Multiport Laparoscopic Surgery Research Articles

Single-incision Laparoscopic Colonic Surgery: A Systemic Review, Meta-analysis, and Future Prospect.

Although single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has gained some attention as a feasible alternative to conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) in colonic surgery, it became less prevalent than expected. Hence, we conducted this systematic review to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and oncological outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) with meta-analysis and discussion of the future prospect of SILS. The search was conducted from September to October 2023 using PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Articles on colorectal cancer comparing SILC with multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MPLC) from all randomized controlled trials and comparative studies with 50 patients or more per arm were examined. The primary outcomes were the intra- and postoperative complication rates, and the secondary outcomes were the perioperative and oncological outcomes. The trends of the SILS number in Japan and the trends of the number of articles on SILS in PubMed were also reviewed. There were no significant differences in perioperative complication rates, operative factors, and oncological outcomes between SILC and MPLC, although heterogeneity was observed mainly in operative factors and the total length of the skin incision was significantly shorter in SILC. Therefore, SILC is technically and oncologically feasible and safe when performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons. The case number of SILS was gradually increasing but the rate of SILS was decreasing in Japan. The number of articles on SILS was also decreasing. SILS has gained foothold to some extent but has plateaued. The emerging new robotic platform may reappraise the concept of SILS.

Analysis of short-term outcome indicators and risk factors for postoperative complications in patients with sigmoid colon cancer by transumbilical single-port plus one port laparoscopy

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of Single-Port plus One Port Laparoscopy (SILS + 1) with Conventional Multi-Port Laparoscopic Surgery (CLS) and investigate risk factors associated with postoperative complications in patients with sigmoid colon cancer undergoing laparoscopy. Male patients with sigmoid colon cancer treated at our hospital were selected and evenly distributed into the CLS and SILS + 1 groups and further categorized into complication and non-complication groups based on their complications status within 30 days post-surgery. Compared to the CLS group, the SILS+ 1 group had significantly shorter incision length, greater distance to the lower edge of the tumor and shorter time to first postoperative ambulation (p < 0.05). A total of 20 cases (16.67%) developed complications within 30 days post-surgery, and among them, 8 (13.33%) were in the SILS + 1 group and 12 (20.00%) in the CLS group (p = 0.327). Logistic multivariable regression analysis showed that age (p = 0.028; Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.028; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.003–1.054), body mass index (BMI)(p = 0.002; OR = 1.950; 95% CI: 1.248–2.961) and operation time (p < 0.001; OR = 1.067; 95% CI: 1.030–1.106) were independent risk factors for complication occurrence within 30 days post-surgery, and at 2-year follow-up, there was no significant difference in overall survival between both groups (p > 0.05). In conclusion, age, BMI and duration of surgery were identified as independent risk factors for postoperative complications in male sigmoid colon cancer patients, among whom SILS + 1 was found to reduce postoperative discomfort and accelerate recovery compared to CLS while maintaining surgical efficacy.

Ergonomic learning curves on gynecological laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery

BackgroundFew previous studies have introduced general techniques to overcome the “chopstick effect” in laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS). We aim to investigate and highlight the key ergonomic methodologies for gynaecologic LESS based on the surgeon’s hands-on performance.MethodsThe first author surgeon A reviewed and analyzed the LESS procedures performed by herself and how she taught surgeon B from January 2021 to April 2022. The procedures were classified based on technical difficulty and learning periods, and the hands-on technical skills of LESS module were evaluated.ResultsSurgeon A conducted 580 LESS procedures, which were divided into the novice (n = 48) and intermediate (n = 33) periods, and the remaining cases were included in the routine period. We formed a special ergonomic LESS operating methodology: Maintain good LESS laparoscopic spatial sensation, keep hand-eye coordination, well cooperation between the main surgeon and the assistant; Experienced multiport laparoscopy surgery (MPS) skills, improve basic LESS technique: grasp, lift, transfer, place, blunt separating, coagulation and cutting. Coordination location, orientation, movements, and flexion or extension of shoulders, arms, elbow, wrist and finger joints; Maintain strength, tension and ambidexterity postures with joint and muscular efforts to control instruments. Surgeon B learned the above experiences by performing 39 LESS procedures under the guidance of surgeon A.ConclusionThis educational research sheds light on the common challenges faced in LESS and presents the importance of ergonomic hands-on performance skills in improving surgical outcomes, which could serve as a guide for future training and education in LESS.

