Single-Incision versus Conventional Multiport Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery—Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis

Background

The aim of this pooled analysis is to determine the effect of single-incision laparoscopic colorectal surgery (SILC) on short-term clinical and oncological outcomes compared with conventional multiport laparoscopic colorectal surgery (CLC).

Methods

An electronic search of Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases was performed. Weighted mean differences (WMD) were calculated for the effect size of SILC on continuous variables and pooled odds ratios (POR) were calculated for discrete variables.

Results

No significant differences between the groups were noted for mortality or morbidity including anastomotic leak, reoperation, pneumonia, wound infection, port-site hernia, and operative time. The benefits of a SILC approach included reduction in time to return of bowel function (WMD?=??1.11 days; 95 % C.I. ?2.11 to ?0.13; P?=?0.03), and length of hospital stay (WMD?=??1.9 days; 95 % C.I. ?2.73 to ?1.07; P?Conclusions SILC can be performed safely by experienced laparoscopic surgeons with similar short-term clinical and oncological outcomes to CLC. SILC may further enhance some of the benefits of minimally invasive surgery with a reduction in blood loss and length of hospital stay.     

Single-Incision Laparoscopic Surgery (SILS) in Biliary and Pancreatic Diseases

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the gold standard for gallbladder removal and the most common laparoscopic procedure worldwide. With the advent of laparoscopic surgery and its continuous development, the focus has shifted to ‘scarless’ surgery. In recent times, the innovative technique of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has been applied in gallbladder removal and even more complex biliopancreatic procedures to further minimize the invasiveness of the surgery. Newer developments in laparoscopic equipments and instrumentation have helped to further evolve this field of minimally invasive surgery. Literature search was performed using the following online search engines: Google, Medline, PubMed, Cochrane, and the online Springer link library. The terms used for the search were as follows: SILS, LESS, single-incision laparoscopic surgery, single-port laparoscopic surgery, SILS cholecystectomy, and SILS pancreatic surgery. Articles that matched the search criteria were selected and extensively reviewed. Moreover, pertinent information on instrumentation and technology for SILS and LESS was obtained by accessing websites of manufacturers. Although SILS represents the search for an essentially scarless surgery, there is still not a widespread use and uniformity of this procedure. SILS is performed either by single- or multiple-port technique. In the present article, we present a review of the potential benefits, limitations, and risks of SILS in biliary and pancreatic diseases. There are many studies showing benefits in cholecystectomy. A few case reports have also emerged about its feasibility in procedures such as cystogastrostomy and limited pancreatic resection. Further research and development of this technique is needed to arrive at a tangible conclusion about the perceived benefits of SILS. Randomized studies to compare SILS with traditional laparoscopy are essential.     

经脐单孔腹腔镜右半结肠根治手术的临床研究

目的探讨经脐单孔腹腔镜右半结肠根治手术的临床研究。 方法纳入2015年1月至2018年6月于上海交通大学医学院附属瑞金医院北院普外科接受传统5孔腹腔镜右半结肠切除术和纯单孔腹腔镜右半结肠手术的患者共89例,其中单孔腹腔镜手术45例(单孔腹腔镜组)、传统5孔腹腔镜手术44例(传统腹腔镜组),根据患者的年龄、性别、体质量指数、ASA评分(≤ 2分/>2分)、手术时间、并发症、淋巴结获得数目、病理分期等进行分析。 结果在术中出血量、进食流食时间、术后住院时间方面,单孔腹腔镜组和传统腹腔镜组比较,差异无统计学意义。单孔腹腔镜组的手术时间[166 min(42.0 min)比144 min(37.5 min),P＝0.03]更长。单孔腹腔镜组中出现1例(2.27%)术后吻合口瘘,传统腹腔镜组有1例(2.22%)术后吻合口瘘(P＝0.99)。两组的病理结果相似。单孔腹腔镜组中位随访时间22.5个月、传统腹腔镜组中位随访时间21.9个月。单孔腹腔镜组有3例(6.8%)出现复发、传统腹腔镜组也有3例(6.6%)复发,复发率比较,差异无统计学意义(P＝0.88)。 结论单孔腹腔镜右半结肠癌手术需要在临床和肿瘤学疗效方面与传统五孔腹腔镜手术相当,初步证实是一种安全可开展的手术方式。     

Single-incision versus three-port conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: is there any real need to go single?

Abstract Background: Preliminary results showed some benefits of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) over conventional laparoscopic colectomy, including better cosmesis, less postoperative pain, and faster recovery, but these results need further confirmation. In addition, the literature still lacks comparative studies between the two approaches to prove the above-mentioned advantages of SILS over conventional laparoscopy and, most importantly, its equivalent effectiveness in terms of initial oncological results. Patients and Methods: Two consecutive series of 10 patients undergoing three-port conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (3PCL-RH) and single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy, respectively, were compared in their short-term surgical and oncological outcomes. Results: Analysis of perioperative and postoperative outcomes revealed no significant differences between the two groups. In the SILS group an anastomotic leakage occurred, which was conservatively treated by continuous drainage, total parental nutrition, and antibiotic therapy. The analysis of oncological outcomes showed no differences in terms of length of distal tumor-free margin and harvest of lymph nodes. Conclusions: Despite its feasibility for right hemicolectomy and its equivalent short-term surgical and oncological outcome compared with conventional laparoscopy, SILS demonstrated no significant advantages in terms of surgical incision length and postoperative course compared with 3PCL-RH. We acknowledge that the small sample size and the nonrandomized design are a limit of the study. Thus, prospective randomized controlled trials are recommended to prove the superiority of single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.     

Hybrid Single-incision Laparoscopic Restorative Proctocolectomy with Ileal Pouch Anal Anastomosis for Ulcerative Colitis

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery is a rapidly evolving field as a bridge between traditional laparoscopic surgery and natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery. We report one of the initial clinical experiences from India for Laparoscopic Restorative Proctocolectomy and Ileal Pouch Anal Anastomosis (RPC IPAA) with this new technique. A SILSTM port was used through the curved intra-umbilical 25-mm incision. A 12-mm port was placed in the right iliac fossa at the ileostomy site. Another 5 mm port was placed in the left iliac fossa at the drain site. 10 mm 0 degree lens was used through the SILS port. Two 5 mm port were placed from the SILS port. Right iliac fossa port was the surgeon’s right hand port and left hand port was 5 mm SILS port. Left iliac fossa port and 5 mm SILS port were used by the assistant surgeon for retraction. The specimen was delivered through the umbilical incision by extending the incision for 1.5 cm on either side. Ileal J Pouch was created extracorporeally and then anastomosed to the anal canal with the circular stapler laparoscopically. The diverting loop ileostomy was brought out through the right iliac fossa 12 mm port. The pelvic drain was brought out through the left iliac fossa port. The procedure was completed without any perioperative complications. Operative time was 256 minutes. Postoperative follow-up did not reveal any umbilical wound complication. Till date we have performed 26 Laparoscopic RPC with IPAA and this was the first Single Incision Laparoscopic RPC with IPAA. For experienced laparoscopic colorectal surgeons, single incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) is feasible. Single-incision laparoscopic colectomy is a promising alternative method as minimally invasive abdominal surgery for the treatment of patients requiring colectomy.     

Systematic review with meta-analysis of studies comparing single-incision laparoscopic colectomy and multiport laparoscopic colectomy

Background

There is currently a paucity of research comparing the clinical outcomes of single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) with those obtained with multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MLC). This meta-analysis aimed to examine whether SILC shows real benefits over MLC, especially in terms of feasibility, safety, and oncological adequacy.

Methods

A literature review of studies comparing SILC and MLC has been performed which looked at the following outcomes: mortality, morbidity, and oncological parameters of adequacy, as well as other potential benefits and drawbacks. Standardized mean difference for continuous variables and odds ratios for qualitative variables were calculated.

Results

Thirty studies comparing SILC and MLC were reviewed: two prospective randomized clinical trials (RCTs), eight prospective studies, and 20 retrospective comparative observational studies. Overall, in a cohort of 3502 patients who underwent surgery, SILC was used in 1068 cases (30.5 %) and MLC was used in 2434 cases (69.5 %). Mean intraoperative blood loss was significantly lower when the SILC procedure had been used (75.06 vs. 91.45 ml, P = 0.03); bowel function recovered significantly earlier in the SILC patients (1.96 vs. 2.15 days, P = 0.03); mean postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the SILC group (5.55 vs. 6.60 days, P = 0.0005); and length of skin incision was significantly shorter in SILC patients (3.98 vs. 5.28 cm, P = 0.01). However, in the latter four outcomes, evidence of heterogeneity was found. In contrast, MLC showed significantly better results when compared to SILC in terms of distal free margins (12.26 vs. 10.98 cm, P = 0.01).

Conclusions

SILC could be considered as a safe and feasible alternative to MLC in experienced hands. Further evidence for this surgical procedure should be assessed in the form of high-quality RCTs, with additional focus on its use in low rectal cancer resection.

     

单孔腹腔镜与常规腹腔镜胆囊切除术后切口的比较研究

目的对比单孔腹腔镜胆囊切除术（SILC）与常规腹腔镜胆囊切除术（CLC）术后切口的情况。方法 2011年1~6月,对40例施行SILC（SILC组）和同期配对施行CLC（CLC组）的患者,分别于术后第2天和术后1个月门诊随访时检查切口情况,并填写问卷。结果术后第2天和术后1个月随访时,两组患者切口疼痛程度相近,差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。术后第2天切口明显程度、满意程度SILC组优于CLC组（P〈0.05）。术后1个月随访时,SILC组仍高于CLC组,但差异无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。术后1个月随访时,两组患者切口满意程度均较术后第2天升高,但仅CLC组升高有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。结论单孔腹腔镜手术较常规腹腔镜手术具有瘢痕隐蔽及由此引起的切口满意度高的优势,但这些优势随时间推移而消失。就术后切口疼痛程度而言,SILC并无优势。     

Single-incision laparoscopic versus conventional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy: a comparison of short-term surgical results

Background  

Since the introduction of laparoscopic colectomy, improved short-term surgical results have been noted in the literature. Therefore, efforts have shifted to reducing the invasiveness of laparoscopic surgery, resulting in the invention of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS). Due to its comparable capabilities and feasibility, the implementation of SILS has rapidly grown in different fields. However, few studies discuss its true benefit compared with conventional laparoscopy. This study is the first to use SILS colectomy as an approach for malignant colon cancer. The goal of this cohort series is to compare the short-term surgical outcomes between SILS and conventional right hemicolectomy.     

Standard laparoscopic versus single-incision laparoscopic colectomy for cancer: early results of a randomized prospective study

BackgroundStandard laparoscopic colectomy (SLC) for cancer is a safe, feasible, and oncologically effective procedure with better short-term and similar long-term results of open colectomy. Conversely, owing to technical difficulties in colonic resection and full mesenteric dissection, single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) has been considered unsuitable for oncologic purposes. We compared the technical feasibility and early clinical outcomes of SLC and SILC for cancer.MethodsIn this prospective randomized clinical trial, 16 (50%) patients underwent SLC (10 left and 6 right) and 16 (50%) patients underwent SILC (8 left and 8 right).ResultsDemographics, preoperative data, and characteristics of the tumor were similar. The mean number of resected lymph nodes was 16 ± 5 in the SLC and 18 ± 6 in the SILC group (P = NS). Surgical time was 124 ± 8 minutes and 147 ± 5 minutes, respectively (P = NS). Surgical mortality was nil and the major morbidity rate was 6.3% in both groups.ConclusionsSILC for cancer is a technically feasible and safe oncologic procedure with short-term results similar to those obtained with a traditional laparoscopic approach.     

Large subcapsular liver hematoma following single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Background and Objectives:

Many laparoscopic surgeons are now transitioning from standard multiple-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy to single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) in an attempt to improve cosmetic outcomes and decrease postoperative morbidity. However, little has been published regarding the potential complications of SILS operations.

Methods:

We report the case of a patient undergoing SILS cholecystectomy who developed the complication of a large hepatic hematoma, resulting in significant postoperative morbidity, blood transfusion requirement, and reoperation.

Results:

After an in-depth internal review of the postoperative morbidity of this case, it appears that the causative factor may be instrument shaft torque on the liver surface.

Conclusion:

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery may pose significant and unique risks that warrant additional operative caution. Quantitative comparison of SILS to the gold-standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy is needed to further elucidate definitive benefits and complications of this novel technique.     

Single-Incision Laparoscopic Combined Cholecystectomy and Appendectomy

Background and Objectives:

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery is becoming more widely used, but few combined procedures have been reported. Herein we share our experience with single-incision laparoscopic combined cholecystectomy and appendectomy.

Methods:

We reviewed data from 26 patients who underwent single-incision laparoscopic combined cholecystectomy and appendectomy between May 1, 2009 and June 1, 2013 at Shengjing Hospital. All the procedures were performed with conventional laparoscopic instruments placed through a single operating portal of entry created within the umbilicus.

Results:

All the operations were successfully completed without conversion to conventional laparoscopic or open surgery. No intraoperative complications occurred. Patients were satisfied with the therapeutic and cosmetic outcomes.

Conclusions:

Single-incision laparoscopic combined cholecystectomy and appendectomy appear to be a technically feasible alternative to the standard laparoscopic procedure in simultaneous management of coexisting benign gallbladder and appendix pathologies. Larger studies are required to confirm these findings.     

Single-Port Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy: Intermediate Results

Background:

Single-port laparoscopic colectomy was first described in 2008 as a new technique for colorectal surgery.¹ No available reports have stated the intermediate- or long-term outcome. We report our intermediate results for the first 20 single-port laparoscopic right hemicolectomies performed by a single laparoscopically trained surgeon at our institution.

Design:

Between February 2009 and September 2010, 20 consecutive patients with an indication for right hemicolectomy who were candidates for laparoscopic surgery underwent a single-port laparoscopic approach. The only exclusion was a previous midline laparotomy. The patients were followed for outcomes after a median of 27 months (range: 15 to 35).

Results:

The mean age was 65 years (range: 59 to 88). The mean body mass index was 28 (range: 20 to 35). Seventy-five percent of patients had significant comorbidities, with an American Society of Anesthesiologists class of III or IV. The median estimated blood loss was 25 mL (range: 25 to 250). The mean number of lymph nodes was 13 (range: 0 to 29). There was one conversion to hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomy and one to open colectomy secondary to bleeding. The mean hospital stay was 5 days (range: 3 to 7). Thirty-day postoperative complications included 1 wound infection, 1 patient with alcohol withdrawal, and 1 incidence of colitis caused by Clostridium difficile infection.At a median follow-up of 27 months, there were no local recurrences or distant metastases. One death occurred at 17 months from myocardial infarction. Two patients developed incisional hernias, with one requiring a laparoscopic hernia repair. One patient required a completion proctocolectomy for a pathological diagnosis of hyperplastic polyposis syndrome.

Conclusions:

Single-port laparoscopic right hemicolectomy has been safely performed in patients who are candidates for conventional laparoscopic hemicolectomy. This small series indicates that intermediate-term results are similar to conventional laparoscopic surgery in efficacy, safety, and oncological outcomes. Larger datasets are necessary to determine cost-effectiveness, differences in postoperative outcomes, and patient satisfaction.     

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy in children: a retrospective comparison with traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Purpose

The natural progression of minimal access surgery is to perform the same technical operation with minimal or no evidence of scarring. In children, small case series of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy suggests that the operation is feasible; however, no comparison has been made to traditional, multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patient safety, outcomes, and cost.

Methods

A retrospective review of consecutive single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomies in children was performed from January 2009 to November 2010. Demographics and outcome measures were recorded, including operative time, operative costs, length of stay, need for intravenous analgesia, and operative complications. A concurrent group of pediatric patients undergoing traditional, multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy was used for comparison.

Results

A total of 69 pediatric laparoscopic cholecystectomies were performed from January 2009 to October 2010. Forty-two patients with a mean age of 14.7 years (range, 5.9-18.9 years) underwent attempted single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, and 27 patients with a mean age of 15 years (range, 2.8-19.4 years) underwent multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Mean operative time (68 vs 64.5 minutes; P, not significant [NS]), length of stay (1.45 vs 1.19 days; P, NS), and doses of intravenous analgesia (1.7 vs 2; P, NS) were not significantly different for patients undergoing single-incision or multiport laparoscopic cholecystectomy, respectively. Two patients (5%) undergoing the single-incision approach required 1 additional port be placed to complete the operation. In addition, there was no significant difference in operative costs between the single-incision and multiport approach ($7766 vs $8383; P, NS).

