title: [Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery in gynecology: the situation in 2013].
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) is a recent technic of minimally invasive surgery that arouses a growing interest due to its potential benefits in terms of pain and cosmetic. However, in gynecology as well as in other surgical specialties, preliminary results seem to be controversial. Its feasibility and interest by comparison with conventional laparoscopy (CL) have not been confirmed by randomized multicenter studies.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  Compare in gynecological surgery, feasibility and surgical outcomes (conversion rate and complications, postoperative pain, duration of surgery, length of hospital stay, appearance and cost) between SILS and CL.
  
  
  METHODS
  For this, a review of the literature from a PUBMED and Medline databases was conducted. The clinical cases and series with fewer than 10 patients were excluded. Eligible data were compared and analyzed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  A total of 46 studies including five prospective randomized were studied in gynecology. Conversion rates and complications appear identical to those of the CL. The learning curve is also comparable. The technique is not standardized and some ergonomic problems are described. Operating time and duration of hospitalization seems to be comparable. The postoperative pain assessment found conflicting results. The cosmetic results are in favor of the single incision laparoscopy. Finally, the cost is higher.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  According to the literature, the single incision laparoscopy seems feasible and safe, with better cosmetic results. But the cost is increased and associated with no benefit in terms of pain, operating time and duration of hospitalization. Beyond cosmetics results, further randomized studies are needed to identify a possible benefit.
authors.affiliation: Service de Gynécologie-Obstétrique et Reproduction Humaine, CHU de Clermont-Ferrand, CHU Estaing, 1, place Lucie-Aubrac, 63003 Clermont-Ferrand, France. brabischong@chu-clermontferrand.fr
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Rabischong
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Compan
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Savary
authors.forename: N
authors.initials: N
authors.lastname: Bourdel
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Canis
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Mage
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Botchorishvili
mesh_terms: D004724:Endoscopy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods / Q000639:trends*; D005260:Female; D013509:Gynecologic Surgical Procedures / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods / Q000639:trends*; D006801:Humans; D010535:Laparoscopy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods / Q000639:trends*; D007902:Length of Stay; D019060:Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods / Q000639:trends; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000209:etiology
keywords: Cœlioscopie; Gynecology; Gynécologie; Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS); Laparoscopie par incision unique; Laparoscopy; Single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS)