Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Laparoscopic, minilaparoscopic and single-port hysterectomy: perioperative outcomes

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

This study was designed to compare perioperative outcomes and postoperative pain of standard laparoscopic (S-LPS), minilaparoscopic (M-LPS), and laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) hysterectomy.

Methods

A single-institutional, matched, retrospective, cohort study was performed. Between May 2010 and March 2011, 85 consecutive women were submitted to a total laparoscopic hysterectomy by S-LPS, M-LPS, and single-port LESS. Perioperative outcomes of these three techniques were analyzed and compared.

Results

Demographics and baseline characteristics of each group were absolutely comparable. The median operative time was longer [105 (range, 75–125) min] in the LESS group compared with the M-LPS group [90 (range, 60–120) min; p < 0.011] and S-LPS [80 (range, 50–110) min; p < 0.001]. No statistically significant differences have been reported for estimated blood loss or intra- and early postoperative complications. Postoperative pain control was better for LESS and M-LPS than S-LPS.

Conclusions

M-LPS and LESS hysterectomy can be performed safely, and both seem to be associated with a halving of early postoperative pain with a lower request of analgesics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Johnson N, Barlow D, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr E, Garry R (2006) Surgical approach to hysterectomy for benign gynaecological disease. Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD003677

  2. Johnson N, Barlow D, Lethaby A, Tavender E, Curr E, Garry R (2005) Methods of hysterectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 330:1478

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kluivers KB, Johnson NP, Chien P, Vierhout ME, Bongers M, Mol BW (2008) Comparison of laparoscopic and abdominal hysterectomy in terms of quality of life: a systematic review. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 136:3–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fagotti A, Bottoni C, Vizzielli G, Alletti SG, Scambia G, Marana E, Fanfani F (2011) Postoperative pain after conventional laparoscopy and laparoendoscopic single site surgery (LESS) for benign adnexal disease: a randomized trial. Fertil Steril 96:255–259

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hosono S, Osaka H (2007) Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 17:191–199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yim GW, Jung YW, Paek J (2010) Transumbilical single-port access versus conventional total laparoscopic hysterectomy: surgical outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 203: 26.e1-6

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kim TJ, Lee YY, Cha HH (2010) Single-port-access laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy versus conventional laparoscopic-assisted vaginal hysterectomy: a comparison of perioperative outcomes. Surg Endosc 24:2248–2252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ghezzi F, Cromi A, Siesto G, Uccella S, Boni L, Serati M, Bolis P (2011) Minilaparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy: results of randomized trial. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 18:455–461

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fanfani F, Rossitto C, Gagliardi ML, Gallotta V, Gueli Alletti S, Scambia G, Fagotti A (2012) Total laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) hysterectomy in low risk early endometrial cancer: a pilot study. Surg Endosc 37:1085–1092

    Google Scholar 

  10. Yung YW, Lee M, Yim GW, Lee SH, Paek JH, Kwon HY, Nam EJ, Kim SW, Kim YT (2011) A randomized prospective study of single-port and four-port approaches for hysterectomy in terms of postoperative pain. Surg Endosc 25:2462–2469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ghezzi F, Cromi A, Colombo G, Uccella S, Bergamini V, Serati M, Bolis P (2005) Minimizing ancillary ports size in gynecologic laparoscopy: a randomized trial. Minim Invasive Gynecol 12:480–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Paek J, Kim S, Lee S, Lee M, Yim G, Nam E, Kim Y (2011) Learning curve and surgical outcome for single-port access total laparoscopic hysterectomy in 100 consecutive cases. Gynecol Obstet Invest 72:227–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fader AN, Escobar PF (2009) Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) in gynecologic oncology: technique and initial report. Gynecol Oncol 114:157–161

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Escobar PF, Kaouk JH, Geisler D, Kroh M, Fader AN, Falcone T (2010) Single-port laparoscopy, NOTES, and endoluminal surgery. Diagn Ther Endosc 710130

  15. Fagotti A, Fanfani F, Marocco F, Rossitto C, Gallotta V, Marana E, Scambia G (2011) Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery for the treatment of benign adnexal diseases: a pilot study. Surg Endosc 25:1215–1221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosures

Drs. Francesco Fanfani, Anna Fagotti, Cristiano Rossitto, Maria Lucia Gagliardi, Alfredo Ercoli, Valerio Gallotta, Salvatore Gueli Alletti, Giorgia Monterossi, Luigi Carlo Turco, and Giovanni Scambia have conflict of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesco Fanfani.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fanfani, F., Fagotti, A., Rossitto, C. et al. Laparoscopic, minilaparoscopic and single-port hysterectomy: perioperative outcomes. Surg Endosc 26, 3592–3596 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2377-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2377-2

Keywords

Navigation