Cargando…

Safety Outcomes of NOTES Cholecystectomy Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is an endoscopic technique whereby surgical interventions can be performed with a flexible endoscope passed through a natural orifice (mouth, vulva, urethra, anus) then through a transluminal opening of the stomach, vagina, bladder, or colon. A...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Peng, Cheng, Ling, Yan, Ma, Chi, Ma, Xiaochun, Fan, Wei, Niu, Weibo, Niu, Jun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5054957/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27557339
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000000284
_version_ 1782458695763886080
author Peng, Cheng
Ling, Yan
Ma, Chi
Ma, Xiaochun
Fan, Wei
Niu, Weibo
Niu, Jun
author_facet Peng, Cheng
Ling, Yan
Ma, Chi
Ma, Xiaochun
Fan, Wei
Niu, Weibo
Niu, Jun
author_sort Peng, Cheng
collection PubMed
description Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is an endoscopic technique whereby surgical interventions can be performed with a flexible endoscope passed through a natural orifice (mouth, vulva, urethra, anus) then through a transluminal opening of the stomach, vagina, bladder, or colon. Although in the early stage of research and development, NOTES has been clinically applied across the globe, above all the transvaginal cholecystectomy is among the most frequently performed procedures. In the existing 2 types of transvaginal routes, the hybrid NOTES cholecystectomy (NC) is more likely to be accepted. However, there has been controversy regarding the safety outcomes of hybrid NC in comparison with classical laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The primary objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the characteristics between NC and classical LC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A meta-analysis of eligible studies comparing NC with classical LC was performed to evaluate the safety outcomes including wound complications, other postoperative complications and intraoperative conversion between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Pooling 3 randomized controlled trials (n=157) and 7 nonrandomized trial (n=593) demonstrated that the rates of wound complications and other postoperative complications in NC group did not significantly differ from those of classical LC group [wound complications: ratio difference (RD)=−0.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.04to 0.01, P=0.23; other postoperative complication: RD=−0.01; 95% CI, −0.03 to 0.02; P=0.6]. The intraoperative conversion rate in NC groups was higher than that of LC groups (RD=0.03; 95% CI, 0.01-0.06; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: There is no significate difference between the safety of NC and laparoscope cholecystectomy. NC is associated with a higher rate of intraoperative conversion when compared with LC. It is worthy of further promotion and validation in clinical settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5054957
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-50549572016-11-01 Safety Outcomes of NOTES Cholecystectomy Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Peng, Cheng Ling, Yan Ma, Chi Ma, Xiaochun Fan, Wei Niu, Weibo Niu, Jun Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech Review Article Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is an endoscopic technique whereby surgical interventions can be performed with a flexible endoscope passed through a natural orifice (mouth, vulva, urethra, anus) then through a transluminal opening of the stomach, vagina, bladder, or colon. Although in the early stage of research and development, NOTES has been clinically applied across the globe, above all the transvaginal cholecystectomy is among the most frequently performed procedures. In the existing 2 types of transvaginal routes, the hybrid NOTES cholecystectomy (NC) is more likely to be accepted. However, there has been controversy regarding the safety outcomes of hybrid NC in comparison with classical laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The primary objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the characteristics between NC and classical LC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A meta-analysis of eligible studies comparing NC with classical LC was performed to evaluate the safety outcomes including wound complications, other postoperative complications and intraoperative conversion between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Pooling 3 randomized controlled trials (n=157) and 7 nonrandomized trial (n=593) demonstrated that the rates of wound complications and other postoperative complications in NC group did not significantly differ from those of classical LC group [wound complications: ratio difference (RD)=−0.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) −0.04to 0.01, P=0.23; other postoperative complication: RD=−0.01; 95% CI, −0.03 to 0.02; P=0.6]. The intraoperative conversion rate in NC groups was higher than that of LC groups (RD=0.03; 95% CI, 0.01-0.06; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: There is no significate difference between the safety of NC and laparoscope cholecystectomy. NC is associated with a higher rate of intraoperative conversion when compared with LC. It is worthy of further promotion and validation in clinical settings. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2016-10 2016-08-23 /pmc/articles/PMC5054957/ /pubmed/27557339 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000000284 Text en Copyright © 2016 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
spellingShingle Review Article
Peng, Cheng
Ling, Yan
Ma, Chi
Ma, Xiaochun
Fan, Wei
Niu, Weibo
Niu, Jun
Safety Outcomes of NOTES Cholecystectomy Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Safety Outcomes of NOTES Cholecystectomy Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Safety Outcomes of NOTES Cholecystectomy Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Safety Outcomes of NOTES Cholecystectomy Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Safety Outcomes of NOTES Cholecystectomy Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Safety Outcomes of NOTES Cholecystectomy Versus Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort safety outcomes of notes cholecystectomy versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5054957/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27557339
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/SLE.0000000000000284
work_keys_str_mv AT pengcheng safetyoutcomesofnotescholecystectomyversuslaparoscopiccholecystectomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT lingyan safetyoutcomesofnotescholecystectomyversuslaparoscopiccholecystectomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT machi safetyoutcomesofnotescholecystectomyversuslaparoscopiccholecystectomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT maxiaochun safetyoutcomesofnotescholecystectomyversuslaparoscopiccholecystectomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT fanwei safetyoutcomesofnotescholecystectomyversuslaparoscopiccholecystectomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT niuweibo safetyoutcomesofnotescholecystectomyversuslaparoscopiccholecystectomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT niujun safetyoutcomesofnotescholecystectomyversuslaparoscopiccholecystectomyasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis