The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2026
Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Single-Port Laparoscopic Surgery and Multi-Port Laparoscopic Surgery in the Treatment of Ectopic Pregnancy in Vietnam.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Huynh Ngiem Xuan, Nguyen Tri Bao, Le Khanh Phuong Pham, Nguyen Hieu Trung, Truong Hung Quang, Pham Hien Thu Thi, Huynh Phuoc Ngoc, Nguyen Dien Thanh, Lam Ngoc Thien
Аннотация
AIM: Single-port laparoscopic surgery has been increasingly used in the management of ectopic pregnancy, but direct comparisons with the conventional four-port method remain limited. This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of single-port laparoscopic surgery compared to the four-port approach at Hung Vuong Hospital.
METHODS: A total of 100 patients were enrolled and allocated to either the single-port or four-port group, with 50 cases in each. Operative time, estimated blood loss, postoperative pain (using the Visual Analog Scale), cosmetic satisfaction, complications, and gastrointestinal recovery were recorded and compared.
RESULTS: The average operative time was similar between the two groups (58 ± 18.15 min for single-port vs. 57.42 ± 29.72 min for four-port, p > 0.05), as was the estimated blood loss (84 ± 78.87 mL vs. 84.3 ± 57.78 mL, p > 0.05). Patients in the single-port group reported significantly less pain within the first 12 h (VAS 2.14 ± 0.50 vs. 3.46 ± 0.79, p < 0.001) and expressed higher satisfaction with cosmetic results (p < 0.001). No major complications, such as organ injury or conversion to open surgery, occurred in either group during the study period. However, the time to first bowel movement was longer in the single-port group (1.86 ± 0.83 days vs. 1.10 ± 0.30 days, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Both single-port and four-port laparoscopic surgeries showed favorable short-term perioperative outcomes in this cohort and were feasible approaches for the management of ectopic pregnancy. The single-port method provided advantages of reduced postoperative pain and improved cosmetic outcomes but was associated with a slightly slower recovery of bowel function.
METHODS: A total of 100 patients were enrolled and allocated to either the single-port or four-port group, with 50 cases in each. Operative time, estimated blood loss, postoperative pain (using the Visual Analog Scale), cosmetic satisfaction, complications, and gastrointestinal recovery were recorded and compared.
RESULTS: The average operative time was similar between the two groups (58 ± 18.15 min for single-port vs. 57.42 ± 29.72 min for four-port, p > 0.05), as was the estimated blood loss (84 ± 78.87 mL vs. 84.3 ± 57.78 mL, p > 0.05). Patients in the single-port group reported significantly less pain within the first 12 h (VAS 2.14 ± 0.50 vs. 3.46 ± 0.79, p < 0.001) and expressed higher satisfaction with cosmetic results (p < 0.001). No major complications, such as organ injury or conversion to open surgery, occurred in either group during the study period. However, the time to first bowel movement was longer in the single-port group (1.86 ± 0.83 days vs. 1.10 ± 0.30 days, p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Both single-port and four-port laparoscopic surgeries showed favorable short-term perioperative outcomes in this cohort and were feasible approaches for the management of ectopic pregnancy. The single-port method provided advantages of reduced postoperative pain and improved cosmetic outcomes but was associated with a slightly slower recovery of bowel function.