Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 10, 2025
Clinical Application of Single-Surgeon, Three-Port, Laparoscopic Resection for Colorectal Cancer with Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction
Published on: March 24, 2023
Efficacy of natural duct specimen extraction versus conventional laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer: a
Yang Liu1, Ting Tian1, Xin-Chun Li1
1Department of General Surgery, Changde Hospital, Xiangya School of Medicine, Central South University (The First People's Hospital of Changde City) Changde 415000, Hunan, China.
Objective:
Rectal cancer has a high incidence and its onset age is getting younger. Currently, conventional laparoscopic surgery can no longer meet the clinical requirements for surgical incisions. Natural orifice specimen extraction surgery (NOSES) is less invasive, but there have been few studies on the effectiveness of this procedure for rectal cancer. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the efficacy of NOSES and conventional laparoscopic surgery in rectal cancer treatment.
Methods:
In this retrospective analysis, we collected clinical data of 150 rectal cancer patients. Patients who received NOSES were included in a NOSES group and those underwent routine laparoscopic surgery were in a control group. Then, the observation group was matched with the control group at a ratio of 1:1 by using the propensity score matching method. We compared the surgical indicators, postoperative recovery indicators, physical indicators, pain, surgical stress-related indicators, inflammation indicators, immune indicators, quality of life, and postoperative complications between the two groups.
Results:
We found that compared with the control group, the NOSES group had a shorter exhaust start time, getting out-of-bed activity time, length of hospital stay, bowel sound recovery time, and gastrointestinal peristalsis time. The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS) scores decreased in both groups after surgery, with the NOSES group showing a more significant reduction. The Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores decreased in both groups, and the NOSES group had lower VAS scores. Additionally, the NOSES group exhibited a significant interaction effect with time (intergroup effect: F = 497.800; time effect: F = 163.100; interaction effect: F = 5.307). Superoxide dismutase (SOD) levels decreased and malondialdehyde (MDA) levels increased in both groups postoperatively; however, the NOSES group had higher SOD levels and lower MDA levels. All the above comparisons were statistically significant (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the total complication rates between the NOSES group and the control group (Z = -0.768, P = 0.442; χ2 = 2.333, P = 0.127).
Conclusion:
Compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, NOSES results in less pain and injury, a more stable mood, faster recovery, and comparable safety.
