Objective To understand status of technical realization, present development, faced problems, and application prospects of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer, and to analyze safety and feasibility so as to provide theoretical and practical basis for clinical application and promotion. Method By searching the databases such as Medline, Embase, and Wanfang, etc., the relevant literatures about reduced-port laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer were collected and reviewed. Results At present, the most common reduced-port laparoscopic surgery was the 1-port laparoscopic surgery, 2-port laparoscopic surgery, and 3-port laparoscopic surgery. The 1-port laparoscopic surgery had the effects of minimal invasiveness and cosmesis, but it was difficult to perform. The 2-port laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer preserved as far as possible the effect of minimal invasiveness, the difficulty of procedure was reduced greatly, which was easy to be learnt and promoted. The experience of the 3-port laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer contributed to the technical development of the 1-port laparoscopic surgery, with no need for the assisted incision for intraoperative specimen. The reduced-port laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer was technically feasible and safe, which possessed the equal or better short-term outcomes as compared with the conventional 5-port laparoscopic or open surgery beside the radical resection for rectal cancer. However, the stringent technique for the laparoscopic surgery was necessary and it needed to overcome the learning curve. Conclusions Reduced-port laparoscopic surgery has some obvious advantages in minimal invasiveness, cosmesis, and enhanced recovery. More large-sample, multi-center, randomized controlled trials are eager to further confirm safety, effectiveness, and feasibility of reduced-port laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of single-incision plus one-port laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SILS+1) for patients with obesity. MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on obese patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) from January 2023 to November 2024. Patients were stratified into two groups: SILS+1 and conventional multi-port LSG (MPLSG). Comparative parameters included operative time, postoperative hospital stay, complication rates, weight loss outcomes, and improvement in metabolic indicators [including hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), triglyceride (TG), total cholesterol (TC), and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C)]. ResultsA total of 95 patients with obesity were enrolled, including 40 in the SILS+1 group and 55 in the MPLSG group. The SILS+1 group had significantly lower preoperative BMI, HbA1c, and TC levels compared to the MPLSG group (P<0.05), and a significantly higher proportion of female patients (P<0.05). Other baseline characteristics, such as age, TG, and HDL-C levels, showed no statistically significant differences (P>0.05). Operative time was significantly longer in the SILS+1 group than in the MPLSG group [(100.16 ± 17.53) min vs. (93.82 ± 20.83) min, P<0.001]. The proportion of patients requiring drainage tube placement was significantly lower in the SILS+1 group [55.0% (22/40) vs. 76.4% (42/55), P=0.049]. There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in the need for additional trocar sites, change in Hb level from preoperative to postoperative day 1, postoperative hospital stay, or incidence of postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo grade I) (P>0.05). No 30-day readmissions occurred in either group. One patient in the SILS+1 group required an additional trocar site. Gastrointestinal patency was normal in all patients, with no signs of contrast agent leakage or stricture observed. Both SILS+1 and MPLSG procedures demonstrated equivalent efficacy in weight loss outcomes (P>0.05) and in their effects on HbA1c, TG, and TC levels (P>0.05). The SILS+1 procedure showed a significant advantage in improving HDL-C levels (F=6.221, P=0.015), with significantly higher postoperative HDL-C levels observed at 6 months postoperatively compared to the MPLSG group (F=2.500, P=0.027). ConclusionsFor selected obese populations, SILS+1 represents a feasible and safe alternative to MPLSG. This technique demonstrates equivalent efficacy to MPLSG in early-stage weight loss and metabolic improvement, serving as a transitional approach toward pure single-incision laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.