ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2025
Postoperative abdominopelvic adhesion and umbilical wound validation after single-port laparoscopy or two-port laparoscopy for gynecological surgery: a comparison with conventional laparoscopy.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Two-portWorld journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2026Article
- Clinical and aesthetic outcomes of transumbilical single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic ovarian cystectomy.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Evaluating the safety and efficacy of SILS and SILS+1 port laparoscopic surgery for colorectal resection: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of RCTs.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe emergence of minimally invasive surgery has led to the development of laparoscopic surgery to reduce the number of ports. Although the incision for the umbilical port is sufficiently large, thus reducing the number of ports used during laparoscopic surgery, postoperative complications involving incisions at port sites have been reported. Thus, we analyzed postoperative intraperitoneal outcomes after laparoscopy by reviewing operation records and photographs of consecutive surgeries.
methodsA total of 134 patients were enrolled in the clinical study to analyze their intraperitoneal outcomes. The patients were divided into groups, which were compared and analyzed on the basis of the number of ports used intraoperatively. The clinical characteristics of the patients were obtained from their medical records, and their operation records, including those of their consecutive operations, were analyzed.
resultsPatients who underwent single-port laparoscopy were included in Group 1, patients who underwent two-port laparoscopy were included in Group 2, and patients who underwent three-port laparoscopy or four-port laparoscopy were included in Group 3. Correlation analysis of the number of ports used during surgery revealed that the white blood cell count before and after surgery and the intraperitoneal umbilical adhesion score were negatively correlated. The incidence of intraperitoneal umbilical adhesions increased as the number of ports used during laparoscopy decreased.
conclusionsBecause the incidence of postoperative intraperitoneal umbilical adhesion increases as the size of the umbilical wound increases, such as after single-port laparoscopy, surgical umbilical wounds should be cautiously repaired after single-port laparoscopic surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.