Background/Objective: Although consensus has been reached on the superiority of laparoscopy for a majority of conditions underlying acute abdominal pain, the safety and feasibility of single-port laparoscopic colectomy (SPLC) in emergency situations have not been determined. Methods: A prospective electronic database of all emergency patients who underwent either multiport laparoscopic colectomy (MPLC) or SPLC between April 2006 and December 2014 was used to compare the surgical outcomes of these operative methods. Results: During the study period, 31 MPLCs and 76 SPLCs were performed. These two operative methods resulted in similar operating times, transfusion amounts, lengths of stay, postoperative complications, attainment of lymph nodes, and proximal and distal cut margins. However, the SPLC group had a shorter time to first flatus (2.8±1.9 days vs. 3.8±1.5 days, p=0.005), earlier reinitiation of free oral fluids (3.2±2.1 days vs. 4.4±1.8 days, p=0.002), and lesser requirement of narcotic analgesics (2.5±3.9 times vs. 4.7±4.8 times, p=0.017). Conclusion: SPLC could be a safe and effective alternative to MPLC, even in emergency situations when performed by surgeons who have overcome the learning curve associated with single-port laparoscopic techniques. The tendency toward earlier returns to bowel function and decreased incidence of postoperative analgesic use would be potential benefits of SPLC in emergency situations.