Obese women's perception of bariatric trans-vaginal NOTES
- PMID: 22170394
- DOI: 10.1007/s11695-011-0578-8
Obese women's perception of bariatric trans-vaginal NOTES
Abstract
Much of the discussion pertaining to natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) focuses on technical issues, with little attention to women's perception and to their willingness to consent to this surgery, especially in the field of obesity. Aim of this study was to evaluate obese women's perception of NOTES and trans-vaginal access. Sixty two obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery were given a written description of NOTES with an anonymous questionnaire exploring their concerns and opinions regarding this technique. The risk of complications was the most important aspect with regard to surgical procedures for 87.1% of patients, while the aesthetic result counted only for 16.1%; none of the patients would accept an increased risk of surgical complications for a better aesthetic result, and 74.2% of them would prefer a standardized traditional surgical approach. Nulliparous women were more concerned about the potentially negative effects of NOTES on fertility than multiparous women and younger women were more worried about the effects on sexual function than older women. 83.9% of patients refusing NOTES stated that the main reason for their refusal was the lack of definitive data on the beneficial effects. Bariatric NOTES potentially offers obese women a scarless intervention, but only a few obese women expressed worries about the cosmetic/aesthetic effects of surgery, while most of them were worried about effects on future fertility and sexual life. Our study highlights a strong need for early reporting of outcome data to enlighten patients about this new approach to bariatric surgery.
Similar articles
-
Women's positive perception of transvaginal NOTES surgery.Surg Endosc. 2009 Aug;23(8):1770-4. doi: 10.1007/s00464-008-0206-4. Epub 2008 Dec 5. Surg Endosc. 2009. PMID: 19057953
-
Transvaginal natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES): a survey of women's views on a new technique.Surg Endosc. 2010 Oct;24(10):2424-31. doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-0968-3. Epub 2010 Mar 12. Surg Endosc. 2010. PMID: 20224999
-
Female population perception of conventional laparoscopy, transumbilical LESS, and transvaginal NOTES for cholecystectomy.Surg Endosc. 2011 Jul;25(7):2308-15. doi: 10.1007/s00464-010-1554-4. Epub 2011 Feb 8. Surg Endosc. 2011. PMID: 21301884
-
Women's Perception of Transvaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (NOTES): Results of a Survey of Female Medical Staff and Literature Review.Surg Innov. 2016 Apr;23(2):201-11. doi: 10.1177/1553350615598621. Epub 2015 Aug 2. Surg Innov. 2016. PMID: 26234564 Review.
-
Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery: Review of Its Applications in Bariatric Procedures.Obes Surg. 2016 Feb;26(2):422-8. doi: 10.1007/s11695-015-1978-y. Obes Surg. 2016. PMID: 26620212 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Scars Matter: The Importance of Incision Decisions in Bariatric Patients.Obes Surg. 2020 Apr;30(4):1611-1615. doi: 10.1007/s11695-019-04251-2. Obes Surg. 2020. PMID: 31811624
-
Is single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy safe? Results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.Surg Endosc. 2013 Jul;27(7):2293-304. doi: 10.1007/s00464-012-2763-9. Epub 2013 Jan 26. Surg Endosc. 2013. PMID: 23355161
-
Conventional laparoscopy vs. single port surgery from a patient's point of view: influence of demographics and body mass index.Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2012 Dec;124(23-24):834-41. doi: 10.1007/s00508-012-0299-6. Epub 2012 Nov 20. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2012. PMID: 23179437
-
Consumer demand for surgical innovation: a systematic review of public perception of NOTES.Surg Endosc. 2015 Apr;29(4):774-80. doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3769-2. Epub 2014 Aug 27. Surg Endosc. 2015. PMID: 25159629
References
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical