Cargando…
Comparison of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in the treatment effects of low rectal cancer
Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is an intra-abdominal procedure that does not require an auxiliary incision to take a surgical sample from the abdominal wall through the natural orifice, but there are few systematic clinical studies on it. The aim of this study was to demonstrate...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8085046/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33927293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88790-8 |
_version_ | 1783686265294553088 |
---|---|
author | Zhu, Yihao Xiong, Huan Chen, Yinggang Liu, Zheng Jiang, Zheng Huang, Rui Gao, Feng Zhang, Qian Wang, Meng Jin, Yinghu Qiao, Tianyu Ma, Tianyi Hu, Hanqing Wang, Xishan Tang, Qingchao Wang, Guiyu |
author_facet | Zhu, Yihao Xiong, Huan Chen, Yinggang Liu, Zheng Jiang, Zheng Huang, Rui Gao, Feng Zhang, Qian Wang, Meng Jin, Yinghu Qiao, Tianyu Ma, Tianyi Hu, Hanqing Wang, Xishan Tang, Qingchao Wang, Guiyu |
author_sort | Zhu, Yihao |
collection | PubMed |
description | Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is an intra-abdominal procedure that does not require an auxiliary incision to take a surgical sample from the abdominal wall through the natural orifice, but there are few systematic clinical studies on it. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the safety and feasibility of NOSES. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data and follow-up of 165 patients with low rectal cancer who underwent NOSES or conventional laparoscopic surgery at our center from January 2013 to June 2015. From the perioperative data and postoperative follow-up results of both groups, patients in the NOSES group had less intraoperative bleeding (49.3 ± 55.8 ml vs. 75.1 ± 57.3 ml, p = 0.02), shorter postoperative gastrointestinal recovery (42.3 ± 15.5 h vs. 50.1 ± 17.0 h, p = 0.01), less postoperative analgesic use (35.6% vs. 57.6%, p = 0.02), lower postoperative pain scores, lower rate of postoperative complications (6.8% vs. 25.4%, p = 0.01), better satisfaction of the image and cosmesis of the abdominal wall postoperatively, and higher quality of life. Moreover, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between two groups. Overall, NOSES is a safe and reliable minimally invasive surgical technique for patients with low rectal cancer. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8085046 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80850462021-05-03 Comparison of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in the treatment effects of low rectal cancer Zhu, Yihao Xiong, Huan Chen, Yinggang Liu, Zheng Jiang, Zheng Huang, Rui Gao, Feng Zhang, Qian Wang, Meng Jin, Yinghu Qiao, Tianyu Ma, Tianyi Hu, Hanqing Wang, Xishan Tang, Qingchao Wang, Guiyu Sci Rep Article Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is an intra-abdominal procedure that does not require an auxiliary incision to take a surgical sample from the abdominal wall through the natural orifice, but there are few systematic clinical studies on it. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the safety and feasibility of NOSES. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data and follow-up of 165 patients with low rectal cancer who underwent NOSES or conventional laparoscopic surgery at our center from January 2013 to June 2015. From the perioperative data and postoperative follow-up results of both groups, patients in the NOSES group had less intraoperative bleeding (49.3 ± 55.8 ml vs. 75.1 ± 57.3 ml, p = 0.02), shorter postoperative gastrointestinal recovery (42.3 ± 15.5 h vs. 50.1 ± 17.0 h, p = 0.01), less postoperative analgesic use (35.6% vs. 57.6%, p = 0.02), lower postoperative pain scores, lower rate of postoperative complications (6.8% vs. 25.4%, p = 0.01), better satisfaction of the image and cosmesis of the abdominal wall postoperatively, and higher quality of life. Moreover, there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between two groups. Overall, NOSES is a safe and reliable minimally invasive surgical technique for patients with low rectal cancer. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-04-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8085046/ /pubmed/33927293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88790-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Zhu, Yihao Xiong, Huan Chen, Yinggang Liu, Zheng Jiang, Zheng Huang, Rui Gao, Feng Zhang, Qian Wang, Meng Jin, Yinghu Qiao, Tianyu Ma, Tianyi Hu, Hanqing Wang, Xishan Tang, Qingchao Wang, Guiyu Comparison of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in the treatment effects of low rectal cancer |
title | Comparison of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in the treatment effects of low rectal cancer |
title_full | Comparison of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in the treatment effects of low rectal cancer |
title_fullStr | Comparison of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in the treatment effects of low rectal cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in the treatment effects of low rectal cancer |
title_short | Comparison of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in the treatment effects of low rectal cancer |
title_sort | comparison of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery and conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection in the treatment effects of low rectal cancer |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8085046/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33927293 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-88790-8 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zhuyihao comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT xionghuan comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT chenyinggang comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT liuzheng comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT jiangzheng comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT huangrui comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT gaofeng comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT zhangqian comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT wangmeng comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT jinyinghu comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT qiaotianyu comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT matianyi comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT huhanqing comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT wangxishan comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT tangqingchao comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer AT wangguiyu comparisonofnaturalorificespecimenextractionsurgeryandconventionallaparoscopicassistedresectioninthetreatmenteffectsoflowrectalcancer |