Comparative study of safety and outcomes of single-port access versus conventional laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

backgroundSingle-port access (SPA) offers cosmetic advantages in addition to the well-recognised benefits of conventional multi-port laparoscopic (CL) surgery, and can be carried out using standard straight instruments. We report the outcomes of our early experience with SPA colorectal resections in comparison with CL surgery.

methodsWe compared the following data, patient characteristics, operating time, morbidity, operative mortality, length of hospital stay and tumour variables, of patients who underwent SPA right, left, sigmoid and total colon resections, as well as high anterior resections and panproctocolectomies, with that of patients who underwent equivalent conventional laparoscopic (CL) operations. The 40 SPA and 78 CL patients studied underwent surgery between February 2008 and September 2011.

resultsThere was no difference between the SPA and CL operations, as regards the patient's sex (55.0 vs. 62.8% males, p = 0.411), comorbidity (ASA I 10.0 vs. 12.8%; ASA II 57.5 vs. 59.0%; ASA III 32.5 vs. 25.6%; ASA IV 0 vs. 2.6%, p = 0.722) and body mass index (26.2 vs. 28.0 kg/m(2), p = 0.073). However, SPA patients were younger (mean age 54.1 vs. 64.8 years, p = 0.001), and malignancy was a less common indication for surgery (25.0 vs. 71.8%, p < 0.001). There were no conversions to open surgery, and one death occurred in the CL group (1.3%). Mean operating time (162 vs. 170 min, p = 0.547), median post-operative hospital stay (4 vs. 4 days, p = 0.255) and morbidity (7.5 vs. 12.8%, p = 0.538) were comparable.

conclusionsSPA laparoscopic surgery appears safe in the hands of experienced laparoscopic surgeons, with no increase in operating time, length of stay, morbidity and mortality. Selection of patients with indications for surgery for benign disease may be of importance to ensure an oncologically safe initial uptake of SPA colorectal practice.