Efficacy of vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic sentinel lymph node biopsy for endometrial cancer: a prospective multicenter cohort study.

Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is performed increasingly often despite the lack of high-quality evidence confirming its safety, especially for malignant diseases. The aim of this prospective study is to verify that vaginal NOTES (vNOTES) can be performed safely and effectively in early endometrial cancer staging surgery. This prospective study was conducted in two tertiary hospitals in southern China from January 2021 to May 2022. A total of 120 patients with stage I endometrial cancer were included. vNOTES or multiport laparoscopic staging surgery was selected according to each patient's wishes. The primary outcome was the sentinel lymph node detection rate, analyzed by a noninferiority test. The secondary outcomes were perioperative outcomes. Among the 120 patients enrolled, 57 underwent vNOTES, and 63 underwent multiport laparoscopy. The patient-specific detection rates of sentinel lymph nodes were 94.73 and 96.82% in the vNOTES and laparoscopy groups, respectively. Additionally, the bilateral detection rates were 82.46 and 84.13%, and the side-specific detection rates were 88.60 and 90.48% in these two groups, respectively. All three detection rates in the vNOTES group were noninferior to those of laparoscopy group at a noninferiority cutoff of -15%. The median operation times of the vNOTES and laparoscopy groups were 132.35 and 138.73min ( P =0.362), and the median estimated blood loss were 75 and 50ml ( P =0.096), respectively. No intraoperative complications occurred in either group. The pain scores on the Numerical Rating Scale at both 12h and 24h after operation were significantly lower in the vNOTES group ( P <0.001) and the median postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the vNOTES group ( P =0.001). This study illustrates the potential applicability of vNOTES in gynecological malignancy surgery by demonstrating its safety and effectiveness in endometrial cancer staging. However, its long-term survival outcomes require further exploration.

Efficacy of transumbilical laparoendoscopic single-site surgery versus multi-port laparoscopic surgery for endometrial cancer: a retrospective comparison study.

Although single-port laparoscopy surgery has been evaluated for several years, it has not been widely adopted by gynecologic oncologists. The objective was to compare the perioperative outcomes and survival of endometrial cancer (EC) patients undergoing transumbilical laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (TU-LESS) with multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MLS). This is a retrospective comparative monocentric study including patients treated between December 2017 and October 2021. The perioperative outcomes and survival of EC patients who had surgery via TU-LESS or MLS were compared, by propensity matching. A total of 156 patients were included (TU-LESS vs. MLS: 78 vs. 78). The conversion rate of TU-LESS and MLS was 5.13% and 2.56%, respectively (P=0.681). The operation time was comparable between the two groups [207.5min (180-251) vs. 197.5min (168.8-225), P=0.095]. There was no significant difference between the two groups in exhaustion time, perioperative complications, or postoperative complications. While, the TU-LESS group had a shorter out-of-bed activity time [36 hours (24-48) vs. 48 hours (48-72), P<0.001] and a lower visual analog pain scale 36 hours after surgery [1 (1-2) vs. 2 (1-2), P<0.001] than the MLS group. The length of hospital stay was similar in the two groups [5(4-6) vs. 5(4-5), P=0.599]. Following surgery, 38.5% of the TU-LESS patients and 41% of the MLS patients got adjuvant therapy (P=0.744). The median follow-up time for TU-LESS and MLS cohorts was 45 months (range: 20-66) and 43 months (range: 18-66), respectively. One TU-LESS patient and one MLS patient died following recurrence. The 4-year overall survival was similar in both groups (98.3% vs. 98.5%, P=0.875). TU-LESS is a feasible and safe option with comparable perioperative outcomes and survival of MLS in endometrial cancer. With the growing acceptance of sentinel lymph node biopsy, TU-LESS of endometrial cancer may be a viable option for patients and surgeons.

