Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 May;77(5):774-83. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.12.017. Epub 2013 Feb 28.
Reliable closure of the gastrotomy after transgastric natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) remains unresolved.
To compare the technical aspects and clinical and histologic outcomes of NOTES gastrotomy closure techniques.
Experimental study.
Animal laboratory.
Thirty-four dogs, 14 for nonsurvival study and 20 for survival study.
The animals randomly received different gastrotomy closures after NOTES: endoclip, omentoplasty, over-the-scope-clip (OTSC), and hand-suturing.
Procedure time, closure strength, survival, postoperative adverse events, and histologic evaluation of wound healing.
Omentoplasty and OTSC groups needed shorter procedure times and fewer clips than the endoclip group. The endoclip and omentoplasty groups generated similar leakage pressures (34.5 ± 2.6 vs 42.2 ± 4.1 mm Hg, P > .05), both lower than OTSC and hand-suturing groups (81.5 ± 2.1 and 87.0 ± 3.0 mm Hg, respectively, P < .001). Of the 20 animals in the survival study (all 4 groups), only 2 of 6 in the endoclip group were killed prematurely due to sepsis. Necropsy revealed the OTSC group reached a 100% clip retention rate, higher than the endoclip (47.9%) and omentoplasty groups (44.4%, P < .05) rates. Complete healing, defined as intact and continuous gastric layers microscopically, was seen in 83.3% of animals (5 of 6) in the omentoplasty group, comparable with OTSC (4 of 6, 66.7%, P = .500) but higher than the endoclip group (1 of 6, 16.7%, P = .04).
Animal study.
Omentoplasty is easier and safer for NOTES gastrotomy closure than endoclips and offers safety profile and efficacy similar to OTSC and hand-suturing.
经自然腔道内镜外科(transgastric natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery,NOTES)胃造口后的可靠关闭仍然没有得到解决。
比较NOTES 胃造口关闭技术的技术方面和临床及组织学结果。
实验研究。
动物实验室。
34 只狗,14 只为非生存研究,20 只为生存研究。
NOT ES 后,动物随机接受不同的胃造口闭合术:内镜夹、大网膜覆盖、经内镜下抓钳夹闭(over-the-scope-clip,OTSC)和手工缝合。
手术时间、闭合强度、生存、术后不良事件和伤口愈合的组织学评估。
大网膜覆盖和 OTSC 组所需的手术时间和夹闭数量均少于内镜夹组。内镜夹和大网膜覆盖组的漏液压力相似(34.5 ± 2.6 与 42.2 ± 4.1 mmHg,P >.05),均低于 OTSC 和手工缝合组(81.5 ± 2.1 和 87.0 ± 3.0 mmHg,P <.001)。20 只生存研究动物(均来自 4 个组)中,仅 6 只内镜夹组中的 2 只因脓毒症而提前死亡。尸检显示,OTSC 组的夹闭率达到 100%(6 只中的 6 只),高于内镜夹(47.9%)和大网膜覆盖组(44.4%,P <.05)。在大网膜覆盖组中,83.3%(5 只中的 6 只)的动物完全愈合,定义为显微镜下胃壁连续完整,与 OTSC(4 只中的 6 只,66.7%,P =.500)相似,但高于内镜夹组(1 只中的 6 只,16.7%,P =.04)。
动物研究。
与内镜夹相比,大网膜覆盖对于 NOTES 胃造口术的闭合更容易、更安全,其安全性和疗效与 OTSC 和手工缝合相似。