Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Peroral transgastric endoscopic procedures in pigs: feasibility, survival, questionings, and pitfalls

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Multiple studies have demonstrated the feasibility of peroral transgastric endoscopic procedures in porcine models. We present our experience with these procedures in a porcine survival model and expose the technical difficulties and worries about their application in humans.

Methods

We performed the following transgastric procedures in nine small pigs (20–30 kg) under general anesthesia using a double-channel therapeutic endoscope: peritoneoscopy (nine pigs), cholecystectomy (six pigs), gastrojejunal anastomosis (two pigs), and fallopian tube excision (one pig). Postsurgical complications and survival of the pigs were recorded during a 3-week follow-up.

Results

In six pigs, the gallbladder was successfully resected. The time of the procedure ranged from 2.5 to 3.5 hours. In one case, severe bleeding occurred from the cystic artery during dissection and was successfully managed by placement of endoscopic clips. Five pigs survived for 3 weeks after cholecystectomy. In one pig, severe peritonitis developed because of gastric contents leakage due to failure of gastric closure and the animal was euthanized 3 days after the procedure. Endoscopic transgastric gastrojejunostomy was successfully performed in two pigs without major complications. The time required for the procedure averaged about 50 min. Fallopian tube excision was also successful in one pig without any complications. The entire procedure was performed within 60 min.

Conclusions

This study reports the feasibility of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) procedures in a porcine survival model and impresses the efficacy, the safety, the complications, and some technical difficulties of transgastric NOTES procedures, which merit further evaluation in future studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sanowski RA, Kozarek RA, Partyka EK (1981) Evaluation of a flexible endoscope for laparoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol 76:416–419

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Vitale GC, Davis BR, Tran TC (2005) The advancing art and science of endoscopy. Am J Surg 190:228–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Park PO, Bergstrom M, Ikeda K, Fritscher-Ravens A, Swain P (2005) Experimental studies of transgastric gallbladder surgery: cholocystectomy and cholecystogastric anastomosis (videos). Gastrointest Endosc 61:601–606

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kantsevoy SV, Jagannath SB, Niiyama H, Chung SS, Cotton PB, Gostout CJ, Hawes RH, Pasricha PJ, Magee CA, Vaughn CA, Barlow D, Shimonaka H, Kalloo AN (2005) Endoscopic gastrojejunostomy with survival in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 62:287–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jagannath SB, Kantsevoy SV, Vaughn CA, Chung SS, Cotton PB, Gostout CJ, Hawes RH, Pasricha PJ, Scorpio DG, Magee CA, Pipitone LJ, Kalloo AN (2005) Peroral trangastric endoscopic ligation of the fallopian tubes with long-term survival in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 61:449–453

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Swanstrom LL, Kozarek R, Pasricha PJ, Gross S, Birkett D, Park PO, Saadat V, Ewers R, Swain P (2005) Development of a new access device for transgastric surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 9:1129–1136

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wagh MS, Merrifield BF, Thomson CC (2005) Endoscopic transgastric abdominal exploration and organ resection: initial experience in a porcine model. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 3:892–896

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ikeda K, Fritscher-Ravens A, Mosse CA, Mills T, Tajiri H, Swain CP (2005) Endoscopic full-thickness resection with sutured closure in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 62:122–129

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kantsevoy SV, Hu B, Jagannath SB, Vaughn CA, Beitler DM, Chung SS, Cotton PB, Gostout CJ, Hawes RH, Pasricha PJ, Magee CA, Pipitone LJ, Talamini MA, Kalloo AN (2006) Trangastric endoscopic splenectomy: is it possible? Surg Endosc 20:522–525

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bergstrom M, Ikeda K, Swain P, Park PO (2006) Transgastric anastomosis by using flexible endoscopy in a porcine model (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 63:307–312

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wagh MS, Merrifield BF, Thompson CC (2006) Survival studies after endoscopic transgastric oophorectomy and tubectomy in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 63:473–478

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Feretis C, Kalantzopoulos D, Koulouris P, Kolettas C, Archontovasilis F, Chandakas S, Patsea H, Pantazopoulou A, Sideris M, Papalois A, Simopoulos K, Leandros E (2007) Endoscopic transgastric procedures in anesthetized pigs: technical challenges, complications, and survival. Endoscopy 39:394–400

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hashiba K, Carvalho AM, Diniz G, Barbosa de Aridrade N, Guedes CA, Siqueira Filho L, Lima CA, Coehlo HE, de Oliveira RA, Carvaiho AM, Coetho HE (2001) Experimental endoscopic repair of gastric perforations with an omental patch and clips. Gastrointest Endosc 54:500–504

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Tsunada S, Ogata S, Ohyama T, Ootani H, Oda K, Kikkawa A, Ootani A, Sakata H, Iwakiri R, Fujimoto K (2003) Endoscopic closure of perforations caused by EMR in the stomach by application of metallic clips. Gastrointest Endosc 57:948–951

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to acknowledge the support of Johnson & Johnson for their assistance in this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Experimental Surgery and Surgical Research, School of Medicine, Democritus University of Thrace, Alexandroupolis, Thrace, Greece

    Constantinos Simopoulos, Georgios Kouklakis, Petros Zezos, Petros Ypsilantis, Sotiris Botaitis, Christos Tsalikidis & Michail Pitiakoudis

Authors
  1. Constantinos Simopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Georgios Kouklakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Petros Zezos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Petros Ypsilantis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Sotiris Botaitis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Christos Tsalikidis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Michail Pitiakoudis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Petros Zezos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Simopoulos, C., Kouklakis, G., Zezos, P. et al. Peroral transgastric endoscopic procedures in pigs: feasibility, survival, questionings, and pitfalls. Surg Endosc 23, 394–402 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-9930-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-9930-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation