Abstract
Objective: To compare the operative results of single port access laparoscopic surgery using SILS port™ (multi-channel port method), SSL (multiple trocar method), and EZ Access (multi-channel port method).
Patients: A total of 28 women who underwent single port access laparoscopic surgery at our department between November 2010 and April 2011.
Main outcome measures: Insertion time of access device, surgery time, and blood loss. Features of each method were compared.
Results: Single port access laparoscopic surgery was completed in 26 women. Conversion to the conventional method was required in two cases. A significant difference was not found in regard to port insertion time, surgery time, and blood loss between the three groups: SILS (n = 15), SSL (n = 6), and EZ access (n = 5). In SSL, it was not necessary to make a large fascial incision; however, difficulty was encountered in the collection of the extracted tissue and the insertion of the anti-adhesion material in the SILS group. No difficulty was encountered in collection and insertion among patients in the SILS group. However, the surgeon should be skilled in the cross procedures using curved forceps and cost was higher in SLS than the other groups. EZ Access was found to have several advantages such as simultaneous performance of other procedures, easy collection and insertion, and comparatively low cost.
Conclusions: We found that tissue extraction was difficult with SSL and that EZ Access was the preferred method for collection of extracted tissue.
