Effectiveness of NOTES versus traditional techniques on surgical outcomes in adults with diverticulitis: a systematic review protocol

Abstract

Objective: This review will evaluate the effectiveness of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES)/hybrid NOTES versus traditional surgical techniques in the management of diverticular disease. Introduction: Diverticular disease can have a significant impact on a patient’s quality of life, especially the changes affecting bowel function. Recurrent/severe symptoms may require surgery. Resections are invasive and can have significant operative complications. There has been a shift from an open resection to a more minimally invasive technique such as laparoscopy. Furthermore, the use of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic resection, using a transanal/transvaginal approach, has begun to be used in colorectal resections. Inclusion criteria: Eligible studies will include patients who underwent surgical resection for diverticular disease or diverticulitis. The review will consider studies that evaluate NOTES in the management of diverticular disease or diverticulitis. This will include hybrid procedures involving both NOTES and natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE), with the aid of laparoscopy/endoscopy/robotic equipment. Studies on participants under 18 years of age and presenting with non-diverticular pathologies will be excluded. Methods: This review will follow the JBI methodology for systematic reviews of effectiveness and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 statement. Databases to be searched will include PubMed, MEDLINE (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ANZCTR, with no language limitations. The reference lists of included studies will be screened for additional studies. This review will preferentially consider experimental and quasi-experimental study designs. Two reviewers will conduct critical appraisal and data extraction. Studies will, where possible, be pooled in statistical meta-analyses. Systematic Review Registration Number: PROSPERO CRD42023420771