Conclusion

Single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe and effective in the pediatric population. It can be performed with the same technical exposure and outcomes as multiport laparoscopy, with the added benefit of little to no scarring and no increase in cost.     

经脐单孔腹腔镜手术治疗胃良性疾病的探讨

目的探讨利用传统腹腔镜器械行经脐单孔腹腔镜手术治疗胃良性疾病的临床应用前景。方法 2009年5月至2011年5月,12例胃间质瘤及4例良性消化性溃疡患者完成经脐单孔腹腔镜胃部分切除术、胃大部切除术,总结手术方法及临床疗效。结果 12例胃间质瘤患者顺利完成经脐单孔腹腔镜胃部分切除术,手术平均用时110min,术中平均出血量90ml,术后平均住院时间5d。4例良性消化性溃疡合并幽门梗阻患者中,1例因术中局部粘连重中转开腹,其余3例手术顺利,平均手术时间290min,术中平均出血量220ml,术后平均住院时间7d。全组病例无术后出血、吻合口漏及吻合口梗阻等并发症发生,患者恢复好。结论经脐单孔腹腔镜手术治疗胃良性疾病安全、可行,并可以达到良好的美容效果。     

Prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: report of preliminary data

Background

This study presents preliminary data from a prospective randomized multicenter, single-blinded trial of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) versus standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy (4PLC).

Methods

Patients with symptomatic gallstones, polyps, or biliary dyskinesia (ejection fraction <30%) were randomized to SILC or 4PLC. Data included operative time, estimated blood loss, length of skin and fascial incisions, complications, pain, satisfaction and cosmetic scoring, and conversion.

Results

Operating room time was longer with SILC (n = 50) versus 4PLC (n = 33). No differences were seen in blood loss, complications, or pain scores. Body image scores and cosmetic scores at 1, 2, 4, and 12 weeks were significantly higher for SILC. Satisfaction scores, however, were similar.

Conclusions

Preliminary results from this prospective trial showed SILC to be safe compared with 4PLC although operative times were longer. Cosmetic scores were higher for SILS compared with 4PLC. Satisfaction scores were similar although both groups reported a significantly higher preference towards SILC.     

The Use of the EndoGrab™ Port-Free Endocavity Retractor in Single-Incision Laparoscopic Right Hemicolectomy

The EndoGrab? Port-Free Endocavity Retractor is an internally anchored retracting device that enables surgeons to reduce not only the number of ports and incisions but also the number of assistant surgeons. Our institution performs single-incision laparoscopic colectomy (SILC) as a routine procedure. Forty-nine patients underwent a single-incision laparoscopic right hemicolectomy. In this procedure, we use this retractor to the mesenteric tissue, including the ileocolic vessels and the mesentery of the transverse colon, and overcame the technical problems related to SILC and showed excellent short-term outcomes. To perform SILC safely while maintaining the minimal invasiveness and the quality, the use of this retractor is essential, especially in difficult situations, such as an unfavorable visual field when performing a lymph node dissection around the middle colic vessels in right hemicolectomy.     

