Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Female population perception of conventional laparoscopy, transumbilical LESS, and transvaginal NOTES for cholecystectomy

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Recent population survey has shown a preference for transumbilical laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (U-LESS) compared with natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) for cholecystectomy, assuming similar surgical risk. This study was designed to evaluate the perception and preference of women regarding conventional laparoscopy, U-LESS, and transvaginal NOTES (TV-NOTES) with particular interest to access perception.

Methods

An anonymous questionnaire on laparoscopic, U-LESS, and TV-NOTES cholecystectomy, without regards to risks or advantages, was given to female medical/paramedical staff (n = 100), patients (n = 100), and the general population (n = 100). Women participants (median age, 35 (range, 16–79) years) were queried about preference, perception of the different accesses, and personal informations. Of the respondents, 54% had children, 79% had stable relationships, and 96% were sexually active (vaginal intercourse).

Results

With similar operative risk, 87% preferred U-LESS, 4% TV-NOTES and 8% laparoscopy. LESS/NOTES choice was influenced by a desire of improved cosmetics (82%) and lower pain (44%). 96% had worries regarding transvaginal access, among them: dyspareunia (68%), decreased sensibility during intercourse (43%), refuse of short-term sexual abstinence (40%), and infertility (23%). Transumbilical access evocated worries in 35%: umbilical pain (19%), postoperative umbilical sensibility (15%), and incisional hernia (11%). Postoperative intercourse abstinence after TV-NOTES evocated worries in 76% (defined as 3 weeks in survey): feel less attractive (40%), less feminine (32%), tension with their intimate (35%), lover non-acceptation (20%), possible abortion of new relationship (26%), and feel less comfortable socially (16%).

Conclusions

The high acceptation rate for U-LESS approach compared with TV-NOTES may be related to fears regarding postoperative sexuality and fertility. The importance of temporary postoperative sexual abstinence (vaginal intercourse) is high and may be difficult to influence. Future research on TV-NOTES should focus on the access risk to be able to scientifically reassure our patients. For now, U-LESS seems to be favor compared with TV-NOTES for cholecystectomy in female patients.

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

Addendum 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gettman M, Box G, Averch T, Cadeddu JA, Cherullo E, Clayman RV, Desai M, Frank I, Gill IS, Gupta M, Haber GP, Humphreys M, Kaouk JH, Landman J, Lima E, Ponsky L (2008) Consensus statement on natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery and single-incision laparoscopic surgery: heralding a new era in urology. Eur Urol 53(6):1117–1120

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kelley W (2008) Single port laparoscopic surgery. Laparosc Today 7(2):5–6

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gill IS, Advincula AP, Aron M, Caddedu J, Canes D, Curcillo PG, Desai MM, Evanko JC, Falcone T, Fazio V, Gettman M, Gumbs AA, Haber GP, Kaouk JH, Kim F, King SA, Ponsky J, Remzi F, Rivas H, Rosemurgy A, Ross S, Schauer P, Sotelo R, Speranza J, Sweeney J, Teixeira J (2010) Consensus statement of the consortium for laparoendoscopic single-site surgery. Surg Endosc 24(4):762–768

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bucher P, Pugin F, Morel P (2009) Scarless surgery: reality through umbilical laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS)? Rev Med Suisse 5(209):1412–1415

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Zornig C, Mofid H, Siemssen L, Wenck CH (2010) Transvaginal access for NOTES. Chirurg 81(5):426–430

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Zorron R, Palanivelu C, Galvao Neto MP, Ramos A, Salinas G, Burghardt J, DeCarli L, Henrique Sousa L, Forgione A, Pugliese R, Branco AJ, Balashanmugan TS, Boza C, Corcione F, D’avila Avila F, Arturo Gomez N, Martins S, Filgeueiras M, Gellert K, Rmirez E, Campos J, Rajan PS, Prasad M, Cuccurullo D, Muller V (2010) International multicenter trial on clinical natural orifice surgery–NOTES IMTN study: preliminary results of 362 patients. Surg Innov 17(2):142–158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bucher P, Pugin F, Morel P, Hagen M (2008) Scarless surgery: myth or reality through NOTES? Rev Med Suisse 4(163):1550–1552

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Thele F, Zygmunt M, Glitsch A, Heidecke CD, Schreiber A (2008) How do gynecologists feel about transvaginal NOTES surgery? Endoscopy 40(7):576–580

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Curcillo PG II, Wu AS, Podolsky ER, Graybeal C, Katkhouda N, Saenz A, Dunham R, Fendley S, Neff M, Copper C, Bessler M, Gumbs AA, Norton M, Iannelli A, Mason R, Moazzez A, Cohen L, Mouhlas A, Poor A (2010) Single-port-access (SPA™) cholecystectomy: a multi-institutional report of the first 297 cases. Surg Endosc 24(8):1854–1860

