Conventional 3-port vs. single-incision laparoscopic oophorectomy for ovarian cryopreservation in paediatric surgery: a retrospective case-note review | ||||
| Annals of Pediatric Surgery | ||||
| Volume 18, Issue 1, January 2022 PDF (1.09 MB) | ||||
| DOI: 10.1186/s43159-022-00161-8 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
Kiloran Metcalfe; Harmit Ghattaura   ; Ceri Elbourne; Khaled Ashour; Sheila Lane; Kokila Lakhoo
| ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Objective We aim to compare conventional 3-port with single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) for oophorectomy in patients undergoing ovarian cryopreservation. Background Demand for cryopreservation of ovarian tissue prior to the initiation of gonadotoxic treatment has risen significantly since its introduction in England in 2013. Traditionally, laparoscopic oophorectomy is performed using a 3-port technique with an umbilical port and 2 smaller 5-mm working ports. Energy devices can be used to allow haemostatic dissection of the ovary and this is delivered through the umbilical port site. In an attempt to improve efficiency, post-operative outcomes, and enhance cosmesis; our department initiated the use of the Applied Medical GelPoint Mini Advanced Access Platform single port technique using a vertical trans-umbilical approach for ovarian cryopreservation. Methods All patients undergoing laparoscopic oophorectomy for cryopreservation between September 2013 and August 2017 were included. The patients were consented for SILS, 3-port and open oophorectomies. All patients received maximum local anaesthetic wound infiltration intra-operatively. Case notes and theatre electronic data were reviewed and data was collected on additional procedure, conversion rate, operative time, post-operative analgesia requirement, complications and length of hospital stay. Results A total of 106 patients underwent laparoscopic oophorectomy during the study period. Of these, 40 underwent conventional 3-port, 65 had SILS and 1 patient had open. No cases were converted from the intended method. There was a statistically significant difference in the mean operative time; with SILS being faster than the conventional 3-port method (SILS: 40.4 min; 3-port: 51.7 min; = 0.017). There was no difference in length of stay or perioperative analgesics, and complication rates in both groups were low. Informal qualitative feedback included surgeons stating that the ovary was much easier to deliver using the SILS technique. Patients were also happy with a single cosmetically appeasing scar hidden within the umbilicus. Conclusion SILS is an acceptable technique in ovarian cryopreservation allowing a quicker operative time, easier delivery of the ovary, and better cosmesis. A learning curve is recognised due to the ergonomics of single port laparoscopy; however, the technique can be established easily in departments with existing laparoscopic capabilities. This is the first paper which establishes this within a Paediatric Surgical setting, and adult literature suggests that further prospective trials may prove some benefit in ovarian tissue volume or time to initiation of treatment due to enhanced recovery. | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| cryopreservation; Ovary; Single-incision laparoscopy; Surgery; Oncology | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 8 PDF Download: 6 |
||||
