Document Detail

Randomized, blinded comparison of transgastric, transcolonic, and laparoscopic peritoneoscopy for the detection of peritoneal metastases in a human cadaver model.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  20850736     Owner:  NLM     Status:  In-Process    
BACKGROUND: Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery peritoneoscopy may be able to replace laparoscopic peritoneoscopy (LAP) for staging of GI malignancies if it is proven to be equally accurate and safe.
OBJECTIVE: To compare transgastric peritoneoscopy (TGP) and transcolonic peritoneoscopy (TCP) to LAP, pairwise, in a randomized, blinded (to location and number of beads) human cadaver model with simulated peritoneal metastases.
DESIGN: Metastases were simulated by 2.5-mm, color-coded beads, which were placed into the peritoneal cavity via an open approach. In previous porcine experiments, LAP resulted in a yield of 95%. By using a noninferiority design with a margin of equivalence of 15%, we needed a sample size of 34 beads for 80% power. Randomization was performed for number and location of beads. Eighteen experiments were performed on 6 fresh-frozen human cadavers.
SETTING: Experimental surgical laboratory.
INTERVENTION: LAP, TGP, and TCP were performed in randomized order by one of two surgeons/endoscopists blinded for location and number of beads.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Number of beads detected and touched.
RESULTS: LAP found and touched 33 beads (yield 97%), TGP 26 beads (76%; difference in yield vs LAP was -20.5 [95% CI, -26.3 to -9.27]), and TCP 29 beads (85%; difference in yield vs LAP was -11.8 [95% CI, -14.6 to 4.98]). Beads that were missed were mostly located at the inferior liver surface: TGP missed 6 of 9 of these beads (67%), TCP 4 of 9 (44%).
LIMITATIONS: Cadaver model.
CONCLUSION: In this prospective, blinded, comparative trial in a human cadaver model, TCP was comparable to LAP in detecting simulated metastases. TGP was inferior to LAP. Future development should focus on improved visualization of the inferior surface of the liver.
Rogier P Voermans; Mark I van Berge Henegouwen; Erienne de Cuba; Frank J C van den Broek; Gijs van Acker; Robin Timmer; Paul Fockens
Related Documents :
14689186 - Advantage of single-trial models for response to selection in wheat breeding multi-envi...
3608506 - The impact of treatment allocation procedures on nominal significance levels and bias.
17327246 - An introduction to causal modeling in clinical trials.
18759836 - Related causal frameworks for surrogate outcomes.
18556026 - A continuous time version and a generalization of a markov-recapture model for trapping...
22412306 - Detection of gaseous plumes using basis vectors.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article     Date:  2010-09-20
Journal Detail:
Title:  Gastrointestinal endoscopy     Volume:  72     ISSN:  1097-6779     ISO Abbreviation:  Gastrointest. Endosc.     Publication Date:  2010 Nov 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2010-11-01     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  0010505     Medline TA:  Gastrointest Endosc     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  1027-33     Citation Subset:  IM    
Copyright Information:
Copyright © 2010 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Department of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Comment In:
Gastrointest Endosc. 2010 Nov;72(5):1034-5   [PMID:  21034903 ]

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Previous Document:  Evaluation of a urinary test as a diagnostic tool of a nonprogressive pregnancy.
Next Document:  An improved particle swarm optimization algorithm for reliability problems.