Original article
Experimental endoscopy
EUS in localizing safe alternate access sites for natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: initial experience in a porcine model

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2008.04.030Get rights and content

Background

Most natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) procedures have been performed through the anterior stomach wall, based on the established safety of PEG placement. This approach does not afford mechanically efficient access to all anatomic areas of interest.

Objective

To assess the utility of EUS in identifying safe alternate access sites for NOTES.

Design

Nonsurvival animal experiment.

Methods

Thirty-two EUS-guided access procedures were performed through the antrum, the posterior stomach wall, or the rectum of 12 pigs. Sixteen safe-access procedures (SAP) used sonographic guidance to achieve safe intraperitoneal access by avoiding extraluminal organs and vessels during the initial NOTES puncture. Sixteen unsafe-access procedures (UAP) evaluated potential complications of blind access by performing a standard NOTES puncture at sites adjacent to critical extraluminal structures identified by EUS. Access was achieved by using a similar technique for both SAPs and UAPs. Baseline and completion laparotomies were performed.

Results

All 16 UAPs resulted in clinically relevant complications, such as liver laceration and iliac artery injury. In contrast, 13 SAPs were without complication. The 3 complications in the SAP group occurred with transrectal access and consisted of 2 minor complications and a small-bowel perforation.

Conclusions

Blind NOTES access through the antrum, posterior stomach wall, and rectum could result in catastrophic complications. In contrast, EUS-guided access through these sites substantially reduced but did not completely eliminate this risk. EUS appears promising as an adjunct to NOTES access, particularly as more experience is gained in definitively excluding the presence of at-risk extraluminal structures.

Section snippets

Endoscopes and instruments

Endoscopes used in this study were a prototype forward-viewing echoendoscope (GIF-UCT160J-AL5), a standard curved linear array (CLA) echoendoscope (GIF-UCT160EUS; Olympus), and a standard single-channel gastroscope (GIF-130; Olympus). Instruments used during the access procedures were a triple-lumen needle-knife catheter (Microvasive Endoscopy, Boston Scientific Corp, Natick, Mass), a 19-gauge EUS-FNA needle (Olympus), a 0.89-mm × 400-cm Jagwire (Microvasive), and an 18-mm to 20-mm controlled

Results

All 32 access procedures resulted in successful peritoneal entry. Of the 16 SAPs, 13 were without complication. In contrast, all 16 UAPs resulted in complications.

Discussion

By using EUS to target at-risk extraluminal organs and vessels, we were able to demonstrate the potential complications of blind NOTES access through sites other than the anterior gastric wall. When EUS was used to identify and avoid such structures, however, access through these sites was substantially safer and less likely to result in a major complication. These findings, although preliminary, suggest that EUS is useful in identifying safe alternate access sites for NOTES.

In this study, the

References (17)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (0)

If you want to chat with an author of this article, you may contact him at [email protected].

DISCLOSURE: The authors report that there are no disclosures relevant to this publication.

View full text