Lilin Yang1, Jie Gao2, Lei Zeng2, Zhiwei Weng3, Songping Luo4. 1. First School of Clinical Medicine, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China. 2. Department of Gynecology, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China. 3. Department of Reproductive Medicine, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China. 4. First School of Clinical Medicine, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou, China. Electronic address: gynspluo@hotmail.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The choice between single-port laparoscopic hysterectomy (SPLH) and conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (CLH) remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and comparative effectiveness of SPLH and CLH. SEARCH STRATEGY: PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched in February 2015 using combinations of the terms "single port," "single incision," "single site," "laparoscopic hysterectomy," and "laparoendoscopic hysterectomy." SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies comparing SPLH and CLH were included if they reported at least one quantitative outcome. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study characteristics, quality, and outcomes were assessed. The primary outcomes were procedure failure and perioperative complications. Odds ratio (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. MAIN RESULTS: Eighteen studies (6 RCTs, 12 retrospective studies) were included. As compared with CLH, SPLH had a higher failure rate (OR 6.37, 95% CI 3.34-12.14; P<0.001). The frequency of perioperative complications did not differ (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.45-1.74; P=0.73). CONCLUSIONS: There is no significant difference in the frequency of perioperative complications between SPLH and CLH. However, the higher rate of procedure failure in SPLH should be taken into consideration.
BACKGROUND: The choice between single-port laparoscopic hysterectomy (SPLH) and conventional laparoscopic hysterectomy (CLH) remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility, safety, and comparative effectiveness of SPLH and CLH. SEARCH STRATEGY: PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched in February 2015 using combinations of the terms "single port," "single incision," "single site," "laparoscopic hysterectomy," and "laparoendoscopic hysterectomy." SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies comparing SPLH and CLH were included if they reported at least one quantitative outcome. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Study characteristics, quality, and outcomes were assessed. The primary outcomes were procedure failure and perioperative complications. Odds ratio (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. MAIN RESULTS: Eighteen studies (6 RCTs, 12 retrospective studies) were included. As compared with CLH, SPLH had a higher failure rate (OR 6.37, 95% CI 3.34-12.14; P<0.001). The frequency of perioperative complications did not differ (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.45-1.74; P=0.73). CONCLUSIONS: There is no significant difference in the frequency of perioperative complications between SPLH and CLH. However, the higher rate of procedure failure in SPLH should be taken into consideration.
Authors: Evelien M Sandberg; Claire F la Chapelle; Marjolein M van den Tweel; Jan W Schoones; Frank Willem Jansen Journal: Arch Gynecol Obstet Date: 2017-03-29 Impact factor: 2.344
Authors: Ji Hyun Lee; Sang Hyun Cho; Kyung Jin Eoh; Jung-Yun Lee; Eun Ji Nam; Sunghoon Kim; Sang Wun Kim; Young Tae Kim Journal: Obstet Gynecol Sci Date: 2020-03-19