These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of single-surgeon series of transperitoneal laparoendoscopic single-site surgery and standard laparoscopic adrenalectomy.
    Author: Wang L, Liu B, Wu Z, Yang Q, Chen W, Sheng H, Xu Z, Xiao L, Wang C, Sun Y.
    Journal: Urology; 2012 Mar; 79(3):577-83. PubMed ID: 22386401.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of transperitoneal laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) adrenalectomy and determine whether it shows any objective advantage compared with standard laparoscopy. METHODS: From August 2009 to May 2011, 13 transperitoneal LESS adrenalectomies were performed through a 2-3-cm skin incision using the TriPort access system. This cohort was compared with a contemporary 1:2 matched-pair group of 26 patients undergoing standard laparoscopic adrenalectomy by the same urologist. The perioperative outcomes, including cosmetic satisfaction scores, were statistically analyzed. RESULTS: The 2 groups were comparable with respect to patient demographics, estimated blood loss, and postoperative hospitalization (P > .05). The LESS procedures had a longer mean operative time (148.5 vs 112.9 minutes, P = .032) but a significantly lower postoperative visual analog pain scale score (2.3 vs 3.7, P = .001), fewer patients requiring analgesics (30.8% vs 73.1%, P = .011), and an earlier resumption of oral intake (21.6 vs 26.0 hours, P = .002). The mean length of the scar in the LESS group was much smaller (2.3 vs 5.9 cm, P < .0001) with a statistically significant greater mean cosmetic satisfaction score (9.5 vs 9.1, P = .042). CONCLUSION: The perioperative outcomes of transperitoneal LESS adrenalectomy for small adrenal tumors were comparable to those with the standard laparoscopic approach. It also provides better postoperative pain control, faster recovery of bowel function, and better cosmetic satisfaction than standard laparoscopy, albeit with a longer operative time.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]