Surgical Outcomes of Two Specimen Extraction Incision Techniques Following Laparoscopic Nephrectomy

PurposeThe type of incision used for specimen extraction during laparoscopic nephrectomy may influence postoperative pain, wound-related complications, cosmetic outcomes, and healing. This study aimed to compare perioperative and long-term outcomes of two specimen extraction incision techniques used in laparoscopic nephrectomy: fusion of the first and third port sites versus extension of the third port site.MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent laparoscopic nephrectomy between 2020 and 2024. Patients were divided into two groups according to the extraction incision technique: fusion of the first and third ports (Group 1) and extension of the third port (Group 2). Demographic data, perioperative variables, postoperative pain scores, wound-related complications, and long-term incision outcomes were compared between groups.ResultsA total of 87 patients were included (Group 1: n=46; Group 2: n=41). Baseline demographic, clinical, and laboratory characteristics were comparable between groups. Operative time, postoperative day 1 and first-month VAS scores, length of hospital stay, drain removal time, and transfusion rates showed no significant differences. Incision length was significantly shorter in Group 2 (p=0.007). Although not statistically significant, wound infection, hypertrophic scarring, and skin depression were observed more frequently in Group 1. The incidence of incisional hernia was low and similar between groups.ConclusionBoth specimen extraction techniques demonstrated acceptable and safe outcomes following laparoscopic nephrectomy. However, the fusion of port sites was associated with a longer incision and a higher tendency toward wound-healing–related issues. Extension of the third port may be a preferable option to minimize incision length and wound-related concerns. Further prospective, randomized studies with larger cohorts are warranted.