Application of single-port procedure and ERAS management in the laparoscopic myomectomy

ObjectiveAdvances in surgical techniques and perioperative management are the two major contributing factors to improved surgical outcomes. The purpose of the current study was to compare the efficacy of single-port surgery and perioperative enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) management in laparoscopic myomectomy.MethodsThe present study included 120 patients undergoing laparoscopic myomectomy in the Gynecological Ward of Quzhou Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University. According to the traditional perioperative management mode and ERAS management, multi-port and single-port procedures, all patients were assigned to the Conventional-SPLS (Single-Port Laparoscopic Surgery with conventional perioperative care) group (n = 34), Conventional-Multi (multi-port laparoscopic surgery with conventional perioperative care) group (n = 47), and ERAS (multi-port laparoscopic surgery with ERAS perioperative care) group (n = 39). The surgical outcomes of the three groups were compared operation time, intraoperative blood loss, variations in postoperative hemoglobin, postoperative walking time, postoperative flatus expelling time, postoperative hospital stay, and visual analog scale (VAS) scores at 6 and 12 h following surgery.ResultsThe ERAS group recovered the quickest in terms of postoperative walking time and flatus expelling duration. The ERAS group also recovered the shortest postoperative hospital stay (3.85 ± 1.14 days), which differed significantly from that in the Conventional-Multi group, but not significantly from that in the Conventional-SPLS group. In terms of VAS scores at 6 and 12 h after surgery, the ERAS group had the lowest pain intensity, which differed significantly from that of the other two groups. The effect of surgical procedures or postoperative care on hospital stay was assessed using multiple regression analysis. The results demonstrated that ERAS was an important independent contributor to reducing postoperative hospital stay (β = 0.270, p = 0.002), while single-port surgery did not affect this index (β = 0.107, p = 0.278).ConclusionIn laparoscopic myomectomy, perioperative ERAS management could control postoperative pain and shorten hospital stay. Single-port surgery could speed up the recovery of gastrointestinal function and postoperative walking time, but it did not affect postoperative pain management or the length of hospital stay. Thus, the most effective approach to improving postoperative outcomes in laparoscopic myomectomy was the application of perioperative ERAS management.

Stoma-site approach single-port laparoscopic versus conventional multi-port laparoscopic Miles procedure for low rectal cancer: A prospective, randomized controlled trial

The aim of this study was to compare perioperative outcomes of patients with low rectal cancer after stoma-site approach single-port laparoscopic Miles procedure or conventional multi-port laparoscopic Miles procedure, as well as to evaluate the safety and efficacy of stoma-site approach single-port laparoscopic surgery in low rectal cancer. Between September 2020 and September 2021, 51 low rectal cancer patients scheduled for Miles procedure at the Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery of Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College were randomly assigned to the single-port laparoscopic surgery group (SPLS) and the multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) group. The perioperative outcomes were compared between the two groups. In this study, 25 patients underwent SPLS and 26 underwent MPLS. All patients completed the study, and there were no perioperative deaths in either group. Observation indicators such as intraoperative bleeding (39mL vs. 41mL), number of lymph nodes (20.12±3.29 vs. 21.84±3.74), average hospital stay (7.15±1.52 vs. 7.64±1.66), and time to flatulence (2.5d vs. 2.5d) showed no significant differences between the SPLS and MPLS groups (p>0.05). However, the operation duration (180min vs. 118 min) and perioperative complications showed statistically significant differences between the two groups (p<0.05). In addition, patients in the SPLS group had significantly higher satisfaction scores than those in the MPLS group (p<0.05). For patients with low rectal cancer requiring Miles surgery, stoma-site approach single-port laparoscopic surgery has comparable safety and efficacy to multi-port laparoscopic surgery.

Short-term outcomes of single-incision robotic colectomy versus conventional multiport laparoscopic colectomy for colon cancer.

