Córdova Henry, Cubas Georgina, Boada Marc, Rodríguez de Miguel Cristina, Martínez-Pallí Graciela, Gimferrer Josep M, Fernández-Esparrach Gloria
Department of Gastroenterology, Hospital Clínic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Anesthesiology Department, Hospital Clínic, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Endosc Int Open. 2015 Dec;3(6):E571-6. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1392599. Epub 2015 Aug 11.
Safety is a concern in natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) mediastinoscopy. The objective of this study was to compare the safety of NOTES mediastinoscopy with video-assisted mediastinoscopy (VAM).
Twenty-four pigs were randomly assigned to NOTES or VAM. Thirty-minute mediastinoscopies were performed with the identification of seven predetermined structures. The animals were euthanized after 7 days and necropsy was performed.
Mediastinoscopy was not possible in one animal in each group. There were more intraoperative adverse events with NOTES than VAM (7 vs. 2, P = 0.04); hemorrhage was the most frequent adverse event (4 and 1, respectively). At necropsy, pathological findings were observed in 13 animals (9 NOTES and 4 VAM; P = 0.03). Inflammatory parameters were not different between groups and were not related to adverse events.
Systematic NOTES mediastinoscopy is possible and comparable to VAM in terms of number of organs identified and inflammatory impact. However, the safety profile of NOTES mediastinoscopy has to be improved before it can be adopted in a clinical setting.
经自然腔道内镜手术(NOTES)纵隔镜检查的安全性是一个值得关注的问题。本研究的目的是比较NOTES纵隔镜检查与电视辅助纵隔镜检查(VAM)的安全性。
将24头猪随机分配至NOTES组或VAM组。进行30分钟的纵隔镜检查,识别7个预先确定的结构。7天后对动物实施安乐死并进行尸检。
每组各有1只动物无法进行纵隔镜检查。NOTES组术中不良事件比VAM组更多(7例 vs. 2例,P = 0.04);出血是最常见的不良事件(分别为4例和1例)。尸检时,在13只动物中观察到病理结果(NOTES组9只,VAM组4只;P = 0.03)。两组间炎症参数无差异,且与不良事件无关。
系统性NOTES纵隔镜检查是可行的,在识别器官数量和炎症影响方面与VAM相当。然而,NOTES纵隔镜检查的安全性在应用于临床之前仍需改善。