���굥�׸�ǻ���봫ͳ��ǻ�������г�����ȫ��Meta ����

??Safety of transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus conventional laparoscopic holecystectomy: a meta analysis WANG Ye-fei*, SHEN Ai , LIU Bo??et al.*Department of Hepatobiliary Surgery??the First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University??Chongqing 400016??China
Corresponding author: WANG Hong-lin, E- mail: whlcqykd@163.com
Abstract Objective To evaluate the safety of transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods Cochrane library (No.1 2011), PubMed (1978-2011), EMBase (1978-2011) and CNKI (1978-2011) were searched for randomized controlled trials on the efficacy of transumbilical single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SILC) versus conventional laparoscopic holecystectomy (CLC) for the treatment of benign gallbladder disease. According to the inclusion criteria, eight studies were selected. Two authors cited the details about the designs of the trials??identities of the participants and the outcomes from the studies included independently. The data were analyzed by Revman 5.1 software. Results Operating time in the SILS group was longer than that in the CLC group signi?cantly (weighted mean difference =8.03??95% confidence interval??6.02??10.03????P??0.01). There was no signi?cant difference in the introoperative blood loss??weighted mean difference=-2.41??95% confidence interval??-5.66??0.83????P=0.15??, postoperative hospital stay??weighted=0.15??95% confidence interval??-0.06??0.37???? P=0.16?? and the postoperative complications incidence??relative risk=1.21?? 95% confidence interval??0.53??2.78)??P=0.69?? between the two groups. Conclusion SILC is a safe procedure for the treatment of uncomplicated gallstone disease, especially for cosmetic purpose.     

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery: outcomes from 224 colonic resections performed at a single center using SILS™

Background

Compared with single-incision laparoscopy, multiport laparoscopy is associated with greater risk of postoperative wound pain, infection, incisional hernias, and suboptimal cosmetic outcomes. The feasibility of minimally invasive single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for colorectal procedures is well-established, but outcome data remain limited.

Methods

Patients with benign diverticular disease, Crohn’s disease, or ulcerative colitis admitted to Klinikum Leverkusen, Germany, for colonic resection between July 2009 and March 2011 (n = 224) underwent single-incision laparoscopic surgery using the SILS? port system. Surgeons had ≥7 years’ experience in laparoscopic colon surgery but no SILS? experience. Patient demographic and clinical data were collected prospectively. Pain was evaluated by using a visual analog scale (0–10). Data were analyzed by using the SPSS PASW Statistics 18 database.

Results

The majority of patients underwent sigmoid colectomy with high anterior resection (AR) or left hemicolectomy (n = 150) for diverticulitis. Our conversion rate to open surgery was 6.3 %, half in patients undergoing sigmoid colectomy with high AR or left hemicolectomy, 95 % of whom had diverticulitis. Mean operating time was 166 ± 74 (range, 40–441) min in the overall population, with shorter times for single-port transanal tumor resection (SPTTR; 89 ± 51 min; range, 40–153 min) and longer times for proctocolectomy (325 min; range, 110–441 min). Mean hospital stay was approximately 10 days, longer after abdominoperineal rectal resection or proctocolectomy (12–16 days). Most complications occurred following sigmoid colectomy with high AR or left hemicolectomy [19/25 (76 %) of early and 4/5 (80 %) of late complications, respectively]. Pain was <4 on a scale of 0–10 in all cases on postoperative day 1, and typically decreased during the next 2 days.

Conclusions

Our findings support the feasibility and tolerability of colorectal surgery, conducted by experienced laparoscopic surgeons without specific training in use of the SILS? port.     

Incidence of Port-Site Incisional Hernia After Single-Incision Laparoscopic Surgery

Background and Objectives:

Single-incision laparoscopic surgery is gaining popularity among minimally invasive surgeons and is now being applied to a broad number of surgical procedures. Although this technique uses only 1 port, the diameter of the incision is larger than in standard laparoscopic surgery. The long-term incidence of port-site hernias after single-incision laparoscopic surgery has yet to be determined.

Methods:

All patients who underwent a single-incision laparoscopic surgical procedure from May 2008 through May 2009 were included in the study. Single-incision laparoscopic surgical operations were performed either by a multiport technique or with a 3-trocar single-incision laparoscopic surgery port. The patients were seen at 30 to 36 months'' follow-up, at which time they were examined for any evidence of port-site incisional hernia. Patients found to have hernias on clinical examination underwent repairs with mesh.

Results:

A total of 211 patients met the criteria for inclusion in the study. The types of operations included were cholecystectomy, appendectomy, sleeve gastrectomy, gastric banding, Nissen fundoplication, colectomy, and gastrojejunostomy. We found a port-site hernia rate of 2.9% at 30 to 36 months'' follow-up.

Conclusion:

Port-site incisional hernia after single-incision laparoscopic surgical procedures remains a major setback for patients. The true incidence remains largely unknown because most patients are asymptomatic and therefore do not seek surgical aid.