Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Randomized comparative trial of a novel one-step needle sphincterotome versus direct incision and balloon dilation used to create gastrotomies for natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) in the porcine model

  • Dynamic Manuscript
  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

This study aimed to assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of a prototype device (the one-step needle sphincterotome) versus direct incision and balloon dilation for creating transgastric access to the peritoneal cavity in a porcine model.

Methods

In five swine, 24 gastrotomies were created using direct incision followed by balloon dilation (group A) or by the one-step needle sphincterotome (group B) in an in vivo nonsurvival model. The one-step needle sphincterotome is a novel instrument comprising two components including a retractable needleknife and a pull-type sphincterotome on the same instrument shaft, reducing the need to exchange instruments.

Results

The 24 gastrotomies created in the five swine all were successful. The mean time required for creation of a gastrotomy was 613.08 ± 289.64 s in group A and 310.58 ± 137.39 s in group B. The total procedural time was 830.42 ± 296.17 s in group A and 529 ± 143.97 s in group B. Both were significantly shorter in the prototype device group (P = 0.002). The mean length of gastrotomy, mean number of clips required for closure, and mean overall closure time were not significantly different. One swine from each group suffered morbidities and another experienced mortality.

Conclusions

The one-step needle sphincterotome hastened the creation of gastrotomies for natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). The gastrotomies created by both procedures were effective means of gaining peritoneal access, and neither method demonstrated superiority in expediting closure. However, the initial blind transgastric incision by a needleknife may be associated with a risk of injuring surrounding structures.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rattner D, Kalloo A, ASGE/SAGES Working Group (2006) ASGE/SAGES Working Group on Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery. Surg Endosc 20:329–333

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Fritscher-Ravens A, Mosse CA, Mukherjee D, Mills T, Park PO, Swain CP (2003) Transluminal endosurgery: single-lumen access anastomotic device for flexible endoscopy. Gastrointest Endosc 58:585–591

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Spaun GO, Zheng B, Swanström LL (2009) A multitasking platform for natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES): a benchtop comparison of a new device for flexible endoscopic surgery and a standard dual-channel endoscope. Surg Endosc 23:2720–2727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Spaun GO, Zheng B, Martinec DV, Cassera MA, Dunst CM, Swanström LL (2009) Bimanual coordination in natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: comparing the conventional dual-channel endoscope, the R-Scope, and a novel direct-drive system. Gastrointest Endosc 69:e39–e45

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Thompson CC, Ryou M, Soper NJ, Hungess ES, Rothstein RI, Swanstrom LL (2000) Evaluation of a manually driven, multitasking platform for complex endoluminal and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery applications (with video). Gastrointest Endosc 70:121–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Arezzo A, Morino M (2010) Endoscopic closure of gastric access in perspective NOTES: an update on techniques and technologies. Surg Endosc 24:298–303

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fritscher-Ravens A, Ghanbari A, Holland C, Olagbeye F, Hardeler KG, Seehusen F, Jacobsen B, Mannur K (2009) Beyond NOTES: randomized controlled study of different methods of flexible endoscopic hemostasis of artificially induced hemorrhage via NOTES access to the peritoneal cavity. Endoscopy 41:29–35

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Park PO, Long GL, Bergström M, Cunningham C, Vakharia OJ, Bakos GJ, Bally KR, Rothstein RI, Swain CP (2010) A randomized comparison of a new flexible bipolar hemostasis forceps designed principally for NOTES versus a conventional surgical laparoscopic bipolar forceps for intraabdominal vessel sealing in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 71:835–841

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kalloo AN, Singh VK, Jagannath SB, Niiyama H, Hill SL, Vaughn CA, Magee CA, Kantsevoy SV (2004) Flexible transgastric peritoneoscopy: a novel approach to diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in the peritoneal cavity. Gastrointest Endosc 60:114–117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Marescaux J, Dallemagne B, Perretta S, Wattiez A, Mutter D, Coumaros D (2007) Surgery without scars: report of transluminal cholecystectomy in a human being. Arch Surg 142:823–826

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wilhelm D, Meining A, von Delius S, Fiolka A, Can S, Hann von Weyhern C, Schneider A, Feussner H (2007) An innovative, safe, and sterile sigmoid access (ISSA) for NOTES. Endoscopy 39:401–406

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lima E, Rolanda C, Pêgo JM, Henriques-Coelho T, Silva D, Carvalho JL, Correia-Pinto J (2006) Transvesical endoscopic peritoneoscopy: a novel 5-mm port for intraabdominal scarless surgery. J Urol 176:802–805

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. von Delius S, Gillen S, Doundoulakis E, Schneider A, Wilhelm D, Fiolka A, Wagenpfeil S, Schmid RM, Feussner H, Meining A (2008) Comparison of transgastric access techniques for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery. Gastrointest Endosc 68:940–947

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Yoshizumi F, Yasuda K, Kawaguchi K, Suzuki K, Shiraishi N, Kitano S (2009) Submucosal tunneling using endoscopic submucosal dissection for peritoneal access and closure in natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: a porcine survival study. Endoscopy 41:707–711

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Flora ED, Wilson TG, Martin IJ, O’Rourke NA, Maddern GJ (2008) A review of natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) for intraabdominal surgery: experimental models, techniques, and applicability to the clinical setting. Ann Surg 247:583–602

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Bardini R, Asolati M, Ruol A et al (1994) Anastomosis. World J Surg 18:373–378

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Elmunzer BJ, Schomisch SJ, Trunzo JA, Poulose BK, Delaney CP, McGee MF, Faulx AL, Marks JM, Ponsky JL, Chak A (2009) EUS in localizing safe alternate access sites for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: initial experience in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 69:108–114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Fritscher-Ravens A, Ghanbari A, Cuming T, Kahle E, Niemann H, Koehler P, Patel K (2008) Comparative study of NOTES alone vs EUS-guided NOTES procedures. Endoscopy 40:925–930

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Woodward T, McCluskey D III, Wallace MB, Raimondo M, Mannone J, Smith CD (2008) Pilot study of transesophageal endoscopic surgery: NOTES esophagomyotomy, vagotomy, lymphadenectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 18:743–745

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chiu PW, Lau JY, Ng EK, Lam CC, Hui M, To KF, Sung JJ, Chung SS (2008) Closure of a gastrotomy after transgastric tubal ligation by using the Eagle Claw VII: a survival experiment in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 68:554–559

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

Anthony Yuen Bun Teoh, Philip Wai Yan Chiu, James Yun Wong Lau, and Enders Kwok Wai Ng have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgery, Department of Surgery, Prince of Wales Hospital, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Anthony Yuen Bun Teoh, Philip Wai Yan Chiu & Enders Kwok Wai Ng

  2. Institute of Digestive Disease, Faculty of Medicine, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Philip Wai Yan Chiu, James Yun Wong Lau & Enders Kwok Wai Ng

Authors
  1. Anthony Yuen Bun Teoh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Philip Wai Yan Chiu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James Yun Wong Lau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Enders Kwok Wai Ng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Enders Kwok Wai Ng.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

464_2011_1653_MOESM1_ESM.m4v

Video 1. One-step needle sphincterotome in creating gastrotomies for natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). (M4V 9615 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Teoh, A.Y.B., Chiu, P.W.Y., Lau, J.Y.W. et al. Randomized comparative trial of a novel one-step needle sphincterotome versus direct incision and balloon dilation used to create gastrotomies for natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) in the porcine model. Surg Endosc 25, 3116–3121 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-1653-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-1653-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation