• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
    • Why Should You Support SAGES?
    • SAGES Swag
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Annual Meeting
      • 2027 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2027 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Lead Up Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • Innovative Surgical Trends
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Advanced Laparoscopy and Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
    • Foregut Video Atlas
  • Opportunities
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs
  • Learning Hub
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Laparoscopic and NOTES Cholecystectomy: Preliminary Results

Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Laparoscopic and NOTES Cholecystectomy: Preliminary Results

Introduction: the feasibility of hybrid NOTES cholecystectomy has been demonstrated. The recommendations from the 4th International Conference on NOTES (Boston, 2009) encouraged randomized trials to prove the advantages of this approach.

Methods: Between January and July 2009, a prospective randomized trial of hybrid NOTES cholecystectomy (H-NC) versus laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for patients with symptomatic gallstone disease was undertaken in compliance with our IRB and Ethics Committee´s approval. Mean age was 42.5 years. The inclusion criteria specify: a) Age between 18 and 65 years, b) Previous pregnancy/ies, and negative pregnancy tests, c) Informed consent process, d) Symptomatic gallbladder stones with surgical indication, e) Absence of common bile obstruction, f) Body mass index below 25, j) Non relevant ultrasound findings. The patients were allocated randomly in 2 groups of 20 patients each: Group I (LC): a laparoscopic cholecystectomy was performed with a 3 5 mm trocars and in cases, an additional 2 mm forceps for retraction of the gallbladder fundus was used. Group II (H-NC): placement of a 5 mm umbilical trocar for insuflation and visualization, insertion of a 2 channel trocar through the right posterior vaginal cul de sac and introduction of a flexible videoendoscope (Olympus GIF-160) and long forceps and diverse instruments (Novare®). Disecction of the cystic elements (duct and artery) and the Calot´s triangle was performed with electrocautery, scissors and Maryland forceps through the umbilical port, in a laparoscopic fashion as well as the ligaclip instrument. Removal of the gallbladder through the vagina using an endoscopic loop placed at its neck. The access was closed with a running suture of absorbable vycril 2/0 from the vagina. Antibiotic prophylaxis was used with cefazolin 1g before anesthetic induction and post-operative analgesia was standardized for the 2 groups.

Results: 1) the procedure was completed as intended in both groups, 2) Mean operative time was 38 +/- 8.5 minutes for LC and 56 +/- 12 for H-NC, 3) Length of stay was similar for both groups, 4) No intraoperative complications were achieved, 5) In two of the H-NC an additional 2 mm forceps was required, 6) No infectious or parietal complications developed during follow-up, 7) Postoperative pain was less in the N-HC group as well as the need for additional painkiller medication, but not statistically significant, 8) Cosmetic results were excellent in the H-NC group, 9) Patients´ preferences were inclined to the H-NC procedure and 10) 9) Return to work was in average 39 hours earlier for the H-NC.

Conclusions: Our initial results conclude that H-NC is superior to LC for less postoperative pain and better cosmetic results, though it is associated with longer operative time and additional instruments. Nonetheless, H- NC can be performed safely and has an excellent outcome and high patient acceptability, comparable to LC for the treatment of cholelithiasis and intraoperative complications and total hospital stay.


Session: Podium Presentation

Program Number: S040

Related



Hours & Info

15821 Ventura Blvd Ste 400
Encino, CA 91436

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2026 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals

Refine Search