Hsu-Dong Sun1, Huann-Cheng Horng2, Chia-Hao Liu2, Sheng-Mou Hsiao3, Yi-Jen Chen4, Wen-Hsun Chang5, Peng-Hui Wang6. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, New Taipei City, Taiwan, ROC; Department of Obstetric and Gynecology, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC. 2. Department of Obstetric and Gynecology, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC. 3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Far Eastern Memorial Hospital, New Taipei City, Taiwan, ROC. 4. Department of Obstetric and Gynecology, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC; Institute of Clinical Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC. 5. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC; Department of Nursing, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC; Department of Nursing, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC. 6. Department of Obstetric and Gynecology, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Taipei Veterans General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC; Institute of Clinical Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC; Department of Nursing, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC; Department of Medical Research, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan, ROC. Electronic address: phwang@vghtpe.gov.tw.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare the short-term outcome of patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic salpingectomy (SP-LS) and conventional three-port laparoscopic salpingectomy (C-LS). METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of 112 patients with tubal pregnancies treated by one surgeon at a single teaching hospital. Among these, 47 patients were treated with SP-LS and the remaining 65 were treated with C-LS. RESULTS: The characteristics of patients were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences in operative time, estimated blood loss, intraoperative and immediate postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay between both groups. Time to bowel recanalization (6.2 ± 1.0 vs. 7.2 ± 1.4 h, p < 0.05) and postoperative visual analog scale for pain scores (3.0 ± 0.5 vs. 3.6 ± 0.6, p < 0.005) were significantly lower in the SP-LS group compared with those in the C-LS group. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated the feasibility to use the single-port laparoscopic salpingectomy in the management of women with tubal pregnancy, which showed the similar or better outcome compared with the use of conventional three-port laparoscopic salpingectomy.
BACKGROUND: To compare the short-term outcome of patients undergoing single-port laparoscopic salpingectomy (SP-LS) and conventional three-port laparoscopic salpingectomy (C-LS). METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of 112 patients with tubal pregnancies treated by one surgeon at a single teaching hospital. Among these, 47 patients were treated with SP-LS and the remaining 65 were treated with C-LS. RESULTS: The characteristics of patients were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences in operative time, estimated blood loss, intraoperative and immediate postoperative complications, and length of hospital stay between both groups. Time to bowel recanalization (6.2 ± 1.0 vs. 7.2 ± 1.4 h, p < 0.05) and postoperative visual analog scale for pain scores (3.0 ± 0.5 vs. 3.6 ± 0.6, p < 0.005) were significantly lower in the SP-LS group compared with those in the C-LS group. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated the feasibility to use the single-port laparoscopic salpingectomy in the management of women with tubal pregnancy, which showed the similar or better outcome compared with the use of conventional three-port laparoscopic salpingectomy.
Authors: Chia-Hao Liu; Yu-Chieh Lee; Jeff Chien-Fu Lin; I-San Chan; Na-Rong Lee; Wen-Hsun Chang; Wei-Min Liu; Peng-Hui Wang Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-10-11 Impact factor: 3.390