Adnexectomy by vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery versus laparoscopy: results of a first randomised controlled trial (NOTABLE trial).

OBJECTIVE: To compare adnexectomy by vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery (vNOTES) versus laparoscopy. DESIGN: Parallel group, 1:1 single-centre single-blinded randomised trial, designed as non-inferiority study with a margin of 15%. SETTING: Belgian teaching hospital. POPULATION: Non-pregnant non-virgin women with an intact uterus and without obliteration of the pouch of Douglas scheduled to undergo removal of an adnexal mass assessed to be benign on ultrasound by IOTA criteria. METHODS: Randomisation to laparoscopy (control group) or vNOTES (experimental group). Stratification according to adnexal size. Blinding of participants and outcome assessors by sham incisions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was adnexectomy by the allocated technique. Secondary outcomes included duration of surgery, pain scores and analgesics used, quality of life and adverse events. RESULTS: We randomly assigned 67 participants (34 to the vNOTES group and 33 to the laparoscopy group). The primary end point was always reached in both groups: there were no conversions. We performed a sensitivity analysis for the primary outcome, assuming one conversion in the vNOTES group and no conversions in the laparoscopy group: the one-sided 95% upper limit for the differences in proportions of conversion was estimated as 13%, which is below the predefined non-inferiority margin of 15%. The secondary outcomes demonstrated a shorter duration of surgery, lower pain scores, lower total dose of analgesics and a trend for more adverse events in the vNOTES group. CONCLUSIONS: vNOTES is non-inferior to laparoscopy for a successful adnexectomy without conversion. vNOTES allowed shorter operating times and less postoperative pain but there was a trend for more adverse events.

The rationale of opportunistic bilateral salpingectomies (OBS) during benign gynaecological and obstetric surgery: a consensus text of the Flemish Society of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (VVOG).

Ovarian cancer (OC), is a disease difficult to diagnose in an early stage implicating a poor prognosis. The 5-year overall survival in Belgium has not changed in the last 18 years and remains 44 %. There is no effective screening method (secondary prevention) to detect ovarian cancer at an early stage. Primary prevention of ovarian cancer came in the picture through the paradigm shift that the fallopian tube is often the origin of ovarian cancer and not the ovary itself. Opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy (OBS) during benign gynaecological and obstetric surgery might have the potential to reduce the risk of ovarian cancer by as much as 65 %. Bilateral risk-reducing salpingectomy during a benign procedure is feasible, safe, appears to have no impact on the ovarian function and seems to be cost effective. The key question is whether we should wait for a RCT or implement OBS directly in our daily practice. Guidelines regarding OBS within our societies are therefore urgently needed. Our recommendation is to inform all women without a child wish, undergoing a benign gynaecological or obstetrical surgical procedure about the pro's and the con's of OBS and advise a bilateral salpingectomy. Furthermore, there is an urgent need for a prospective registry of OBS. The present article is the consensus text of the Flemish Society of Obstetrics and Gynaecology (VVOG) regarding OBS.

Hysterectomy by transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery versus laparoscopy as a day-care procedure: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare hysterectomy by transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (vNOTES) versus total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH) as a day-care procedure. DESIGN: Parallel group, 1:1 randomised single-centre single-blinded trial, designed as a non-inferiority study with a margin of 15%. SETTING: Belgian teaching hospital. POPULATION: Women aged 18-70 years scheduled to undergo hysterectomy for benign indications. METHODS: Randomisation to TLH (control group) or vNOTES (experimental group). Stratification according to uterine volume. Blinding of participants and outcome assessors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was hysterectomy by the allocated technique. We measured the proportion of women leaving within 12 hours after hysterectomy and the length of hospital stay as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: We randomly assigned 70 women to vNOTES (n = 35) or TLH (n = 35). The primary endpoint was always reached in both groups: there were no conversions. We performed a sensitivity analysis for the primary outcome, assuming one conversion in the vNOTES group and no conversions in the TLH group: the one-sided 95% upper limit for the differences in proportions of conversion was estimated as 7.5%, which is below the predefined non-inferiority margin. More women left the hospital within 12 hours after surgery after vNOTES: 77 versus 43%, difference 34% (95% CI 13-56%), P = 0.007. The hospital stay was shorter after vNOTES: 0.8 versus 1.3 days, mean difference -0.5 days, (95% CI -0.98 to -0.02), P = 0.004. CONCLUSIONS: vNOTES is non-inferior to TLH for successfully performing hysterectomy without conversion. Compared with TLH, vNOTES may allow more women to be treated in a day-care setting. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: RCT: vNOTES is just as good as laparoscopy for successful hysterectomy without conversion but allows more day-care surgery.