Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 12/2015

01-12-2015

Randomized trial on the physiologic impact of NOTES

Authors: Juliane Bingener, Erica A. Loomis, Marianne Huebner, Christopher J. Gostout

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 12/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Our previous work revealed significantly less acidosis in swine undergoing natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) using endoscopic air insufflation than swine undergoing standard laparoscopy. We wanted to evaluate the differential effects of CO2 versus intra-abdominal pressure as source for this finding. In addition, we investigated the endocrine stress response between swine undergoing NOTES peritoneoscopy with CO2 insufflation and animals undergoing standard diagnostic laparoscopy with CO2.

Materials and methods

Twenty-eight (28) female 50-kg domestic pigs were randomly assigned to one of four groups using a permuted block randomization table: Group 1: NOTES using CO2 insufflation, Group 2: NOTES using air insufflation, Group 3: laparoscopy max pressure 12 mmHg and Group 4: laparoscopy with max pressure 7 mmHg. Invasive monitoring lines were placed. Pneumoperitoneum was established by the respective method and maintained for 90 min, visualizing liver, spleen and colon. Arterial blood gas was obtained at baseline and four additional time points. Serum TNF-α for POD (postoperative day) 1 and cumulative urine adrenaline for the procedure were determined by ELISA. ANOVA and t test were used for statistical comparison. The study was Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees approved.

Results

All experiments were completed as outlined. Blood pH showed a significant difference between groups. Serum TNF-α revealed higher levels for NOTES CO2 on POD 1 than standard laparoscopy (p = 0.03).

Conclusion

NOTES animals with CO2 insufflation initially experienced similar pH compared to standard laparoscopy but recovered to levels seen in low-pressure laparoscopy and NOTES with air. NOTES with CO2 appears to elicit a stronger stress response in this study than standard or low-pressure laparoscopy or NOTES with air.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bingener J, Michalek J, Winston J, Van Sickle K, Haines V, Schwesinger W, Lawrence V (2008) Randomized blinded trial comparing the cardiopulmonary effects of NOTES with standard laparoscopy in a porcine survival model. Surg Endosc 22:1430–1434CrossRefPubMed Bingener J, Michalek J, Winston J, Van Sickle K, Haines V, Schwesinger W, Lawrence V (2008) Randomized blinded trial comparing the cardiopulmonary effects of NOTES with standard laparoscopy in a porcine survival model. Surg Endosc 22:1430–1434CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Bingener J, Sloan JA, Ghosh K, McConico A, Mariani A (2012) Qualitative and quantitative analysis of women’s perceptions of transvaginal surgery. Surg Endosc 26:998–1004CrossRefPubMed Bingener J, Sloan JA, Ghosh K, McConico A, Mariani A (2012) Qualitative and quantitative analysis of women’s perceptions of transvaginal surgery. Surg Endosc 26:998–1004CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Detsky A (2011) What patients really want from health care. JAMA 306:2500–2501PubMed Detsky A (2011) What patients really want from health care. JAMA 306:2500–2501PubMed
4.
go back to reference Bickel A, Yahalom M, Roguin N, Frankel R, Breslava J, Ivry S, Eitan A (2002) Power spectral analysis of heart rate variability during positive pressure pneumoperitoneum: the significance of increased cardiac sympathetic expression. Surg Endosc 16:1341–1344CrossRefPubMed Bickel A, Yahalom M, Roguin N, Frankel R, Breslava J, Ivry S, Eitan A (2002) Power spectral analysis of heart rate variability during positive pressure pneumoperitoneum: the significance of increased cardiac sympathetic expression. Surg Endosc 16:1341–1344CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Galizia G, Prizo G, Lieto E, Castellano P, Pelosio L, Imperatore V, Ferrara A, Pignatelli C (2001) Hemodynamic and pulmonary changes during open, carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum and abdominal wall-lifting cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized study. Surg Endosc 15:477–483CrossRefPubMed Galizia G, Prizo G, Lieto E, Castellano P, Pelosio L, Imperatore V, Ferrara A, Pignatelli C (2001) Hemodynamic and pulmonary changes during open, carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum and abdominal wall-lifting cholecystectomy: a prospective randomized study. Surg Endosc 15:477–483CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Hochberger J, Lamade W (2005) Transgastric surgery in the abdomen: the dawn of a new era? Gastrointest Endosc 62:293–296CrossRefPubMed Hochberger J, Lamade W (2005) Transgastric surgery in the abdomen: the dawn of a new era? Gastrointest Endosc 62:293–296CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Ponsky J (2005) Gastroenterologists as surgeons: what they need to know. Gastrointest Endosc 61:454CrossRefPubMed Ponsky J (2005) Gastroenterologists as surgeons: what they need to know. Gastrointest Endosc 61:454CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Kalloo A, Singh V, Jagannath S, Niiyama H, Hill S, Vaughn C, Magee C, Kantsevoy S (2004) Flexible transgastric peritoneoscopy: a novel approach to diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in the peritoneal cavity. Gastrointest Endosc 60:114–117CrossRefPubMed Kalloo A, Singh V, Jagannath S, Niiyama H, Hill S, Vaughn C, Magee C, Kantsevoy S (2004) Flexible transgastric peritoneoscopy: a novel approach to diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in the peritoneal cavity. Gastrointest Endosc 60:114–117CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Jagannath S, Kantsevoy S, Vaughn C, Chung S, Cotton P, Gostout C, Hawes R, Pasricha P, Scorpio D, Magee C, Pipitone L, Kalloo A (2005) Peroral transgastric endoscopic ligation of fallopian tubes with long-term survival in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 61:449–453CrossRefPubMed Jagannath S, Kantsevoy S, Vaughn C, Chung S, Cotton P, Gostout C, Hawes R, Pasricha P, Scorpio D, Magee C, Pipitone L, Kalloo A (2005) Peroral transgastric endoscopic ligation of fallopian tubes with long-term survival in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 61:449–453CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Kantsevoy S, Jagannath S, Niiyama H, Chung S, Cotton P, Gostout C, Hawes R, Pasricha P, Magee C, Vaughn C, Barlow D, Shimonaka H, Kalloo A (2005) Endoscopic gastrojejunostomy with survival in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 62:287–292CrossRefPubMed Kantsevoy S, Jagannath S, Niiyama H, Chung S, Cotton P, Gostout C, Hawes R, Pasricha P, Magee C, Vaughn C, Barlow D, Shimonaka H, Kalloo A (2005) Endoscopic gastrojejunostomy with survival in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 62:287–292CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Park P, Bergstrom M, Ikeda K, Fritscher-Ravens A, Swain P (2005) Experimental studies of transgastric gallbladder surgery: cholecystectomy and cholecystogastric anastomosis. Gastrointest Endosc 61:601–606CrossRefPubMed Park P, Bergstrom M, Ikeda K, Fritscher-Ravens A, Swain P (2005) Experimental studies of transgastric gallbladder surgery: cholecystectomy and cholecystogastric anastomosis. Gastrointest Endosc 61:601–606CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Swanstrom L, Kozarek R, Pasricha P, Gross S, Birkett D, Park P, Saadat V, Ewers R, Swain P (2005) Development of a new access device for transgastric surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 9:1129–1137CrossRefPubMed Swanstrom L, Kozarek R, Pasricha P, Gross S, Birkett D, Park P, Saadat V, Ewers R, Swain P (2005) Development of a new access device for transgastric surgery. J Gastrointest Surg 9:1129–1137CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Wagh MS, Merrifield BF, Thompson CC (2005) Endoscopic transgastric abdominal exploration and organ resection: initial experience in a porcine model. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 3:892–896CrossRefPubMed Wagh MS, Merrifield BF, Thompson CC (2005) Endoscopic transgastric abdominal exploration and organ resection: initial experience in a porcine model. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 3:892–896CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Wagh M, Merrifield B, Thompson C (2006) Survival studies after endoscopic transgastric oophorectomy and tubectomy in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 63:473–478CrossRefPubMed Wagh M, Merrifield B, Thompson C (2006) Survival studies after endoscopic transgastric oophorectomy and tubectomy in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 63:473–478CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Kantsevoy S, Hu B, Jagannath S, Vaughn C, Beitler D, Chung S, Cotton P, Gostout C, Hawes R, Pasricha P, Magee C, Pipitone L, Talamini M, Kalloo A (2006) Peroral transgastric endoscopic splenectomy: is it possible? Surg Endosc 20:522–525CrossRefPubMed Kantsevoy S, Hu B, Jagannath S, Vaughn C, Beitler D, Chung S, Cotton P, Gostout C, Hawes R, Pasricha P, Magee C, Pipitone L, Talamini M, Kalloo A (2006) Peroral transgastric endoscopic splenectomy: is it possible? Surg Endosc 20:522–525CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Rattner D, Kalloo A (2006) ASGE/SAGES Working group on natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 20:329–333CrossRefPubMed Rattner D, Kalloo A (2006) ASGE/SAGES Working group on natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery. Surg Endosc 20:329–333CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Pai RD, Fong DG, Bundga ME, Odze RD, Rattner DW, Thompson CC (2006) Transcolonic endoscopic cholecystectomy: a NOTES survival study in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 64:428–434CrossRefPubMed Pai RD, Fong DG, Bundga ME, Odze RD, Rattner DW, Thompson CC (2006) Transcolonic endoscopic cholecystectomy: a NOTES survival study in a porcine model. Gastrointest Endosc 64:428–434CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Bingener J, Moran E, Gostout CJ, Buck L, Schwesinger W, Van Sickle K, Huebner M (2011) Randomized study of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery and endoscopy shows similar hemodynamic impact in a porcine model. Surg Endosc 25:1065–1069CrossRefPubMed Bingener J, Moran E, Gostout CJ, Buck L, Schwesinger W, Van Sickle K, Huebner M (2011) Randomized study of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery and endoscopy shows similar hemodynamic impact in a porcine model. Surg Endosc 25:1065–1069CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Moran EA, Gostout CJ, McConico AL, Bingener J (2010) Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery used for perforated viscus repair is feasible using lower peritoneal pressures than laparoscopy in a porcine model. J Am Coll Surg 210:474–479CrossRefPubMed Moran EA, Gostout CJ, McConico AL, Bingener J (2010) Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery used for perforated viscus repair is feasible using lower peritoneal pressures than laparoscopy in a porcine model. J Am Coll Surg 210:474–479CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Trunzo JA, McGee MF, Cavazzola LT, Schomisch S, Nikfarjam M, Bailey J, Mishra T, Poulose BK, Lee Y-J, Ponsky JL, Marks JM (2010) Peritoneal inflammatory response of natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) versus laparoscopy with carbon dioxide and air pneumoperitoneum. Surg Endosc 24:1727–1736CrossRefPubMed Trunzo JA, McGee MF, Cavazzola LT, Schomisch S, Nikfarjam M, Bailey J, Mishra T, Poulose BK, Lee Y-J, Ponsky JL, Marks JM (2010) Peritoneal inflammatory response of natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) versus laparoscopy with carbon dioxide and air pneumoperitoneum. Surg Endosc 24:1727–1736CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Randomized trial on the physiologic impact of NOTES
Authors
Juliane Bingener
Erica A. Loomis
Marianne Huebner
Christopher J. Gostout
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 12/2015
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-015-4106-0

Other articles of this Issue 12/2015

Surgical Endoscopy 12/2015 Go to the issue