Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Surgical Endoscopy 1/2015

Open Access 01-01-2015

Single port/incision laparoscopic surgery compared with standard three-port laparoscopic surgery for appendicectomy: a randomized controlled trial

Author: The SCARLESS Study Group

Published in: Surgical Endoscopy | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background and objective

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of single port/incision laparoscopic surgery (SPILS) with standard three-port laparoscopic surgery for appendicectomy in adults. Feasibility data was collected to evaluate generalizability to other single-port techniques such as cholecystectomy.

Methods

This was a single-center, randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomized to receive either SPILS or standard three-port laparoscopic appendicectomy. The primary patient-reported outcomes were body image and cosmesis at 6 weeks. The primary clinical outcome was pain at 1–7 days. Secondary outcomes included duration of operation, conversion rates, complication rates, use of analgesia, hospital re-admission rates, re-operation rates, and time to return to normal activities.

Results

Seventy-nine patients were randomized. Sixty-seven completed the day 1–7 diary and 53 completed the 6-week follow-up. SPILS patients answered significantly more favorably to the items in the body image scale [mean (SD) 5.6 (1.0) vs. 7.0 (3.3); −1.4 (95 % CI −2.8 to 1.5; p = 0.03)] and the cosmetic scale [18.9 (4.1) vs. 15.3 (5.8); 3.6 (95 % CI 0.7–6.5; p = 0.016)] compared with patients in the Standard group. The duration of operation was shorter for SPILS, and patients required less morphine in recovery; however, there were no statistically significant differences in other outcomes.

Conclusions

Patient-reported body image and cosmesis outcomes were better, and surgical outcomes were similar following SPILS. However, the SPILS procedure is more technically demanding and may not be achievable or necessary in routine clinical care. Further assessment of the findings is needed through larger multicenter studies.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Jayne DG, Guillou PJ, Thorpe H, Quirke P, Copeland J, Smith AMH (2007) Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal carcinoma: 3-year results of the UK MRC CLASICC Trial Group. J Clin Oncol 25:3061–3068PubMedCrossRef Jayne DG, Guillou PJ, Thorpe H, Quirke P, Copeland J, Smith AMH (2007) Randomized trial of laparoscopic-assisted resection of colorectal carcinoma: 3-year results of the UK MRC CLASICC Trial Group. J Clin Oncol 25:3061–3068PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Lee PC, Lo C, Lai PS, Chang JJ, Huang SJ, Lin MT (2010) Randomized clinical trial of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus mini-laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 97:1007–1012PubMedCrossRef Lee PC, Lo C, Lai PS, Chang JJ, Huang SJ, Lin MT (2010) Randomized clinical trial of single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus mini-laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Br J Surg 97:1007–1012PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Tsimoyiannis EC, Tsimogiannis KE, Pappas-Gogos G, Farantos C, Benetatos N, Mavriduo P (2010) Different pain scores in single transumbilical incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 24:1842–1848PubMedCrossRef Tsimoyiannis EC, Tsimogiannis KE, Pappas-Gogos G, Farantos C, Benetatos N, Mavriduo P (2010) Different pain scores in single transumbilical incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus classic laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Surg Endosc 24:1842–1848PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Tugcu V, Ilbey YO, Mutlu B, Tasci AI (2010) Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) versus standard laparoscopic simple nephrectomy: a prospective randomized study. J Endourol 24:1315–1320PubMedCrossRef Tugcu V, Ilbey YO, Mutlu B, Tasci AI (2010) Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) versus standard laparoscopic simple nephrectomy: a prospective randomized study. J Endourol 24:1315–1320PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Marks J, Tacchino R, Roberts K, Onders R, Denoto G, Paraskeva P et al (2011) Prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: report of preliminary data. Am J Surg 201:369–372PubMedCrossRef Marks J, Tacchino R, Roberts K, Onders R, Denoto G, Paraskeva P et al (2011) Prospective randomized controlled trial of traditional laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: report of preliminary data. Am J Surg 201:369–372PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Asakuma M, Hayashi M, Komeda K, Shimizu T, Hirokawa F, Miyamoto Y et al (2011) Impact of single port cholecystectomy on post operative pain. Br J Surg 98:991–995PubMedCrossRef Asakuma M, Hayashi M, Komeda K, Shimizu T, Hirokawa F, Miyamoto Y et al (2011) Impact of single port cholecystectomy on post operative pain. Br J Surg 98:991–995PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Pappalepore N (2002) Transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy (TULAA): a safe and useful alternative for uncomplicated appendicitis. Eur J Pediatr Surg 12:383–386PubMedCrossRef Pappalepore N (2002) Transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted appendectomy (TULAA): a safe and useful alternative for uncomplicated appendicitis. Eur J Pediatr Surg 12:383–386PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Meyer A, Preuss M, Roesler S, Lainka M, Omlor G (2004) Transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted ‘‘one-trocar’’ appendectomy—TULAA—as an alternative operation method in the treatment of appendicitis [in German]. Zentralbl Chir 129:391–395PubMedCrossRef Meyer A, Preuss M, Roesler S, Lainka M, Omlor G (2004) Transumbilical laparoscopic-assisted ‘‘one-trocar’’ appendectomy—TULAA—as an alternative operation method in the treatment of appendicitis [in German]. Zentralbl Chir 129:391–395PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Ateş O (2007) Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy conducted intracorporeally with the aid of a transabdominal sling suture. J Pediatr Surg 42:1071–1074PubMedCrossRef Ateş O (2007) Single-port laparoscopic appendectomy conducted intracorporeally with the aid of a transabdominal sling suture. J Pediatr Surg 42:1071–1074PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Roberts KE (2009) True single-port appendectomy: first experience with the puppeteer technique. Surg Endosc 23:1825–1830PubMedCrossRef Roberts KE (2009) True single-port appendectomy: first experience with the puppeteer technique. Surg Endosc 23:1825–1830PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Hong TH (2009) Transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TUSPLA): scarless intracorporeal appendectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 19:75–78PubMedCrossRef Hong TH (2009) Transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy (TUSPLA): scarless intracorporeal appendectomy. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 19:75–78PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Bucher P, Pugin F, Buchs N, Ostermann S, Charara F, Morel P (2009) Single port access laparoscopic cholecystectomy (with video). World J Surg 33:1015–1019PubMedCrossRef Bucher P, Pugin F, Buchs N, Ostermann S, Charara F, Morel P (2009) Single port access laparoscopic cholecystectomy (with video). World J Surg 33:1015–1019PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Ahsan R, Kynaston J, MacDonald ER, Ahmed I (2010) Patient preferences for surgical techniques: should we invest in new approaches? Surg Endosc 24:3016–3025CrossRef Ahsan R, Kynaston J, MacDonald ER, Ahmed I (2010) Patient preferences for surgical techniques: should we invest in new approaches? Surg Endosc 24:3016–3025CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Buxton MJ (1987) Problems in the economic appraisal of new health technology: the evaluation of heart transplants in the UK. In: Drummond MF (ed) Economic appraisal of health technology in the European Community. Oxford Medical Publications, Oxford, pp 103–118 Buxton MJ (1987) Problems in the economic appraisal of new health technology: the evaluation of heart transplants in the UK. In: Drummond MF (ed) Economic appraisal of health technology in the European Community. Oxford Medical Publications, Oxford, pp 103–118
15.
go back to reference Park JH, Hyun KH, Park CH, Choi SY, Choi WH, Kim DJ (2010) Laparoscopic vs transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy: results of prospective randomized trial. J Korean Surg Soc 78:213–218CrossRef Park JH, Hyun KH, Park CH, Choi SY, Choi WH, Kim DJ (2010) Laparoscopic vs transumbilical single-port laparoscopic appendectomy: results of prospective randomized trial. J Korean Surg Soc 78:213–218CrossRef
16.
go back to reference St Peter S, Adibe OO, Juuang D, Sharp SW, Garey CL, Laituir CA et al (2011) Single incision versus standard 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective randomised trial. Ann Surg 254:586–590PubMedCrossRef St Peter S, Adibe OO, Juuang D, Sharp SW, Garey CL, Laituir CA et al (2011) Single incision versus standard 3-port laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective randomised trial. Ann Surg 254:586–590PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Rehman H, Rao AM, Ahmed I (2011) Single incision versus conventional multi-incision appendicectomy for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (7): CD009022 Rehman H, Rao AM, Ahmed I (2011) Single incision versus conventional multi-incision appendicectomy for suspected appendicitis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (7): CD009022
18.
go back to reference Dunker MS, Stiggelbout AM, van Hogezand RA, Ringers J, Griffioen G, Bemelman WA (1998) Cosmesis and body image after laparoscopic-assisted and open ileocolic resection for Crohn’s disease. Surg Endosc 12:1334–1340PubMedCrossRef Dunker MS, Stiggelbout AM, van Hogezand RA, Ringers J, Griffioen G, Bemelman WA (1998) Cosmesis and body image after laparoscopic-assisted and open ileocolic resection for Crohn’s disease. Surg Endosc 12:1334–1340PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Newcombe R (1998) Interval estimation for the difference between independent proportions: comparison of eleven methods. Stat Med 17:873–890PubMedCrossRef Newcombe R (1998) Interval estimation for the difference between independent proportions: comparison of eleven methods. Stat Med 17:873–890PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference StataCorp (2011) Stata statistical software: release 12. StataCorp LP, College Station StataCorp (2011) Stata statistical software: release 12. StataCorp LP, College Station
22.
go back to reference Rao A, Kynaston J, MacDonald ER, Ahmed I (2010) Patient preferences for surgical techniques: should we invest in new approaches? Surg Endosc 12:3016–3025CrossRef Rao A, Kynaston J, MacDonald ER, Ahmed I (2010) Patient preferences for surgical techniques: should we invest in new approaches? Surg Endosc 12:3016–3025CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Single port/incision laparoscopic surgery compared with standard three-port laparoscopic surgery for appendicectomy: a randomized controlled trial
Author
The SCARLESS Study Group
Publication date
01-01-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Surgical Endoscopy / Issue 1/2015
Print ISSN: 0930-2794
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2218
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-014-3416-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

Surgical Endoscopy 1/2015 Go to the issue