Does Incision Location Matter? Analysis of Single-Port Cosmesis in Urologic Reconstructive Surgery

被引:0
|
作者
Raver, Michael [1 ]
Implicito, Catherine [2 ]
Henrich, Mason [2 ]
Cao, Qilin [2 ]
Kim, Katherine [2 ]
Gelman, Simon [1 ]
Saxena, Sonam [1 ]
De La Rosa, Ruth Sanchez [1 ]
Seidman, Sharon [1 ]
Lovallo, Gregory [2 ]
Munver, Ravi [2 ]
Billah, Mubashir [2 ]
Ahmed, Mutahar [2 ]
Stifelman, Michael [2 ]
机构
[1] Hackensack Univ, Dept Urol, Med Ctr, 360 Essex St, Hackensack, NJ 07601 USA
[2] Hackensack Meridian Sch Med, Dept Urol, Nutley, NJ USA
关键词
cosmesis; minimally invasive surgery; robotic surgery; single-port; BODY-IMAGE; PFANNENSTIEL; KIDNEY;
D O I
10.1089/end.2024.0322
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction and Objective: One potential advantage of single-port (SP) robotic surgery compared with multiport (MP) robotic surgery is improved cosmesis. The only studies in urology patients to suggest this finding did not assess differences based on incision site. Our study evaluated SP, MP, incision location, age, gender, and prior abdominal surgery as predictors of cosmesis and scar consciousness for reconstructive procedures. Methods: This is a cohort study using an institutional review board-approved prospective genitourinary reconstruction database. Patients at least 3 months from surgery were emailed and called to complete the Consciousness subsection of the Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire. Bothersome was defined as a score of 11 or greater. Overall consciousness was scored with a single item as "not conscious" or "conscious." Pearson's chi-squared, Wilcoxon rank sum, Fisher's exact test, and logistic regression were performed to assess how age, gender, prior surgery, and incision location affect cosmesis. Results: There were 111 patients (54 MP, 57 SP), of which 27 were SP umbilical, 14 were SP midline nonumbilical, and 16 were SP lower quadrant. On univariate analysis the periumbilical incision had the lowest consciousness. Age was associated with Bother (p = 0.012) and Consciousness (p = 0.002), whereas gender, prior abdominal surgery, and incision site were not significant. On logistic regression, all SP incisions were less likely to be bothered compared with MP, although only SP umbilical was statistically significant (odds ratio [OR] = 0.08, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.01,0.38; p = 0.005). Age was also significant on logistic regression for Bother (OR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.93,0.99; p = 0.005). Gender and prior abdominal surgery were not associated with Bother or Consciousness. Conclusions: SP periumbilical incisions provide the best outcomes for cosmesis compared with other SP incision sites and MP incisions. This finding should be discussed and taken into account when planning surgical approaches for patients undergoing urinary reconstruction, especially in patients younger than 40 years of age.
引用
收藏
页码:1364 / 1371
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] SINGLE-PORT SURGERY DELIVERS IMPROVED COSMESIS COMPARED TO MULTI-PORT SURGERY REGARDLESS OF INCISION SITE
    Raver, Michael
    Henrich, Mason
    Cao, Qilin
    Kim, Katherine
    Brink, Sarah
    De La Rosa, Ruth Sanchez
    Lovallo, Gregory
    Munver, Ravi
    Billah, Mubashir
    Ahmed, Mutahar
    Stifelman, Michael
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2024, 211 (05): : E460 - E461
  • [2] Cosmesis and body image after single-port access surgery for gynaecologic disease
    Song, Taejong
    Kim, Tae-Joong
    Cho, Juhee
    Kim, Im-Ryung
    Kang, Pureun Narae
    Lee, Jeong-Won
    Bae, Duk-Soo
    Kim, Byoung-Gie
    AUSTRALIAN & NEW ZEALAND JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY, 2012, 52 (05): : 465 - 469
  • [3] Endoscopic surgery through single-port incision: time for a trial?
    Arezzo, Alberto
    Morino, Mario
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2011, 25 (06): : 1709 - 1711
  • [4] Endoscopic surgery through single-port incision: time for a trial?
    Alberto Arezzo
    Mario Morino
    Surgical Endoscopy, 2011, 25 : 1709 - 1711
  • [5] ROBOTIC SINGLE-PORT TRANSVESICAL UROLOGIC SURGERY: DESCRIPTION OF INITIAL ACCESS
    Rai, Samarpit
    Younis, Salim K.
    Soputro, Nicolas A.
    Wang, Lin
    Mikesell, Carter D.
    Pedraza, Adriana M.
    Kaouk, Jihad
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2025, 213 (5S):
  • [6] Single-port laparoscopic surgery: Is a single incision the next frontier in minimally invasive gynecologic surgery?
    Ramirez, Pedro T.
    GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2009, 114 (02) : 143 - 144
  • [7] MANAGEMENT OF INTRAOPERATIVE VASCULAR INJURIES IN UROLOGIC SINGLE-PORT OR MULTI-PORT ROBOTIC SURGERY
    Anh Nguyen
    Ali, David
    Rudnick, Benjamin
    Huang, Rogerio
    Billah, Mubashir Shabil
    Ahmed, Mutahar
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2023, 209 : E248 - E248
  • [8] Implementation of single-port robotic urologic surgery: experience at a large academic center
    Ditonno, Francesco
    Franco, Antonio
    Licari, Leslie Claire
    Bologna, Eugenio
    Manfredi, Celeste
    Katz, David O.
    Huang, Jonathan H.
    Latchamsetty, Kalyan C.
    Coogan, Christopher L.
    Cherullo, Edward E.
    Chow, Alexander K.
    Vourganti, Srinivas
    Autorino, Riccardo
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2024, 18 (01)
  • [9] A Novel Robotic System for Single-port Urologic Surgery: First Clinical Investigation
    Kaouk, Jihad H.
    Haber, Georges-Pascal
    Autorino, Riccardo
    Crouzet, Sebastien
    Ouzzane, Adil
    Flamand, Vincent
    Villers, Arnauld
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2014, 66 (06) : 1033 - 1043
  • [10] Single-Port vs Multiport Robotic Surgery in Urologic Oncology: A Narrative Review
    Xu, Mark C.
    Hemal, Ashok K.
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2025,