ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Concealing scars in a simple way: transumbilical single-site dual-incision laparoscopic surgery for benign adnexal diseases.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWhile laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) theoretically improves cosmesis through a single umbilical incision, evidence on patient-reported cosmetic satisfaction remains equivocal. Technical challenges in umbilical incision closure and reliance on costly disposable devices further limit its adoption in resource-constrained settings. The transumbilical single-site dual-incision (SSDI) approach circumvents these challenges through strategic dual umbilical incision placement. This design enables surgeons to apply conventional instruments and umbilical incision suturing techniques which are comparable to multiport laparoscopy. This study aimed to compare surgical outcomes and cosmetic satisfaction between transumbilical SSDI laparoscopic surgery using conventional instruments and standard LESS for benign adnexal diseases.
methodsA total of 116 patients with benign adnexal diseases underwent transumbilical SSDI laparoscopic surgery using conventional laparoscopic instruments (n = 52) or standard LESS (n = 64) were retrospectively analyzed.
resultsBoth procedures were successfully performed in all patients. SSDI technique preserved the integrity of the base of umbilical fossa in 88.5% (46/52) of cases, obviating the need for complex umbilical reconstruction. Compared to the LESS group, the SSDI group demonstrated significantly shorter total operation time (44.6 ± 18.9 vs. 56.8 ± 14.9 min, P < 0.001) and incision suturing time (3.6 ± 4.4 vs. 15.4 ± 2.5 min, P < 0.001). Additionally, hospital costs were significantly lower in the SSDI group (9,137.4 ± 891.3 vs. 11,920.2 ± 924.5 RMB, P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of estimated blood loss, delayed discharge, wound infection, trocar-site hernia, or cosmetic satisfaction. At the 3-month postoperative follow-up, the majority of patients in both groups reported great satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes.
conclusionTransumbilical SSDI laparoscopic surgery using conventional instruments represents a technically feasible and economically advantageous alternative to standard LESS for benign adnexal diseases. This "back-to-basics" approach may enhance the accessibility of single-site laparoscopy, particularly in resource-limited settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41651952What 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.