Clinical and aesthetic outcomes of transumbilical single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy - Summary - MDSpire

Clinical and aesthetic outcomes of transumbilical single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy

  • By

  • Qingquan Shi

  • Yunan He

  • Jiahui Qiu

  • Jinhong Li

  • June 30, 2026

  • 0 min

Share

Objective:

To compare clinical outcomes and aesthetic satisfaction between transumbilical single-port laparoscopic cystectomy (SP-LC) and traditional multi-port laparoscopic cystectomy (MPL).

Approach:
  • Study Design: A retrospective analysis of 150 patients undergoing laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy from October 2023 to September 2025, divided into MPL and SP-LC groups.
  • Data Collection: Perioperative parameters, postoperative pain (VAS), inflammatory markers, ovarian reserve function, complications, and aesthetic satisfaction were assessed.
Key Findings:
  • SP-LC showed better perioperative recovery than MPL.
  • Less intraoperative blood loss in SP-LC (43.06 ± 11.79 mL vs. 48.12 ± 12.85 mL, P = 0.014).
  • Earlier first exhaust and ambulation in SP-LC (15.82 ± 5.21 h vs. 18.47 ± 5.74 h, P = 0.004; 13.89 ± 3.17 h vs. 15.63 ± 3.51 h, P = 0.002).
  • Shorter hospital stay for SP-LC (3.94 ± 0.85 d vs. 4.31 ± 0.92 d, P = 0.011).
  • Lower pain scores in SP-LC at 24 and 72 hours postoperatively (both P<0.001).
  • Lower postoperative CRP and WBC levels in SP-LC (both P<0.001).
  • Overall complication rate lower in SP-LC (11.59% vs. 25.93%, P = 0.027).
  • Higher aesthetic satisfaction at discharge for SP-LC (P = 0.006).
Interpretation:

Transumbilical single-port laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy is associated with faster recovery, reduced inflammation, fewer complications, and superior aesthetics without compromising ovarian reserve.

Limitations:
  • Retrospective design may introduce selection bias.
  • Limited to a single institution, which may affect generalizability.
Conclusion:

Transumbilical single-port laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy offers advantages in recovery and aesthetic outcomes compared to traditional multi-port techniques.

Original Source(s)

Related Content