Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the operative outcomes of patients undergoing either single-port or multiport laparoscopic hysterectomy (LH). METHODS: Two hundred fifty-six women scheduled for LH for symptomatic myoma and/or adenomyosis from 8 tertiary teaching hospitals were randomized to single-port or multiport groups. Primary outcome was conversion and/or complication proportion of the planned procedure to determine whether the success proportion of the single-port approach was not inferior to that of the multiport approach. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain and operative scar. RESULTS: Demographic parameters including age, body mass index, parity, and history of vaginal and cesarean delivery were comparable between the 2 groups. The primary outcome of a combined conversion and/or complication rate was similar between the single-port and multiport groups at 8% and 10.3%, respectively. Conversions were similar between the groups with 4% of single-port cases and.8% of multiport cases. Transfusions were the most frequent complication required in 4.0% of single-port cases and 7.9% of multiport cases, with no difference between the groups. Concerning secondary outcomes, postoperative pain score and patient and observer scar assessment were not different between the 2 groups. Although not a specific outcome measure, there was no difference between the groups in blood loss, operative time, and postoperative hospital stay. CONCLUSION: Single-port LH is not inferior to multiport LH in terms of conversion and/or complications rates, including transfusion. However, the single-port approach did not have any advantage over multiport LH with regard to pain or cosmetic outcomes. These findings were demonstrated by multi-institutional surgeons in Korea.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 785-791 |
Number of pages | 7 |
Journal | Journal of Minimally Invasive Gynecology |
Volume | 22 |
Issue number | 5 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2015 Jan 14 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:This independent research was supported by a funding contribution from Covidien . The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 AAGL. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Obstetrics and Gynaecology