Comparison of conventional versus single port laparoscopy for surgical treatment of gynecological diseases: a pilot study

Introduction Many recent studies have conducted laparoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) using single-port laparoscopy (SPL), which combines conventional laparoscopy (CL) with a novel multichannel port. However, to implement SPL, several obstacles must be overcome. Aim To study the clinical value of SPL in the surgical treatment of gynecological diseases. Material and methods Twenty-five patients with ectopic pregnancy (EP) and 11 with uterine leiomyoma (UL) were randomly assigned to undergo either LESS by SPL or CL. The CL was performed routinely, while the SPL was performed through a single port using a self-made, multi-channel laparoscopic approach based on CL. The following parameters were compared between the SPL and CL groups: intraoperative conditions (operation time and blood loss), postoperative conditions (exhaustion and hospital stay time), and visual analog scale. Patients with EP and those with UL were analyzed separately in this regard. In patients with UL, hemoglobin changes, complications, and long-term physical recovery within 6 months of surgery were also compared. Results The operation time was significantly longer in the SPL group than in the CL group (p < 0.001). However, blood loss, postoperative exhaustion, and hospital stay time were significantly lower (p < 0.05 in all cases). In patients with UL, intraoperative and postoperative conditions did not differ significantly between the groups. At the follow-up within 6 months, patients with UL in the SPL group had recovered, with better cosmetic effects and more satisfaction. No cases of umbilical incisional hernia occurred in the SPL group. Conclusions SPL showed clinical efficacy, with minimal invasion, rapid recovery, and cost-effectiveness in patients with EP or UL.