Initial experience with vNOTES hysterectomy for benign conditions in a French university hospital.
Journal
Facts, views & vision in ObGyn
ISSN: 2032-0418
Titre abrégé: Facts Views Vis Obgyn
Pays: Belgium
ID NLM: 101578773
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2022
Jun 2022
Historique:
entrez:
5
7
2022
pubmed:
6
7
2022
medline:
6
7
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery by the vaginal route (vNOTES) is a new approach to performing hysterectomy. Clinical outcomes must be evaluated in centres that have started performing this technique. To compare operative outcomes between vNOTES hysterectomy and laparoscopic hysterectomy during the introduction of the vNOTES approach in a teaching hospital. A retrospective study was conducted from November 2019 to May 2021 at a French academic hospital in Marseille. The included patients underwent total hysterectomy for benign indications by vNOTES or conventional laparoscopy. Operative time, uterus weight, intraoperative complications, and postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. Eighty-six patients underwent hysterectomy according to the selected criteria: 36 procedures were performed by vNOTES and 50 by laparoscopy. The mean operative time was shorter in the vNOTES group than in the laparoscopy group [116 min versus 149 min; p=0.003]. The mean uterus weight was not different between the vNOTES group and the laparoscopy group (238g versus 281g; p=0.572). Laparo-conversion occurred in one case in the vNOTES group (2.7%) and three cases in the laparoscopy group (3.4%). One Grade III postoperative complication occurred in the laparoscopy group, and no severe complication occurred in the vNOTES group. Operative outcomes of the vNOTES hysterectomy were favourable and support good feasibility without additional morbidity compared to laparoscopy. During the introduction period of the vNOTES hysterectomy technique in a teaching hospital, reassuring operative outcomes and a low rate of complications were observed.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery by the vaginal route (vNOTES) is a new approach to performing hysterectomy. Clinical outcomes must be evaluated in centres that have started performing this technique.
Objectives
UNASSIGNED
To compare operative outcomes between vNOTES hysterectomy and laparoscopic hysterectomy during the introduction of the vNOTES approach in a teaching hospital.
Material and Methods
UNASSIGNED
A retrospective study was conducted from November 2019 to May 2021 at a French academic hospital in Marseille. The included patients underwent total hysterectomy for benign indications by vNOTES or conventional laparoscopy.
Main outcome measures
UNASSIGNED
Operative time, uterus weight, intraoperative complications, and postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Eighty-six patients underwent hysterectomy according to the selected criteria: 36 procedures were performed by vNOTES and 50 by laparoscopy. The mean operative time was shorter in the vNOTES group than in the laparoscopy group [116 min versus 149 min; p=0.003]. The mean uterus weight was not different between the vNOTES group and the laparoscopy group (238g versus 281g; p=0.572). Laparo-conversion occurred in one case in the vNOTES group (2.7%) and three cases in the laparoscopy group (3.4%). One Grade III postoperative complication occurred in the laparoscopy group, and no severe complication occurred in the vNOTES group.
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Operative outcomes of the vNOTES hysterectomy were favourable and support good feasibility without additional morbidity compared to laparoscopy.
What is new?
UNASSIGNED
During the introduction period of the vNOTES hysterectomy technique in a teaching hospital, reassuring operative outcomes and a low rate of complications were observed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35781111
doi: 10.52054/FVVO.14.2.018
pmc: PMC10191712
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
147-153Références
BMC Surg. 2020 Oct 12;20(1):234
pubmed: 33046022
BMC Surg. 2019 Jul 10;19(1):88
pubmed: 31291917
Asian J Surg. 2020 Jan;43(1):44-51
pubmed: 31444108
Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2012 Jun;51(2):217-21
pubmed: 22795097
J Clin Med. 2020 Dec 07;9(12):
pubmed: 33297354
Surg Today. 2016 Jun;46(6):668-85
pubmed: 26289837
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021 Aug;263:216-222
pubmed: 34237485
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Aug 12;(8):CD003677
pubmed: 26264829
BJOG. 2019 Jan;126(1):105-113
pubmed: 30325565
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2012 Sep-Oct;19(5):631-5
pubmed: 22763314
J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014 Sep-Oct;21(5):818-24
pubmed: 24681063
Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2021 Nov;49(11):805-815
pubmed: 34520857
Gastrointest Endosc. 2004 Jul;60(1):114-7
pubmed: 15229442
Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
pubmed: 15273542
Gynecol Obstet Fertil Senol. 2021 Nov;49(11):816-822
pubmed: 34245923
Isr Med Assoc J. 2020 Jan;22(1):13-16
pubmed: 31927799
J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2021 May;50(5):102073
pubmed: 33513454