Since the da Vinci SP (dVSP) surgical system was introduced, single-incision robotic surgery (SIRS) for colorectal diseases has gained increasing acceptance. Comparison of the short-term outcomes between SIRS using dVSP and those of conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (CMLS) was performed to verify its efficacy and safety in colon cancer. The medical records of 237 patients who underwent curative resection for colon cancer by a single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups according to surgical modality: SIRS (RS group) and CMLS (LS group). Intra- and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. Of the 237 patients, 140 were included in the analysis. Patients in the RS group (n = 43) were predominantly female, younger, and had better general performance than those in the LS group (n = 97). The total operation time was longer in the RS group than in the LS group (232.8 ± 46.0 vs. 204.1 ± 41.7min, P < 0.001). The RS group showed faster first flatus passing (2.5 ± 0.9 vs. 3.1 ± 1.2days, P = 0.003) and less opioid analgesic requirement (analgesic withdrawal within 3 postoperative days: 37.2% vs. 18.6%, P = 0.018) than the LS group. The RS group showed a higher immediate postoperative albumin level (3.9 ± 0.3 vs. 3.6 ± 0.4g/dL, P < 0.001) and lower C-reactive protein level (6.6 ± 5.2 vs. 9.3 ± 5.5mg/dL, P = 0.007) than the LS group during the postoperative period. On multivariate analysis after adjusting for deviated patient characteristics, no significant difference was observed in short-term outcomes, except for operation time. SIRS with dVSP showed short-term outcomes comparable with those of CMLS for colon cancer.

Long-term oncological outcome of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (single-incision plus one port) as a technical option for rectal cancer.

The purpose of this study was to clarify the oncological safety of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery (single-incision plus one port) (RPS) for patients with rectal cancer. The clinicopathological data of 63 selected patients with clinical Stage I-III (T1-3 and N0-2) rectal cancer who underwent RPS of radical anterior resection between 2012 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. The median distance of tumor from anal verge was 11 cm. Ordinarily, a multiport platform with three channels was placed in the 3-cm umbilical incision, and another 5- or 12-mm port was placed in the right lower abdomen. The median operative time, amount of intraoperative bleeding, number of harvested lymph nodes, and length of distal margin were 272 min, 10 mL, 22 nodes, and 4.0 cm, respectively, and there was one (2%) patient with involvement of the radial margin. There were eight patients (13%) who required additional ports, and one patient (2%) who converted to open surgery. Intra- and postoperative complications occurred in one (2%) and 12 patients (19%), respectively. The median length of postoperative hospital stay was 8 days. The median follow-up period was 79 months, and incisional hernia was observed in 3 (5%) patients at the platform site not the port site, and cancer recurrence occurred in four patients (6%). The 5-year relapse-free and overall survival rates were 100% and 100% in the patients with pathological Stage I disease, 94% and 100% in the patients with pathological Stage II disease, and 83% and 89% in the patients with pathological Stage III disease, respectively. RPS in the selected patients with rectal cancer, performed by an expert laparoscopic surgeon, may be technically safe and oncologically acceptable as well as multiport laparoscopic surgery.

Feasibility study on the use of single-port laparoscopic surgery for diagnosis and tumor sampling in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer — Case series of three cases

IntroductionIn advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (AEOC), it is often difficult to achieve optimal surgery at primary debulking surgery (PDS) due to intra-abdominal dissemination and/or metastasis. When it is determined that optimal surgery is not possible, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is performed prior to subsequent debulking surgery. Also, a histological diagnosis of the tumor is very important before initiation of NAC. Laparoscopic surgery is thus useful to objectively diagnose whether an optimal primary debulking surgery is feasible and to obtain tumor biopsy samples. In order to minimize the invasive procedures at initial surgery, we performed laparoscopic surgery using a single-port method. Case presentationThree patients were diagnosed as stage IV ovarian cancer based on imaging and physical examination. Single-port laparoscopic surgery was performed. The intraabdominal findings were evaluated in all patients by predictive index scoring and objectively diagnosed as not ideal candidates for optimal surgery at PDS. Our use of single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) allowed for safe surgical outcomes and sufficient tissue sampling for histological diagnosis. Clinical discussionLaparoscopic surgery is not appropriate for tumor reduction surgery in AEOC; however, its use as an alternative method to laparotomy is recommended for tumor tissue biopsy and/or intraperitoneal observation. Previous studies have reported on the use of conventional multi-port laparoscopic surgery. The single-port method, when compared to conventional laparoscopic surgery, is less invasive with only one abdominal wound at the umbilicus. ConclusionSPLS is feasible and clinically useful for diagnosis and tumor sampling in AEOC.

