Comparison of natural orifice and conventional transabdominal specimen extraction: literature review

dc.authoridAktas, Aydin/0000-0003-3407-0210
dc.authorwosidAktas, Aydin/AAC-3425-2021
dc.contributor.authorAktas, Aydin
dc.contributor.authorCicek, Egemen
dc.date.accessioned2024-08-04T20:54:37Z
dc.date.available2024-08-04T20:54:37Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.departmentİnönü Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractBackground and Objective: Conventional laparoscopic (CL) surgery is widely used in colorectal surgery. However, specimen extraction in CL requires an abdominal incision, which leads to increased rates of incision- related complications, such as postoperative pain, hernia, and surgical site infection (SSI). To reduce these complications, a novel and minimally invasive surgical approach known as natural orifice sample extraction (NOSE) has gained increasingly widespread use. The aim of this review is, intended to compare NOSE and CL in terms of postoperative complications and oncological outcomes in colorectal surgery. Methods: Various medical databases were searched up to May 2021. We included retrospective, cohort study, randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis on the treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC) with NOSES. Key Content and Findings: The results of this review showed that; compared with CL, NOSE showed less intraoperative bleeding, less postoperative pain and less analgesic requirement, fewer postoperative complications, better cosmetic recovery, less hospital stay, and better quality of life (QoL). While the operation time was found to be longer in NOSE, oncological results were similar in the two groups. Conclusions: NOSE can be applied in colorectal surgery with better clinical outcomes and similar oncologic outcomes. Large-scale multicenter studies are required to confirm its clinical benefits.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.21037/ales-22-27
dc.identifier.issn2518-6973
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85168110258en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.21037/ales-22-27
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11616/101519
dc.identifier.volume8en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000906877600001en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/Aen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherAme Publishing Companyen_US
dc.relation.ispartofAnnals of Laparoscopic and Endoscopic Surgeryen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectConventional laparoscopy ( CL)en_US
dc.subjectnatural orifice sample extraction (NOSE)en_US
dc.subjectspecimen extractionen_US
dc.subjectcolonen_US
dc.subjectrectumen_US
dc.subjectcolorectalen_US
dc.titleComparison of natural orifice and conventional transabdominal specimen extraction: literature reviewen_US
dc.typeReview Articleen_US

Dosyalar