Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 26, 2026
Clinical Application of Single-Surgeon, Three-Port, Laparoscopic Resection for Colorectal Cancer with Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction
Published on: March 24, 2023
Pre-bent instruments used in single-port laparoscopic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery: comparative
Arkadiusz Miernik1, Martin Schoenthaler, Kerstin Lilienthal
1Department of Urology, University Medical Center, Hugstettersträsse 55, 79106 Freiburg, Germany. arkadiusz.miernik@uniklinik-freiburg.de
Background:
Different types of single-incision laparoscopic surgery (SILS) have become increasingly popular. Although SILS is technically even more challenging than conventional laparoscopy, published data of first clinical series seem to demonstrate the feasibility of these approaches. Various attempts have been made to overcome restrictions due to loss of triangulation in SILS by specially designed SILS-specific instruments. This study involving novices in a dry lab compared task performances between conventional laparoscopic surgery (CLS) and single-port laparoscopic surgery (SPLS) using newly designed pre-bent instruments.
Methods:
In this study, 90 medical students without previous experience in laparoscopic techniques were randomly assigned to undergo one of three procedures: CLS, SPLS using two pre-bent instruments (SPLS-pp), or SPLS using one pre-bent and one straight laparoscopic instrument (SPLS-ps). In the dry lab, the participants performed four typical laparoscopic tasks of increasing difficulty. Evaluation included performance times or number of completed tasks within a given time frame. All performances were videotaped and evaluated for unsuccessful attempts and unwanted interactions of instruments. Using subjective questionnaires, the participants rated difficulties with two-dimensional vision and coordination of instruments.
Results:
Task performances were significantly better in the CLS group than in either SPLS group. The SPLS-ps group showed a tendency toward better performances than the SPLS-pp group, but the difference was not significant. Video sequences and participants` questionnaires showed instrument interaction as the major problem in the single-incision surgery groups.
Conclusions:
Although SILS is feasible, as shown in clinical series published by laparoscopically experienced experts, SILS techniques are demanding due to restrictions that come with the loss of triangulation. These can be compensated only partially by currently available SILS-designed instruments. The future of SILS depends on further improvements in the available equipment or the development of new approaches such as needlescopically assisted or robotically assisted procedures.
