Deep sedation in natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES): a comparative study with dogs
- 208 Downloads
Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) has been mostly performed with the animal under general and inhalational anesthesia (IA-NOTES). To date, NOTES using propofol sedation (PS-NOTES) has not been investigated. This study aimed to assess the feasibility and safety of PS-NOTES for transgastric oophorectomy with carbon dioxide insufflation and to compare its success rates with those of conventional IA-NOTES.
In this prospective randomized study, NOTES oophorectomy was performed for 19 female dogs randomized to two conditions: PS (study group) and IA (control group). Sedation success rates (ability to visualize and resect ovaries without converting to IA), operative success rates (ability to resect and retrieve both ovaries in full using only NOTES), and vital parameters including hemodynamic and respiratory changes were documented.
In the PS-NOTES group (n = 9), the sedation success rate was 100 %. The operative success rate was 67 % (6 of 9 animals) compared with 80 % (8 of 10 animals) in the IA-NOTES group. No purposeful movement occurred during surgical manipulation and no respiratory or cardiovascular complications in occured the PS group. Heart rate (HR) and end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETCO2) were significantly higher in the PS group than in the IA group. Blood pressure (BP) was significantly higher in the PS group only during the middle part of the procedure. Only mild respiratory depression was noted in the PS group, as indicated by elevated but acceptable ETCO2. Elevations in BP and HR are thought to be related to elevated CO2 but did not appear to have an adverse impact on the course of the procedure. Recovery was uneventful for all the animals.
The use of PS-NOTES appears to be feasible, resulting in outcomes comparable with those for IA in dogs. Further studies are needed to determine the applicability of this concept in human NOTES.
KeywordsInhalational anesthesia NOTES Oophorectomy Propofol sedation
This study was funded by the NOSCAR (2010) and the Glen A. Lehman Endowed Chair Fund in Gastroenterology.
Mohammad Al-Haddad, Daniel McKenna, Jeff Ko, Stuart Sherman, Don J Selzer, Samer G. Mattar, Thomas F. Imperiale, Douglas K. Rex, Attila Nakeeb, Seong Mok Jeong, Cynthia S. Johnson, and Lynetta J Freeman have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
- 4.Horgan S, Thompson K, Talamini M, Ferreres A, Jacobsen G, Spaun G et al. Clinical experience with a multifunctional, flexible surgery system for endolumenal, single-port, and NOTES procedures. Surg Endosc 25:586–592Google Scholar
- 5.Inoue H, Minami H, Kobayashi Y, Sato Y, Kaga M, Suzuki M et al. Peroral endoscopic myotomy (POEM) for esophageal achalasia. Endoscopy 42:265–271Google Scholar
- 6.Lehmann KS, Ritz JP, Wibmer A, Gellert K, Zornig C, Burghardt J et al. The German registry for natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery: report of the first 551 patients. Ann Surg 252:263–270Google Scholar
- 7.Nau P, Anderson J, Yuh B, Muscarella P Jr., Christopher Ellison E, Happel L et al. Diagnostic transgastric endoscopic peritoneoscopy: extension of the initial human trial for staging of pancreatic head masses. Surg Endosc 24:1440–1446Google Scholar
- 8.Nikfarjam M, McGee MF, Trunzo JA, Onders RP, Pearl JP, Poulose BK et al. Transgastric natural-orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery peritoneoscopy in humans: a pilot study in efficacy and gastrotomy site selection by using a hybrid technique. Gastrointest Endosc 72:279–283Google Scholar
- 9.Park PO, Bergstrom M. Transgastric peritoneoscopy and appendectomy: thoughts on our first experience in humans. Endoscopy 42:81–84Google Scholar
- 10.Park PO, Bergstrom M, Rothstein R, Swain P, Ahmed I, Gomez G et al. Endoscopic sutured closure of a gastric natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery access gastrotomy compared with open surgical closure in a porcine model: a randomized, multicenter controlled trial. Endoscopy 42:311–317Google Scholar
- 11.Saad S, Schmischke D, Martin C, Schieren T. Hybrid laparoscopic colectomy with transluminal colonoscopic specimen extraction: a step toward natural orifice surgery. Endoscopy 42(Suppl 2):E346–E347Google Scholar
- 12.Salinas G, Saavedra L, Agurto H, Quispe R, Ramirez E, Grande J et al. Early experience in human hybrid transgastric and transvaginal endoscopic cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 24:1092–1098Google Scholar
- 13.Sylla P, Rattner DW, Delgado S, Lacy AM. NOTES transanal rectal cancer resection using transanal endoscopic microsurgery and laparoscopic assistance. Surg Endosc 24:1205–1210Google Scholar
- 14.Zornig C, Siemssen L, Emmermann A, Alm M, von Waldenfels HA, Felixmuller C et al. NOTES cholecystectomy: matched-pair analysis comparing the transvaginal hybrid and conventional laparoscopic techniques in a series of 216 patients. Surg Endosc. Epub 25 December 2010Google Scholar
- 15.Zorron R, Palanivelu C, Galvao Neto MP, Ramos A, Salinas G, Burghardt J et al. International multicenter trial on clinical natural orifice surgery–NOTES IMTN study: preliminary results of 362 patients. Surg Innov 17:142–158Google Scholar
- 21.Freeman LJ, Rahmani EY, Al-Haddad M, Sherman S, Chiorean MV, Selzer DJ et al. Comparison of pain and postoperative stress in dogs undergoing natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, laparoscopic, and open oophorectomy. Gastrointest Endosc 72:373–380Google Scholar
- 29.Lee CK, Lee SH, Chung IK, Lee TH, Kim HS, Park SH et al. Human diagnostic transgastric peritoneoscopy with the submucosal tunnel technique performed with the patient under conscious sedation (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 72:889–891Google Scholar
- 35.Dumonceau JM, Riphaus A, Aparicio JR, Beilenhoff U, Knape JT, Ortmann M et al. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy, European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates, and the European Society of Anaesthesiology Guideline: Nonanesthesiologist administration of propofol for GI endoscopy. Endoscopy 42:960–974Google Scholar
- 43.Juckenhofel S, Feisel C, Schmitt HJ, Biedler A (1999) TIVA mit propofol/remifentanil oder balancierte anasthesie mit sevofluran/ fentanyl bei laparoskopischen operationen. Hamodynamik, aufwachverhalten und nebenwirkungen [TIVA with propofol-remifentanil or balanced anesthesia with sevoflurane-fentanyl in laparoscopic operations: hemodynamics, awakening and adverse effects]. Anaesthesist 48(11):807–812Google Scholar
- 44.Visser K, Hassink EA, Bonsel GJ, Moen J, Kalkman CJ (2001) Randomized controlled trial of total intravenous anesthesia with propofol versus inhalation anesthesia with isoflurane-nitrous oxide: postoperative nausea with vomiting and economic analysis. Anesthesiology 95:616–626PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 49.Freeman L, Rahmani EY, Burgess RC, Al-Haddad M, Selzer DJ, Sherman S et al. Evaluation of the learning curve for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: bilateral ovariectomy in dogs. Vet Surg 40:140–150Google Scholar