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bucher P, Pugin F, Ostermann S, Morel P (2010) Patient’s point of view on surgical innovations: for less traumatic surgery and enhanced recovery. Rev Med Suisse 5(254):1292–1297

    Google Scholar 

  11. Périssat J (1999) Laparoscopic surgery: a pioneer’s point of view. World J Surg 23(8):863–868

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Swanstrom L, Volkmann E, Hungness E, Soper N (2009) Patient attitudes and expectations regarding natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 23(7):1519–1525

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Bucher P, Pugin F, Ostermann S, Ris F, Chilcott M, Morel P (2010) Population perception of surgical safety and body image trauma: a plea for scarless surgery? Surg Endosc doi:10.1007/s00464-010-1180-1

  14. Neugebauer EA, Becker M, Buess GF, Cuschieri A, Dauben HP, Fingerhut A, Fuchs KH, Habermalz B, Lantsberg L, Morino M, Reiter-Theil S, Soskuty G, Wayand W, Welsch T (2010) EAES recommendations on methodology of innovation management in endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 24(7):1594–1615

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bucher P, Ostermann S, Pugin F, Morel P (2009) E-NOTES appendectomy versus transvaginal appendectomy: similar cosmetic results but shorter complete recovery? Surg Endosc 23(4):916–917

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Slim K, Launay-Savary M (2008) NOTES, the debates continues. Surg Endosc 22(10):2326

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Otten A (1992) The influence of the mass media on health policy. Health Aff 11(4):111–118

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Bucher P, Pugin F, Buchs N, Ostermann S, Charara F, Morel P (2009) Single port access laparoscopic cholecystectomy (with video). World J Surg 33(5):1015–1018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Harrell A, Heniford B (2005) Minimally invasive abdominal surgery: lux et veritas past, present, and future. Am J Surg 190(2):239–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Paganini A, Lomonto D, Navordino M (1995) One port laparoscopic cholecystectomy in selected patients. In: Third International congress on new technology in surgery, Luxembourg

  21. Navarra G, Ascanelli S, Sortini D, Soliani G, Pozza E, Carcoforo P (1997) One-wound laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 84(5):695

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Volckmann E, Hungness E, Soper N, Swanstrom L (2007) Patient perceptions of natural orifice transluminal surgery. In: SAGES 2007 annual meeting program book. www.sages.org/07program/SAGES_2007_Abstracts_Only.pdf. Accessed 15 Oct 2008

  23. Varadarajulu S, Tamhane A, Drelichman E (2008) Patient perception of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery as a technique for cholecystectomy. Gastrointest Endosc 67(6):854–860

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Peterson CY, Ramamoorthy S, Andrews B, Horgan S, Talamini M, Chock A (2009) Women’s positive perception of transvaginal NOTES surgery. Surg Endosc 23(8):1770–1774

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Li W, Xiao J (2008) Investigation for acceptance of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery by inpatients with digestive disease. Gastrointest Endosc 67(5):AB120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Strickland AD, Norwood MG, Behnia-Willison F, Olakkengil SA, Hewett PJ (2010) Transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES): a survey of women’s views on a new technique. Surg Endosc 24(10):2424–2431

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bucher P, Pugin F, Morel P (2010) From single-port access to laparoendoscopic single-site cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 24(1):234–235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. NHMRC (2000) How to use the evidence: assessment and application of scientific evidence. National Health and Medical Research Council, Canberra

  29. Amias A (1975) Sexual life after gynaecological operation II. Br Med 21(5972):680–681

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Palmer R (1984) Why the laparoscopic route for tubal sterilization? Contracept Fertil Sex 12(7):931–933

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Zornig C, Mofid H, Emmermann A, Alm M, Von Waldenfels HA, Felixmuller C (2008) Scarless cholecystectomy with combined transvaginal and transumbilical approach in a series of 20 patients. Surg Endosc 22(6):1427–1429

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Zorron R, Maggioni L, Pombo L, Oliveira AL, Carvalho GL, Filgueiras M (2008) NOTES transvaginal cholecystectomy: preliminary clinical application. Surg Endosc 22(2):542–547

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

Drs. Pascal Bucher, Sandrine Ostermann, Francois Pugin, and Prof. Philippe Morel have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, University Hospital Geneva, 24 rue Micheli-du-Crest, 1211, Geneva, Switzerland

    Pascal Bucher, Sandrine Ostermann, François Pugin & Philippe Morel

Authors
  1. Pascal Bucher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sandrine Ostermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. François Pugin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Philippe Morel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pascal Bucher.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bucher, P., Ostermann, S., Pugin, F. et al. Female population perception of conventional laparoscopy, transumbilical LESS, and transvaginal NOTES for cholecystectomy. Surg Endosc 25, 2308–2315 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1554-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-010-1554-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation