65
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The transvaginal hybrid NOTES versus conventionally assisted laparoscopic sigmoid resection for diverticular disease (TRANSVERSAL) trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is the consequence of further development of minimally invasive surgery to reduce abdominal incisions and surgical trauma. The potential benefits are expected to be less postoperative pain, faster convalescence, and reduced risk for incisional hernias and wound infections compared to conventional methods. Recent clinical studies have demonstrated the feasibility and safety of transvaginal NOTES, and transvaginal access is currently the most frequent clinically applied route for NOTES procedures. However, despite increasing clinical application, no firm clinical evidence is available for objective assessment of the potential benefits and risks of transvaginal NOTES compared to the current surgical standard.

          Methods

          The TRANSVERSAL trial is designed as a randomized controlled trial to compare transvaginal hybrid NOTES and laparoscopic-assisted sigmoid resection. Female patients referred to elective sigmoid resection due to complicated or reoccurring diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon are considered eligible. The primary endpoint will be pain intensity during mobilization 24 hours postoperatively as measured by the blinded patient and blinded assessor on a visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes include daily pain intensity and analgesic use, patient mobility, intraoperative complications, morbidity, length of stay, quality of life, and sexual function. Follow-up visits are scheduled 3, 12, and 36 months after surgery. A total sample size of 58 patients was determined for the analysis of the primary endpoint. The confirmatory analysis will be performed based on the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle.

          Discussion

          The TRANSVERSAL trial is the first study to compare transvaginal hybrid NOTES and conventionally assisted laparoscopic surgery for colonic resection in a randomized controlled setting. The results of the TRANSVERSAL trial will allow objective assessment of the potential benefits and risks of NOTES compared to the current surgical standard for sigmoid resection.

          Trial registration

          The trial protocol was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00005995) on March 27, 2014.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-454) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Flexible transgastric peritoneoscopy: a novel approach to diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in the peritoneal cavity.

          A novel endoscopic peroral transgastric approach to the peritoneal cavity was tested in a porcine model in acute and long-term survival experiments. Transgastric peritoneoscopy was evaluated in 50-kg pigs. After upper endoscopy, the peritoneal cavity was accessed by needle-knife puncture of the gastric wall, followed by extension of the incision either with a pull-type sphincterotome or by balloon dilation. The peritoneal cavity was examined, and a liver biopsy specimen was obtained. The gastric wall incision was closed with clips. Twelve acute and 5 survival experiments were performed. Both techniques of gastric wall incision were without complication. The acute experiments demonstrated the technical feasibility of the approach. In the survival experiments, all pigs recovered and gained weight. The peroral transgastric approach to peritoneal cavity technically is feasible and has the potential to be an alternative to laparoscopy and laparotomy.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Systematic review of outcomes used to evaluate enhanced recovery after surgery.

            Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) aim to improve patient recovery. However, validated outcome measures to evaluate this complex process are lacking. The objective of this review was to identify how recovery is measured in ERP studies and to provide recommendations for the design of future studies. A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases was conducted. Prospective studies evaluating ERPs compared with traditional care in abdominal surgery published between 2000 and 2013 were included. All reported outcomes were classified into categories: biological and physiological variables, symptom status, functional status, general health perceptions and quality of life (QoL). The phase of recovery measured was defined as baseline, intermediate (in hospital) and late (following discharge). A total of 38 studies were included based on the systematic review criteria. Biological or physiological variables other than postoperative complications were reported in 30 studies, and included return of gastrointestinal function (25 studies), pulmonary function (5) and physical strength (3). Patient-reported symptoms, including pain (16 studies) and fatigue (9), were reported less commonly. Reporting of functional status outcomes, including mobilization (16 studies) and ability to perform activities of daily living (4), was similarly uncommon. Health aspects of QoL were reported in only seven studies. Length of follow-up was generally short, with 24 studies reporting outcomes within 30 days or less. All studies documented in-hospital outcomes (intermediate phase), but only 17 reported postdischarge outcomes (late phase) other than complications or readmission. Patient-reported outcomes, particularly postdischarge functional status, were not commonly reported. Future studies of the effectiveness of ERPs should include validated, patient-reported outcomes to estimate better their impact on recovery, particularly after discharge from hospital. © 2014 BJS Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Cosmesis and body image after laparoscopic-assisted and open ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease.

              The objectives of this study were to evaluate body image, cosmetic results, and quality of life in patients with Crohn's disease of the terminal ileum who had either laparoscopic-assisted or open ileocolic resection, and to determine how patients experienced the pre- and postoperative periods after both procedures. Thirty-four patients participated: 11 patients after open resection (OR), 11 patients after laparoscopic-assisted resection (LR), and 12 patients without resection (WR). Retrospectively, the patients filled out several questionnaires pertaining to body image, hospital experiences, and quality of life. One-way analysis of variance, Student's t-tests, and Pearson's correlation were used for statistical analysis. The cosmetic score was significantly higher in the LR than in the OR group (p < 0.01). Body image correlated strongly with cosmesis and with quality of life. The hospital experiences of the laparoscopic and open groups were similar. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with better cosmesis than open surgery. Patients do not experience laparoscopic surgery any differently from open surgery.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                jonas.senft@med.uni-heidelberg.de
                rene.warschkow@kssg.ch
                markus.diener@med.uni-heidelberg.de
                ignazio.tarantino@med.uni-heidelberg.de
                daniel.steinemann@ksbl.ch
                sebastian.lamm@ksbl.ch
                thomas.simon@med.uni-heidelberg.de
                andreas.zerz@ksbl.ch
                beat.mueller@med.uni-heidelberg.de
                georg.linke@med.uni-heidelberg.de
                Journal
                Trials
                Trials
                Trials
                BioMed Central (London )
                1745-6215
                20 November 2014
                20 November 2014
                2014
                : 15
                : 1
                : 454
                Affiliations
                [ ]Department of General, Abdominal and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
                [ ]Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics, University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 305, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
                [ ]Study Center of the German Surgical Society (SDGC), University of Heidelberg, Im Neuenheimer Feld 110, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany
                [ ]Department of Surgery, Kantonsspital Baselland, CH - 4101 Bruderholz, Switzerland
                [ ]Department of Surgery, GRN Klinik, Alte Waibstadter Straße 2, 74889 Sinsheim, Germany
                Article
                2309
                10.1186/1745-6215-15-454
                4246541
                25414061
                48f765bb-cac7-40ea-9671-180d9ba8aa5d
                © Senft et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2014

                This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 21 May 2014
                : 7 November 2014
                Categories
                Study Protocol
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2014

                Medicine
                diverticular disease,laparoscopy,natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery,notes,randomized controlled trial,sigmoid resection,study protocol,transvaginal

                Comments

                Comment on this article