Single-Port Laparoscopic Salpingectomy for Surgical Treatment of Tubal Pregnancy: Comparison with Multi-Port Laparoscopic Salpingectomy

Abstract

BackgroundThis study investigates the safety and feasibility of transumbilical single-port laparoscopic salpingectomy (SPLS) using conventional laparoscopic instruments compared to conventional multi-port laparoscopic salpingectomy (MPLS) for surgical treatment of tubal pregnancy.Material and methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of 63 patients with tubal pregnancy who underwent SPLS and 71 patients who underwent conventional MPLS between January 2008 and December 2010. All patients in the SPLS group had a drainage tube placed through the umbilicus, and, in the MPLS group, through a 5-mm trocar site in one side of the lower abdomen.Results No significance difference was discovered between the groups with regard to adjusted hemoglobin values (SPLS, 1.9 ± 1.0 g/dL versus MPLS, 1.7 ± 1.0 g/dL, P = 0.335). Additionally, there was also no significant difference in clinical characteristics, intraoperative findings, or operative outcomes.Conclusions Our study demonstrated that transumbilical SPLS using conventional laparoscopic instruments has operative outcomes comparable to MPLS for the surgical treatment of tubal pregnancy. Transumbilical SPLS may therefore be offered as a feasible alternative to MPLS.

Conventional versus Single Port Laparoscopy for the Surgical Treatment of Ectopic Pregnancy: A Meta-Analysis

“…2a) [14-16, 18]. When considering only patients with hemoperitoneum, the pooled analysis data from 3 studies showed no differences among the 2 procedures (mean difference –5.46 [95% CI –38.85 to 27.92], p = 0.75, random-effects model; Fig.…”

“…The pooled analysis data from the 4 studies reporting data on the number of patients requiring transfusions of units of PRBC showed no significant differences among the 2 groups (OR 0.97 [95% CI 0.58–1.61], p = 0.90, fixed-effects model; Fig. 3b) [14, 16-18]. …”

“…Three studies were prospective and 2 were retrospective in nature. Four studies included only tubal ectopic pregnancies and all of the patients in these studies were managed with a salpingectomy [14-16, 18]. One study included ovarian, cornual, and heterotopic pregnancies as well [17].…”

“…Two ancillary 5 mm trocars and one 10–12 mm trocar were used. In one study, a 0 or 30 degrees 5 mm laparoscope and conventional rigid instruments were used [16]. In the other case, a 10-mm rigid laparoscope with a flexible laparoscopic grasper (Autonomy Laparo-angle TM , Cambride Endo, Framingham MA, USA) and a SonoSurg (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) were used [14].…”

“…In this case, a 0-degree and articulating instruments were used. In 2 other studies, the multichannel port was made using a wound retractor (Alexis wound retractor XS, applied medical, Santa Margarita, CA, USA) and a surgical glove [14, 16]. The surgical glove was fixed to the outer ring of the retractor and conventional trocars were fixed to the 3 digits.…”