Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 9, 2026
Clinical Application of Single-Surgeon, Three-Port, Laparoscopic Resection for Colorectal Cancer with Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction
Published on: March 24, 2023
Mini-laparotomy versus laparoscopy for gynecologic conditions
Amanika Kumar1, Michael Pearl1
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, New York.
Study Objective:
To compare conversion rates, operative time, and estimated blood loss in patients undergoing mini-laparotomy (<4 cm vertical or transverse abdominal incision) versus laparoscopy for treatment of benign gynecologic conditions.
Design:
Retrospective study (Canadian Task Force classification II-2).
Setting:
Academic medical center.
Patients:
Women who underwent laparoscopy or mini-laparotomy for treatment of gynecologic conditions from January 2002 to March 2011. Patients who underwent hysterectomy as part of the surgery, cancer staging procedure, pregnancy-related procedure, or diagnostic surgery alone were excluded.
Interventions:
Mini-laparotomy or laparoscopy.
Measurement And Main Results:
Primary outcomes were operative time and estimated blood loss. Secondary outcomes were hospital readmission, repeat operation, overnight hospital admission, emergency room visits because of surgery-related signs or symptoms, and wound complications. Of 950 medical records examined, 493 patients (52%) met the inclusion criteria, of which 141 (29%) underwent mini-laparotomy and 352 (71%) underwent laparoscopy. The groups had similar indications for surgery and level of surgical assistant. Patients who underwent mini-laparotomy were older than those who underwent laparoscopy. In patients who underwent mini-laparotomy, mean operative time was significantly shorter (49.3 versus 91.5 minutes; p = .003), and estimated blood loss was less (20 versus 32 mL; p = .001). The cumulative secondary outcome rate was not statistically different between the 2 groups (15% versus 16%). When each secondary outcome (conversion, repeat operation, overnight hospital admission, readmission to the hospitalization, emergency department visit, and wound complication) was examined independently, only the wound complication rate was significantly higher in the mini-laparotomy group compared with the laparoscopy group (5 of 141 patients versus 1 of 352 patients; p = .008).
Conclusions:
Mini-laparotomy is a safe alternative to traditional minimally invasive approaches in gynecology and offers the additional benefits of shorter intraoperative time and less blood loss; however, it is associated with a significantly higher rate of major wound complications. Mini-laparotomy is an important surgical approach and should be included in gynecologic surgical training.