Laparoscopic surgery of large adnexal masses (>12 cm): Single port or conventional?

We aimed to compare single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery (CMLS) for large adnexal mass (AM). Patients undergoing laparoscopy (LS) due to huge AMs (≥12 cm) between 2016 and 2021 were evaluated retrospectively. The SPLS procedure was applied in 25 cases, and CMLS was performed in 32 cases. The premier result was the grade of the postoperative improvement according to the Quality of Recovery (QoR)-40 questionnaire score (24 h after the surgical procedure; postoperative day 1). Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS) and Patient Observer Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS) were also evaluated. A total of 57 cases undergoing SPLS (n=25) or CMLS (n=32) due to a large AM (≥12 cm) were analyzed. No meaningful distinctions in age, menopausal status, body mass index, or mass size were observed between the two cohorts. The operation time was shorter in the SPLS than CPLS cohort (42.2 ± 3.3 vs. 47.6 ± 6.2; p < 0.001). Unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy was performed in 84.0% of cases in the SPLS cohort and 90.6% of patients in the CMLS cohort (p=0.360). The QoR-40 points were significantly higher in the SPLS than the CMLS group (154.9 ± 12.0 vs. 146.2 ± 17.1; p=0.035). The OSAS and PSAS scores were lower in the SPLS than the CMLS group. LS can be used for large cysts that are not considered to be at risk of malignancy. The postoperative recovery time was shorter in patients undergoing SPLS compared to CMLS.

Single incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: incisional hernia rate and postoperative pain management

Background: Single incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a relatively new minimal invasive surgical technique for abdominal surgery compared to the multiport laparoscopic surgery. It has shown to have cosmetic advantages and has the potential to reduce postoperative pain and length of hospital stay. However, a drawback of SILS appears to be a higher incisional hernia rate. It is still unclear whether this rate is related to a larger incisional length or location of the incision. The aim of this study was to determine whether right hemicolectomy performed with SILS affected the postoperative incisional hernia rate.

Single-incision versus multi-port laparoscopic ileocolic resections for Crohn's disease: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) versus multi-port laparoscopy for ileocolic resection in patients with Crohn's disease (CD). A systematic search of multiple electronic databases was conducted. The peri- and post-operative outcomes were evaluated between Crohn's patients undergoing SILS versus multi-port laparoscopy for ileocolic resection. The primary outcomes included operative time, anastomotic leak rate, post-operative wound infections and length of hospital stay. Analysed secondary outcomes were conversion rates, ileus occurrence, intra-abdominal abscess formation, return to theatre and re-admissions. Revman 5.3 was used to perform the statistical analysis. Five observational studies with 521 patients (SILS: 211; multi-port: 310) were included in the data synthesis. Patients undergoing SILS had a reduced total operative time compared to multi-port laparoscopy (mean difference [MD]: -16.14, 95% confidence interval: [CI] -27.23 - 5.05, P = 0.004). Post-operative hospital stay was also found to be significantly less in the SILS group (MD: -0.57, 95% CI: -0.73--0.42, P < 0.0001). No significant difference was seen in the anastomotic leak rate (MD: -16.14, 95% CI: 0.18-1.71, P = 0.004) or post-operative wound infections (odds ratio: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.24 - 2.47, P = 0.67) between the two groups. Moreover, all the measured secondary outcomes were comparable. SILS seems to be a feasible alternative to multi-port laparoscopic surgery for ileocolic resection in patients with CD. Improved outcomes in terms of total operative time and length of hospital stay were observed in patients undergoing SILS surgery. Adopting this procedure into routine clinical practice constitutes the next step in the development of minimally invasive surgery.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of single-incision versus multi-port laparoscopic surgery for descending colon cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis

The clinical impact of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for descending colon cancer (DCC) is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of SILS for DCC compared with multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MPLS). We retrospectively analyzed 137 consecutive patients with stage I-III DCC who underwent SILS or MPLS at two high-volume multidisciplinary tertiary hospitals between April 2008 and December 2018, using propensity score-matched analysis. After propensity score-matching, we enrolled 88 patients (n = 44 in each group). SILS was successful in 97.7% of the matched cohort. Compared with the MPLS group, the SILS group showed significantly less blood loss and a greater number of harvested lymph nodes. Morbidity rates were similar between groups. Recurrence pattern did not differ between groups. No significant differences were found between groups in terms of 3-year disease-free and overall survivals. SILS appears safe and feasible and can provide satisfactory oncological outcomes for patients with DCC.

Early return to work: Single-port vs. multiport laparoscopic surgery for benign ovarian tumor.

To compare the return to work (RTW) time between single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) and multiport laparoscopic surgery (MPLS) for benign ovarian tumors. A cross-sectional cohort study was conducted, which consisted of 335 women of reproductive age with benign ovarian tumors and who were keen on returning to work as early as possible. Surgical outcomes, postoperative pain score, postoperative satisfaction with the cosmesis score (CS), and the RTW time of the SPLS group were compared with those of the MPLS group. Besides, the RTW time and CS were calculated from the questionnaire survey by a single specialized gynecologist. Women who met the inclusion criteria were included in the SPLS (n = 106) and MPLS groups (n = 229). The RTW time in the SPLS group (22.13 ± 27. 06 days) was significantly shorter than that in the MPLS group (46.08 ± 57.86 days) (P < 0.001). The multivariate Cox analysis results showed that age (HR = 0.984, 95% CI, 0.971-0.997, P = 0.020), SPLS (HR = 3.491, 95% CI, 2.422-5. 032, P < 0.001), and return to normal activity time (HR = 0.980, 95% CI, 0.961-0.998, P = 0.029) were independent factors of the RTW time. SPLS may be advantageous in terms of shortening the RTW time for women with benign ovarian tumors.

Comparison of learning curves for laparoendoscopic single-site myomectomy performed by 2 surgeons.

We aimed to compare the learning curves of 2 surgeons with different endoscopic bases when performing laparoendoscopic single-site myomectomy (LESS-M).We retrospectively analyzed and compared 2 groups of patients who underwent LESS-M performed by 2 surgeons with different bases in multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MLS) from October 2019 to December 2020 at West China Second Hospital of Sichuan University. Patients’ characteristics and related surgical indicators were compared, and surgeons’ learning curves were analyzed using a cumulative sum analysis.All of the patients completed LESS-M without converting to MLS or laparotomy, despite Surgeon A being MLS-unqualified and Surgeon B being MLS-qualified. There were no significant differences in patients’ characteristics or surgical indicators between the 2 groups (P > 0.05 for all). Surgeons A and B crossed the learning curve after 21 and 18 cases, respectively.LESS-M is safe and feasible. Approximately 20 cases are required for surgeons to achieve LESS-M proficiency, and surgeons without MLS experience can still master LESS-M.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of single-incision versus multi-port laparoscopic surgery for rectosigmoid or upper rectal cancer.

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for rectal cancer is technically challenging, and its clinical impact is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes of SILS for rectal cancer compared with multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MPLS). We retrospectively analyzed 357 consecutive patients with stage I-III rectal cancer located in the rectosigmoid or upper rectum who underwent SILS or MPLS between January 2012 and December 2016, using propensity score-matched analysis. After propensity score-matching, we enrolled 204 patients (n = 102 per group). Before matching, significant group-dependent differences were observed in tumor location (p < 0.001). After matching, preoperative clinical factors were similar between groups. SILS was successful in 73.5% of cases, an additional port was required in 23.5%, and 2.9% were converted to open surgery. Compared to the MPLS group, the SILS group showed shorter operative time (192 vs. 211min, p = 0.015) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (9 vs. 11days, p = 0.038). Other operative factors and morbidity rates did not differ significantly between groups. The number of harvested lymph nodes was smaller in the SILS group (24) than in the MPLS group (27, p = 0.008). Postoperative recurrence did not differ between groups, either before or after matching. No significant differences in 3-year disease-free, 3-year local recurrence-free, or 5-year overall survival were found between groups. SILS is safe, is feasible, and offers satisfactory oncological outcomes in selected patients with rectosigmoid or upper rectal cancer.

Single-port versus conventional multi-port laparoscopic surgery in the treatment of colorectal cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of single-port laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and conventional multi-port laparoscopic surgery (CMLS) in the treatment of colorectal cancer.Methods: A systematic literature search was performed in Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane library, Web of science and ClinicalTrials.gov. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studies comparing SILS and CMLS for colorectal cancer (CRC) were enrolled. Quality assessment was performed using the Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias tool. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4.1.Results: Eight RCTs with a total of 1143 patients were finally included. The results of meta-analysis showed that the incision length of SILS group was shorter than that of CMLS group in radical resection of CRC [P = 0.003, MD = -2.64, 95% CI (-4.39, -0.89)], the tumor size in pathological specimens of SILS group was smaller than that of CMLS group [P = 0.008, MD = 0.12, 95% CI (0.03, 0.22)]; while the operation time, intraoperative blood loss, conversion rate, postoperative first anus exhaust time, postoperative first day rest pain score, hospital stay, incidence of postoperative complications, incidence of reoperation, number of dissected lymph nodes, length of pathological specimens, distance from the distal resection margin of the tumor and distance from the proximal resection margin of the tumor was not statistically different between SILS and CMLS.Conclusion: SILS is feasible and safe in the treatment of colorectal cancer, and may be more advantageous in terms of cosmetic results. Long-term outcomes need to be confirmed by larger RCTs with complete follow-up data.

Single-incision versus conventional multiport laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity-score matched studies.

To compare single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) and multiport laparoscopic surgery (MLS) for colorectal cancer in terms of short- and long-term outcomes. A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies comparing SILS and MLS for colorectal cancer were enrolled. Outcomes of interests included intraoperative, postoperative, pathological, and survival outcomes. Sixteen studies (6 RCTs and 10 PSM studies) published between 2012 and 2020 with a total of 2425 patients were enrolled. Compared with MLS, SILS was associated with less postoperative pain at postoperative day (POD) 1 (P = 0.02, MWD = -0.73, 95%CI: -1.37, -0.09) and POD2 (P < 0.001, MWD= -1.10, 95%CI: -1.45, -0.74) and shorter length of total incision length (P < 0.001, MWD = -3.31, 95%CI: -3.95, -2.67). No differences were observed in terms of operative time, blood loss, intraoperative and postoperative complications, incision hernia, and pathological or survival outcomes between SILS and MLS. Subgroup analysis for right-sided colon cancer, sigmoid colon cancer, and rectosigmoid colon cancer showed that the SILS group was only associated with less postoperative pain and shorter total incision length. The surgical and pathological outcomes were comparable between SILS and MLS. SILS is a beneficial alternative to MLS in select colorectal cancer patients, especially for right-sided colon cancer, sigmoid colon cancer, and rectosigmoid cancer, with better cosmetic effects and less postoperative pain. Simultaneously, SILS does not compromise intraoperative and postoperative complications, surgical quality, or long-term outcomes.

Clinical Comparison of Laparoendoscopic Single-site Surgery and Multiport Laparoscopic Surgery for the Removal of Ovarian Endometrioid Cyst

Background: Endometriosis is a common, chronic gynecological disease. Laparoscopy is currently the preferred method of ovarian endometriosis. However, the safety and feasibility of laparoendoscopic single-site surgery for ovarian endometrioid cyst removal still need to be discussed. Objective: To explore the safety and feasibility of laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) surgery versus conventional multiport laparoscopic (CMPL) surgery for the ovarian endometrioid cystectomy. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 47 patients who had undergone LESS and LESS ovarian cystectomy due to ovarian endometrioid cyst in our hospital from March 2018 to April 2019. The patients were classified into single-port group (14) and multiport group (33) based on surgical paths. The patients’ general characteristics and perioperative outcomes compared. Results: There were no significant statistical differences between the two groups (P>0.05) in the operation time and the maximum body temperature in 24 h after operation. There were significant statistical differences (all P<0.05) in postoperative decrease of Hb, intraoperative bleeding volume, total hospital stay and CS score. Conclusion: LESS for ovarian endometrioid cyst removal is safe and feasible, and it better than CMPL in relieving postoperative pain and inproving cosmetic effects and so on.