Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

Urological applications of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES)

Subjects

Key Points

  • Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) nephrectomy, prostatectomy, and partial cystectomy are novel surgical techniques with tremendous promise as innovative approaches to the treatment urological diseases

  • NOTES techniques have undergone extensive preclinical development over the past decade, which has increased understanding and led to refinement of the methodology

  • NOTES can be performed via transgastric, transurethral, transrectal, and transvaginal routes, and either alone as 'pure NOTES', or in combination with laparoscopy surgery as 'hybrid NOTES'

  • In humans, NOTES procedures have primarily been used in proof-of-principle studies in cadavers or select patients; however, these have proven the feasibility of NOTES nephrectomy and prostatectomy

  • Considerable challenges continue to limit the widespread adoption of NOTES, including potential safety concerns, an unmet need for dedicated, specifically designed instruments, and the shortage of suitably skilled surgeons

  • Furthermore, stringent validation and comparison with laparoscopy and open-surgery techniques is needed to ensure that the current enthusiasm for NOTES techniques is supported by measureable improvements in patient outcomes

Abstract

Improvements in surgical techniques, and particularly the development and widespread clinical introduction of laparoscopy in the past two decades, have revolutionized the management of urological disease. Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) holds promise in further advancing treatment outcomes in urology. This novel minimally invasive surgical approach can negate the requirement for skin incisions and, therefore, could potentially improve morbidity, convalescence, and cosmesis. After considerable preclinical development, the feasibility of 'hybrid' NOTES—involving concurrent laparoscopy—and 'pure' NOTES nephrectomy and prostatectomy procedures has now been successfully demonstrated in patients with urological conditions, whereas proof-of-concept studies of NOTES partial cystectomy have been performed in animal models. Whether such procedures offer therapeutic and safety benefits compared with traditional laparoscopic techniques remains unknown; indeed, concerns remain over the potential perioperative and postoperative adverse events associated with NOTES, such as incomplete closure of the entry-point incision, infection, and haemorrhage. In particular, however, the requirement for the development of specific rationally designed NOTES instrumentation as well as specially trained, highly skilled personnel to perform the surgery continues to restrict the utility of NOTES. Thus, considerable effort is now needed to shift the focus of research to refining NOTES methodologies to enable translation of these promising proof-of-principle studies into the clinic.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2: Approaches used in NOTES procedures.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jiang, L. et al. Laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy versus open gastrectomy for resectable gastric cancer: an update meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials. Surg. Endosc. 27, 2466–2480 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Simon, G. Chirurgie der Nieren Vol. 2 [German]. 314 (Stuttgart, Ferdinand Enke, 1876).

