Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Technique Contrasted with Conventional Laparoscopy in Cystectomy for Benign Ovarian Cysts

IF 1.6 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Xinru Jiang MM, Xin Zuo MM, Hongdi Zhu MM
{"title":"Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Technique Contrasted with Conventional Laparoscopy in Cystectomy for Benign Ovarian Cysts","authors":"Xinru Jiang MM,&nbsp;Xin Zuo MM,&nbsp;Hongdi Zhu MM","doi":"10.1016/j.curtheres.2023.100713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To compare the laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) technique with conventional laparoscopy in cystectomy for benign ovarian cysts.</p></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><p>A retrospective analysis was performed at Yixing People's Hospital from April 2020 until December 2021.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Thirty-seven patients using the LESS technique were compared with a control group of 45 patients who underwent a traditional laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy. There was no statistically significant difference in the perioperative hemoglobin level changes, cyst rupture rate, postoperative recovery of exhausting time, or pain score at 24 hours after surgery between the 2 groups (<em>P</em> &gt; 0.05). The mean operating time was significantly longer in the LESS group than that of the control group (88.38 ± 30.57 minutes vs 59.44 ± 24.22 minutes; <em>P</em> = 0.001). However, the length of postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LESS group (3.70 ± 0.57 days vs 4.38 ± 0.86 days; <em>P</em> = 0.001). In addition, total hospitalization expenses were higher in the LESS group (14,709.78 ± 1618.63 yuan vs 12,676.73 ± 1411.78 yuan; <em>P</em> = .001) and the satisfaction score was also significantly higher in the LESS group (<em>z</em> = –2.272; <em>P</em> = 0.023). After a follow-up time of 12 to 24 months, no patient in either group showed wound infection, umbilical hernia, or recurrent cysts.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The LESS technique for benign ovarian cystectomy is safe, feasible, and equally effective compared with the multiport laparoscopic oophorocystectomy. Although it currently costs more, patients with benign ovarian cysts are highly satisfied with the LESS technique.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10920,"journal":{"name":"Current Therapeutic Research-clinical and Experimental","volume":"99 ","pages":"Article 100713"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/4d/5a/main.PMC10372162.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Therapeutic Research-clinical and Experimental","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0011393X2300022X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To compare the laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) technique with conventional laparoscopy in cystectomy for benign ovarian cysts.

Materials and methods

A retrospective analysis was performed at Yixing People's Hospital from April 2020 until December 2021.

Results

Thirty-seven patients using the LESS technique were compared with a control group of 45 patients who underwent a traditional laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy. There was no statistically significant difference in the perioperative hemoglobin level changes, cyst rupture rate, postoperative recovery of exhausting time, or pain score at 24 hours after surgery between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). The mean operating time was significantly longer in the LESS group than that of the control group (88.38 ± 30.57 minutes vs 59.44 ± 24.22 minutes; P = 0.001). However, the length of postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LESS group (3.70 ± 0.57 days vs 4.38 ± 0.86 days; P = 0.001). In addition, total hospitalization expenses were higher in the LESS group (14,709.78 ± 1618.63 yuan vs 12,676.73 ± 1411.78 yuan; P = .001) and the satisfaction score was also significantly higher in the LESS group (z = –2.272; P = 0.023). After a follow-up time of 12 to 24 months, no patient in either group showed wound infection, umbilical hernia, or recurrent cysts.

Conclusions

The LESS technique for benign ovarian cystectomy is safe, feasible, and equally effective compared with the multiport laparoscopic oophorocystectomy. Although it currently costs more, patients with benign ovarian cysts are highly satisfied with the LESS technique.

Abstract Image

腹腔镜单部位技术与常规腹腔镜在良性卵巢囊肿切除术中的比较
目的比较腹腔镜单点(LESS)技术与传统腹腔镜技术在良性卵巢囊肿切除术中的应用。材料和方法对2020年4月至2021年12月在宜兴市人民医院进行的回顾性分析。结果将37例使用LESS技术的患者与45例传统腹腔镜卵巢囊肿切除术的对照组进行比较。两组围手术期血红蛋白水平变化、囊肿破裂率、术后排气时间恢复率或术后24小时疼痛评分无统计学差异(P>0.05)。LESS组的平均手术时间明显长于对照组(88.38±30.57分钟vs 59.44±24.22分钟;P = 0.001)。然而,LESS组术后住院时间明显缩短(3.70±0.57天vs 4.38±0.86天;P = 此外,LESS组的住院总费用较高(14709.78±1618.63元vs 12676.73±1411.78元;P = .001),并且LESS组的满意度得分也显著更高(z = –2.272;P = 0.023)。随访12至24个月后,两组患者均未出现伤口感染、脐疝或复发性囊肿。结论LESS技术是一种安全、可行、有效的良性卵巢囊肿切除术。尽管目前成本更高,但良性卵巢囊肿患者对LESS技术非常满意。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: We also encourage the submission of manuscripts presenting preclinical and very preliminary research that may stimulate further investigation of potentially relevant findings, as well as in-depth review articles on specific therapies or disease states, and applied health delivery or pharmacoeconomics. CTR encourages and supports the submission of manuscripts describing: • Interventions designed to understand or improve human health, disease treatment or disease prevention; • Studies that focus on problems that are uncommon in resource-rich countries; • Research that is "under-published" because of limited access to monetary resources such as English language support and Open Access fees (CTR offers deeply discounted English language editing); • Republication of articles previously published in non-English journals (eg, evidence-based guidelines) which could be useful if translated into English; • Preclinical and clinical product development studies that are not pursued for further investigation based upon early phase results.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信