Download PDF
Endoscopy 2007; 39(10): 881-887
DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-966908
Original article

© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Dual-port distal pancreatectomy using a prototype endoscope and endoscopic stapler: a natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) survival study in a porcine model

M.  Ryou1 , D.  G.  Fong1 , R.  D.  Pai1 , A.  Tavakkolizadeh2 , D.  W.  Rattner3 , C.  C.  Thompson1
  • 1Division of Gastroenterology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  • 2Department of General Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
  • 3Department of General Surgery Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Further Information

Publication History

submitted 13 August 2007

accepted after revision 22 August 2007

Publication Date:
29 October 2007 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

See also:

Commentaire des travaux de D. G. Fong et al. pp. 865 et M. Ryou et al. pp. 881Endoscopy 2007; 39(10): 933-935
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1308877

Background and study aims: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is a potentially less invasive alternative to laparoscopic surgery that may be applicable to distal pancreatectomy. We aimed to demonstrate the technical feasibility of a NOTES distal pancreatectomy in an in vivo porcine model via a combined transvaginal-transcolonic approach.

Material and methods: The procedure was performed in five female Yorkshire pigs weighing approximately 30 kg each. A prototype endoscope (”R-scope”), advanced into the peritoneal cavity through an anterior colotomy, and a computer-assisted linear stapler, introduced transvaginally, were used in dissection and resection of the distal pancreas. Prone positioning was used to enhance retroperitoneal exposure. Pneumodissection was used for blunt dissection. The colotomies were closed with endoloops. Necropsies were done immediately after the procedure in the first three animals, and after 2 weeks’ survival in the final two animals.

Results: Distal pancreatectomy was successful in all five animals. Prone positioning was critically important for proper exposure of retroperitoneal and pelvic structures. Pneumodissection was effective for blunt dissection, and both the linear stapler and R-scope functioned smoothly. Transvaginal and transcolonic access provided similar intraperitoneal views, and the dual-lumen approach enhanced triangulation. Both survival animals thrived postoperatively. Necropsies revealed clean staple lines; closed transcolonic and transvaginal incisions; and absence of infection, hemorrhage, or fluid collections.

Conclusions: NOTES distal pancreatectomy is technically feasible in the porcine model. The transvaginal approach provides a vantage point very similar to that of the transcolonic route and holds promise as a NOTES access site, either singly or as part of a dual-lumen approach. The endoscopic linear stapler and R-scope both advance NOTES capabilities. The novel concepts of fully prone positioning, pneumodissection, and endoloop colotomy closures are introduced. Considering anatomical differences and that healthy animals were used, transferring this technique to patients with pancreatic disease might be difficult and further modifications would likely be needed.

References

  • 1 Shimizu S, Tanaka M, Konomi H. et al . Laparoscopic pancreatic surgery: current indications and surgical results.  Surg Endosc. 2004;  18 402-406
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Fernandez-Cruz L, Cesar-Borges G, Lopez-Boado M A. et al . Minimally invasive surgery of the pancreas in progress.  Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2005;  390 342-354
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Tagaya N, Kasama K, Suzuki N. et al . Laparoscopic resection of the pancreas and review of the literature.  Surg Endosc. 2003;  17 201-206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Benoist S, Dugue L, Sauvanet A. et al . Is there a role of preservation of the spleen in distal pancreatectomy?.  J Am Coll Surg. 1999;  188 255-260
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Lillemoe K D, Kaushal S, Cameron J L. et al . Distal pancreatectomy: indications and outcomes in 235 patients.  Ann Surg. 1999;  229 693-698
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Verhoeven H C, Brosens I. Transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy, its history and present indication.  Minim Invasiv Ther Allied Technol. 2005;  14 175-180
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gordts S, Campo R, Brosens I. Experience with transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy for reconstructive tubo-ovarian surgery.  Reprod Biomed Online. 2002;  4 (Suppl 3) 72-75
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Tsin D A. Culdolaparoscopy: a preliminary report.  JSLS, Journal of the Society of Laparoendscopic Surgeons. 2001;  5 69-71
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Gordts S, Brosens I, Gordts S. et al . Progress in transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy.  Obstet Gynecol Clin N Am. 2004;  31 631-639
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Darai E, Dessolle L, Lecruru F. et al . Transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy compared with laparoscopy for the evaluation of infertile women: a prospective comparative blind study.  Hum Reprod. 2000;  15 2379-282
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Gordts S, Campo R, Rombauts L. et al . Transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy as an outpatient procedure for infertility investigation.  Hum Reprod. 1998;  13 99-103
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Tsin D A, Colombero L T, Mahmood D. et al . Operative culdolaparoscopy: a new approach combining operative culdoscopy and minilaparoscopy.  J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2001;  8 438-441
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Tsin D A, Sequeria R J, Giannikas G. Culdolaparoscopic cholecystectomy during vaginal hysterectomy.  JSLS. 2003;  7 171-172
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Buess G, Kipfmuller K, Ibald R. et al . Clinical results of transanal endoscopic microsurgery.  Surg Endosc. 1988;  2 245-250
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Tytgat G N. Dilation therapy of benign esophageal stenoses.  World J Surg. 1989;  13 142-148
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Iglesias J J, Sporer A, Gellman A C. et al . New Iglesias resectoscope with continuous irrigation, simultaneous suction and low intravesical pressure.  J Urol. 1975;  114 929-933
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Fong D G, Pai R D, Thompson C C. Transcolonic endoscopic abdominal exploration: a NOTES survival study in a porcine model.  Gastrointest Endosc. 2007;  65 312-318
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Pai R D, Fong D G, Bundga M E. et al . Transcolonic endoscopic cholecystectomy: a NOTES survival study in a porcine model [with video].  Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;  64 428-434
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Gordts S, Campo R, Brosens I. Office transvaginal hydrolaparoscopy for early diagnosis of pelvic endometriosis and adhesions.  J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc. 2000;  7 45-49
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Gordts S, Campo R, Puttemans P. et al . Investigation of the infertile couple: a one-stop outpatient endoscopy-based approach.  Hum Reprod. 2002;  17 1684-1687
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Sclabas G M, Swain P, Swanstrom L L. Endoluminal methods for gastrotomy closure in natural orifice transenteric surgery (NOTES).  Surg Innov. 2006;  13 23-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Pearle M S, Nakada S Y, McDougall E M. et al . Laparoscopic pneumodissection: results in initial 20 patients.  J Am Coll Surg. 1997;  184 579-583
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Gardner S M, Clayman R V, McDougall E M. et al . Laparoscopic pneumodissection: a unique means of tissue dissection.  J Urol. 1995;  154 (2 Pt 1) 591-594
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Dawson D L, Coil J A, Jadali M. et al . Use of skin staplers in experimental gastrointestinal injuries.  J Trauma. 1992;  32 204-209
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Edwards D P, Warren B F, Galbraith K A. et al . Comparison of two closure techniques for the repair of experimental colonic perforations.  Br J Surg. 1999;  86 514-517
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Raju G S, Ahmed I, Brining D. et al . Endoluminal closure of large perforations of colon with clips in a porcine model [with video].  Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;  64 640-646
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Wilhelm D, Meining A, von Delius S. et al . An innovative, safe and sterile sigmoid access (ISSA) for NOTES.  Endoscopy. 2007;  39 401-406
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar

C. C. Thompson, MD 

Brigham and Women's Hospital
Division of Gastroenterology

75 Francis St
Boston, MA, 02115
USA

Fax: +1-617-732-8266

Email: ccthompson@partners.org

      >