  3. Clayman, R. V. et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy: initial case report. J. Urol. 146, 278–282 (1991).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gettman, M. T., Lotan, Y., Napper, C. A. & Cadeddu, J. A. Transvaginal laparoscopic nephrectomy: development and feasibility in the porcine model. Urology 59, 446–450 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lima, E. et al. Third-generation nephrectomy by natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery. J. Urol. 178, 2648–2654 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Clayman, R. V. et al. Rapid communication: transvaginal single-port NOTES nephrectomy: initial laboratory experience. J. Endourol. 21, 640–644 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Box, G. N. et al. Rapid communication: robot-assisted NOTES nephrectomy: initial report. J. Endourol. 22, 503–506 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Haber, G. P. et al. Robotic NOTES (Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery) in reconstructive urology: initial laboratory experience. Urology 71, 996–1000 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Isariyawongse, J. P., McGee, M. F., Rosen, M. J., Cherullo, E. E. & Ponsky, L. E. Pure natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) nephrectomy using standard laparoscopic instruments in the porcine model. J. Endourol. 22, 1087–1091 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Crouzet, S. et al. Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) renal cryoablation in a porcine model. BJU Int. 102, 1715–1718 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Haber, G. P. et al. Pure 'natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery' for transvaginal nephrectomy in the porcine model. BJU Int. 104, 1260–1264 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Raman, J. D. et al. Complete transvaginal NOTES nephrectomy using magnetically anchored instrumentation. J. Endourol. 23, 367–371 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Perretta, S. et al. Feasibility of right and left transvaginal retroperitoneal nephrectomy: from the porcine to the cadaver model. J. Endourol. 23, 1887–1892 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Aron, M. et al. Transvaginal nephrectomy with a multichannel laparoscopic port: a cadaver study. BJU Int. 103, 1537–1541 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Boylu, U., Oommen, M., Joshi, V., Thomas, R. & Lee, B. R. Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) partial nephrectomy in a porcine model. Surg. Endosc. 24, 485–489 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bazzi, W. M. et al. Transrectal hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) nephrectomy in a porcine model. Urology 77, 518–523 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Baldwin, D. D. et al. Hybrid transureteral natural orifice translumenal endoscopic nephrectomy: a feasibility study in the porcine model. J. Endourol. 25, 245–250 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Sánchez-Margallo, F. M. et al. Transvaginal NOTES-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy: a survival study in a sheep model. Surg. Endosc. 26, 926–932 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lima, E., Branco, F., Parente, J., Autorino, R. & Correia-Pinto, J. Transvesical natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) nephrectomy with kidney morcellation: a proof of concept study. BJU Int. 109, 1533–1537 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bazzi, W. M. et al. Feasibility of transrectal hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) nephrectomy in the cadaveric model. Urology 80, 590–595 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bazzi, W. M. et al. Comparison of transrectal and transvaginal hybrid natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery partial nephrectomy in the porcine model. Urology 82, 84–89 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Eyraud, R. et al. Robot-assisted transrectal hybrid natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery nephrectomy and adrenalectomy: initial investigation in a cadaver model. Urology 81, 1090–1094 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Zeltser, I. S. et al. Single trocar laparoscopic nephrectomy using magnetic anchoring and guidance system in the porcine model. J. Urol. 178, 288–291 (2007).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Breda, G. et al. Laparoscopic nephrectomy with vaginal delivery of the intact kidney. Eur. Urol. 24, 116–117 (1993).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Gill, I. S. et al. Vaginal extraction of the intact specimen following laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. J. Urol. 167, 238–241 (2002).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Branco, A. W. et al. Hybrid transvaginal nephrectomy. Eur. Urol. 53, 1290–1294 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Alcaraz, A. et al. Feasibility of transvaginal NOTES-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy. Eur. Urol. 57, 233–237 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Kaouk, J. H. et al. NOTES transvaginal nephrectomy: first human experience. Urology 74, 5–8 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Porpiglia, F., Fiori, C., Morra, I. & Scarpa, R. M. Transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery-assisted minilaparoscopic nephrectomy: a step towards scarless surgery. Eur. Urol. 60, 862–866 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sotelo, R. et al. NOTES hybrid transvaginal radical nephrectomy for tumor: stepwise progression toward a first successful clinical case. Eur. Urol. 57, 138–144 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Alcaraz, A. et al. Feasibility of transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery-assisted living donor nephrectomy: is kidney vaginal delivery the approach of the future? Eur. Urol. 59, 1019–1025 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Kaouk, J. H. et al. Transvaginal hybrid natural orifice transluminal surgery robotic donor nephrectomy: first clinical application. Urology 80, 1171–1175 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kaouk, J. H. et al. Pure natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) transvaginal nephrectomy. Eur. Urol. 57, 723–726 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Hagen, M. E. et al. Robotic single-incision transabdominal and transvaginal surgery: initial experience with intersecting robotic arms. Int. J. Med. Robot. 6, 251–255 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Laydner, H. et al. Robotic retroperitoneal transvaginal natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) nephrectomy: feasibility study in a cadaver model. Urology 81, 1232–1237 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Lerner, L. B. & Tyson, M. D. Holmium laser applications of the prostate. Urol. Clin. North Am. 36, 485–495 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Humphreys, M. R., Krambeck, A. E., Andrews, P. E., Castle, E. P. & Lingeman, J. E. Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgical radical prostatectomy: proof of concept. J. Endourol. 23, 669–675 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Krambeck, A. E., Humphreys, M. R., Andrews, P. E. & Lingeman, J. E. Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery: radical prostatectomy in the canine model. J. Endourol. 24, 1493–1496 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Humphreys, M. R. et al. Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial perioperative and pathologic results. Urology 78, 1211–1217 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Nagele, U. et al. Natural orifice (NOTES) transurethral sutureless radical prostatectomy with thulium laser support: first patient report. World J. Urol. 30, 625–631 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Chung, D. E. & Te, A. E. New techniques for laser prostatectomy: an update. Ther. Adv. Urol. 1, 85–97 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Sawyer, M. D., Cherullo, E. E., Elmunzer, B. J., Schomisch, S. & Ponsky, L. E. Pure natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery partial cystectomy: intravesical transurethral and extravesical transgastric techniques in a porcine model. Urology 74, 1049–1053 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Freeman, L. J. et al. Comparison of pain and postoperative stress in dogs undergoing natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, laparoscopic, and open oophorectomy. Gastrointest. Endosc. 72, 373–380 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Baron, T. H. Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery. Br. J. Surg. 94, 1–2 (2007).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. McGee, M. F. et al. A primer on natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: building a new paradigm. Surg. Innov. 13, 86–93 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Wood, S. G., Panait, L., Duffy, A. J., Bell, R. L. & Roberts, K. E. Complications of transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery: a series of 102 patients. Ann. Surg. 259, 744–749 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Zorron, R. et al. International multicenter trial on clinical natural orifice surgery—NOTES IMTN study: preliminary results of 362 patients. Surg. Innov. 17, 142–158 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Rattner, D., Kalloo, A. & ASGE/SAGES Working Group. ASGE/SAGES Working Group on Natural Orifice Translumenal Endoscopic Surgery. October 2005. Surg. Endosc. 20, 329–333 (2006).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

M.D.T. researched the data for the article and M.R.H. reviewed/edited the manuscript before submission. Both authors substantially contributed to discussion of the content and writing the article.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mitchell R. Humphreys.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tyson, M., Humphreys, M. Urological applications of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES). Nat Rev Urol 11, 324–332 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2014.96

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrurol.2014.96

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing