Download PDF
Endoscopy 2011; 43(11): 1000-1003
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1291405
DDW Highlights
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery

T. Hucl
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Prague, Czech Republic
,
J. Spicak
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Institute for Clinical and Experimental Medicine, Prague, Czech Republic
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
04 November 2011 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Introduction

It is now more than a decade since the first description of the concept of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). The first decade was characterized by a substantial number of experimental studies conducted to develop optimal techniques and overcome various challenges. Reports of clinical NOTES procedures in humans began to appear in 2007 and increased in subsequent years. The gastroenterologist performing early experimental studies in animals has now been largely replaced by a surgeon, operating mainly in a hybrid fashion (with laparoscopic assistance) and often using rigid instruments, sparing the flexible endoscope.

The abstracts presented at the 2011 Digestive Disease Week (DDW, 7 – 10 May, Chicago, Illinois, USA) showed that advances in NOTES continue to be made, but that the rate may be slowing. There were 25 abstracts related to NOTES at DDW 2011, as many as last year but significantly fewer than the year before. Most of the abstracts are summarized below.

 

  • References

  • 1 Azadani A, Jonsson H, Park PO et al. Closure of a gastric NOTES®-incision using several techniques: in-vivo comparison of the closure leak pressure with the gastric yield pressure. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 131
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Curell AB, Paracaula MM, Bertroli JA et al. Closure of gastrostomy with gastropexy for NOTES® . Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 131-132
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Ryska O, Martinek J, Filipkova T et al. Single loop-and-clip rectal closure (KING Closure) – a novel technique for natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 315-315
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Dubcenco E, Grantcharov T, Streutker C et al. A long-term, randomized, comparative, survival, porcine model study evaluating effectiveness of adhesiolysis (adhesion reformation): transgastric NOTES® vs. laparoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 311
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Bernhardt J, Ludwig K, Schneider-Koriath S et al. Pure NOTES® sigmoid resection in an animal survival model: three luminal action with a two luminal access to the abdominal cavity. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 312-313
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Song TJ, Seo DW, Kim HJ et al. NOTES® gastrojejunostomy with a T-anchoring device in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 316
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Martinek J, Ryska O, Filipkova T et al. NOTES® transrectal ovarectomy: an experimental sham study. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 313
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Bergström M, Azadani A, Jonsson H et al. Transgastric NOTES® surgery is well tolerated and induces a decreased postoperative stress response in a pig uterine horn resection model. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 313-314
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Rezende MF, Rodrigues R, Gomes GF et al. Effect of transgastric peritoneoscopy on the systemic cytokines in acute inflammatory response in swines. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 315
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Rodrigues R, Rezende MF, Gomes GF et al. Effect of transgastric peritoneal access on the peritoneal innate cellular immunity: experimental study in swines. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 314
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Wang A, Li W, Wu L et al. Comparative study of laparoscopy with transgastric NOTES® peritoneoscopy using small and big sized endoscopes on inflammatory response in a dog model. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 316-317
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Al-Haddad MA, McKenna D, Selzer DJ et al. Propofol sedation vs. inhalant anesthesia in NOTES®: a comparative study in dogs. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 315
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Wang D, Chen D, Leung JW. Flexible transgastric endoscopic liver cyst fenestration: a feasibility study in human. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 130
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Garud S, Davis SS, Lewis MM et al. Human hybrid endoscopic and laparoscopic management of mass lesions of the foregut. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 130
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Dray X, Dico RL, Pautrat K et al. Single-incision laparoscopic evaluation of peritoneal carcinomatosis: first human cases with combined flexible endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 312
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Miyahara R, Hirooka Y, Funasaka K et al. A study of endoscopic full-thickness incision and endoscopic gastric plication using NOTES® techniques. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 316
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Nijhawan S, Majid SF, Sedrak M et al. First human NOTES® experience for sleeve gastrectomy at University of California at San Diego (UCSD). Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 147
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Chiu PW, Teoh AY, Wu JC et al. Per oral endoscopic myotomy (P.O.E.M.) for treatment of esophageal motility disorders – from bench to bedside. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 147-148
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Dubcenco E, Phillips H, Baker JP et al. Transvaginal NOTES® cholecystectomy using a novel reusable vaginal access system (VAS): early human experience. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 312
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Verlaan T, Voermans RP, van Wagensveld BA et al. NOTES® versus laparoscopy: what is the perception of patients undergoing bariatric surgery?. Gastrointest Endosc 2011; 73: 316
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar