Transvaginal natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES): a survey of women’s views on a new technique

BackgroundLaparoscopic and minimally invasive surgery has changed the surgical landscape irrevocably. Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) offers the possibility of surgery without visible scars. Transvaginal entry offers potential benefits because it gains access to the peritoneal cavity without the need to open an abdominal viscus. Much of the discussion pertaining to NOTES focuses on technical and training issues, with little attention to date paid to the opinions of women. The perceptions of female health care workers and patients were sought in relation to their views on transvaginal NOTES.MethodsThis study surveyed 300 women using a 12-point questionnaire devised by a multidisciplinary group of surgeons interested in minimally invasive surgery. The questionnaire was designed to establish the opinions of women with respect to NOTES surgery versus standard laparoscopic procedures. Responses were de-identified.ResultsThree-fourths of the women surveyed were neutral or unhappy about the prospect of a NOTES procedure, and this remained constant even when it was stipulated that laparoscopic cholecystectomy and NOTES had equivalent safety and efficacy. Younger nulliparous women were most concerned about the potential negative effect of NOTES on sexual function. A minority were concerned about the cosmetic effect of surgery, although surgical scars were perceived as more important to younger respondents.ConclusionsPotentially, NOTES surgery offers women a scarless operation with the possibility of less pain than experienced in standard laparoscopic surgery. Few women, however, were troubled about the cosmetic effect of surgery. The effect of NOTES on sexual function was expressed as a particular concern by younger women. In all groups and across all ages, peritoneal access using the transvaginal route was met by significant scepticism. In Australia, women remain to be convinced about the potential advantages of the emerging NOTES technology.

[1]  A. Wattiez,et al.  Laparoscopic hysterectomy , 2002, Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology.

[2]  M. Thompson-Fawcett,et al.  NOTES: new dimension of minimally invasive surgery , 2009, ANZ journal of surgery.

[3]  L. Swanstrom,et al.  Patient attitudes and expectations regarding natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery , 2009, Surgical Endoscopy.

[4]  K. Gurusamy,et al.  Meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials on the safety and effectiveness of day‐case laparoscopic cholecystectomy , 2008, The British journal of surgery.

[5]  D. Bruce Medication errors: another important surgical problem , 2009, ANZ journal of surgery.

[6]  G. Dionigi,et al.  Natural orifices transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) and other allied “ultra” minimally invasive procedures: are we loosing the plot? , 2009, Surgical Endoscopy.

[7]  Michel Boulvain,et al.  Incidence rate and risk factors for vaginal vault prolapse repair after hysterectomy , 2008, International Urogynecology Journal.

[8]  D. Fowler,et al.  Transvaginal laparoscopically assisted endoscopic cholecystectomy: a hybrid approach to natural orifice surgery. , 2007, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[9]  G. Maddern NOTES: progress or marketing? , 2009, ANZ journal of surgery.

[10]  M. Talamini,et al.  Women’s positive perception of transvaginal NOTES surgery , 2009, Surgical Endoscopy.

[11]  S. Varadarajulu,et al.  Patient perception of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery as a technique for cholecystectomy. , 2008, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[12]  Chinnusamy Palanivelu,et al.  Transvaginal endoscopic appendectomy in humans: a unique approach to NOTES—world’s first report , 2008, Surgical Endoscopy.

[13]  Andrew A Gumbs,et al.  Transvaginal Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery Cholecystectomy: Early Evolution of the Technique , 2009, Annals of surgery.

[14]  O. Alimoğlu,et al.  Laparoscopic surgery of the spleen. , 2005, The Surgical clinics of North America.

[15]  T. El-toukhy,et al.  The effect of different types of hysterectomy on urinary and sexual functions: a prospective study , 2004, Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology : the journal of the Institute of Obstetrics and Gynaecology.

[16]  A. Laurent,et al.  Laparoscopic liver resection: a systematic review. , 2009, Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery.

[17]  Vikesh K. Singh,et al.  Flexible transgastric peritoneoscopy: a novel approach to diagnostic and therapeutic interventions in the peritoneal cavity. , 2004, Gastrointestinal endoscopy.

[18]  I. Opitz,et al.  Risk factors for perioperative complications in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: analysis of 22,953 consecutive cases from the Swiss Association of Laparoscopic and Thoracoscopic Surgery database. , 2006, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[19]  W. Brugge,et al.  Taking NOTES: translumenal flexible endoscopy and endoscopic surgery , 2007, Current opinion in gastroenterology.