ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2026
Single-port versus multi-port laparoscopic left lateral sectionectomy using articulating instruments: a comparative study.
Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSingle-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) for left lateral sectionectomy (LLS) offers potential advantages in reducing invasiveness and improving cosmesis, but its adoption remains limited because of technical challenges, including loss of triangulation and instrument collision. We hypothesized that using articulating instruments could overcome these limitations and allow SPLS to achieve outcomes equivalent to conventional multi-port laparoscopic surgery (MPLS).
methodsA retrospective cohort of 77 patients undergoing LLS was analyzed (SPLS, n = 42; MPLS, n = 35). SPLS was performed via a single umbilical incision using articulating instruments. Perioperative outcomes were compared.
resultsBaseline demographics and tumor characteristics were similar. All procedures were completed laparoscopically without conversion to open surgery or additional port placement. No significant differences were found in operative time, estimated blood loss, R0 resection rate (100% in both), or postoperative complication rates (SPLS 2.4% vs. MPLS 5.7%). No patient in the SPLS group required a blood transfusion, compared to two patients (5.7%) in the MPLS group (p > 0.05). The SPLS group had a significantly shorter hospital stay (5 vs. 6 days, p = 0.02). No mortality, reoperation, or port-site complication occurred.
conclusionsIn selected patients and in the hands of experienced surgeons, SPLS using articulating instruments is a safe and effective alternative to conventional multi-port laparoscopy, achieving comparable perioperative and oncologic outcomes with a shorter postoperative hospital stay. These findings support articulating instrument-assisted SPLS as a feasible and high-quality approach for minor liver resection in experienced centers.
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.