia abdominal (NOTES transcolônico) tem sido objeto de pesquisa de pesquisa experimental recente, sugerindo que o acesso poderia ser uma opção atraente para tratamento de afecções colorretais e abdominais [3][4][5][6][7][8] . Obstáculos técnicos iniciais como o risco de infecção e fistula, acesso seguro à cavidade e fechamento confiável do orifício colônico, que permaneceram como problemas que retardaram o uso do acesso, comparado com os acessos transvaginal e transoral.…”
unclassified