Literature DB >> 16547619

Minimally invasive video-assisted parathyroidectomy versus open minimally invasive parathyroidectomy for a solitary parathyroid adenoma: a prospective, randomized, blinded trial.

Marcin Barczyński1, Stanisław Cichoń, Aleksander Konturek, Wojciech Cichoń.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A variety of minimally invasive parathyroidectomy (MIP) techniques have been currently introduced to surgical management of primary hyperparathyroidism (pHPT) caused by a solitary parathyroid adenoma. This study aimed at comparing the video-assisted MIP (MIVAP) and open MIP (OMIP) in a prospective, randomized, blinded trial.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Among 84 consecutive pHPT patients referred for surgery, 60 individuals with concordant localization of parathyroid adenoma on ultrasound and subtraction Tc99m-MIBI scintigraphy were found eligible for MIP under general anesthesia and were randomized to two groups (n = 30 each): MIVAP and OMIP. An intraoperative intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) assay was routinely used in both groups to determine the cure. Primary end-points were the success rate in achieving the cure from hyperparathyroid state and hypocalcemia rate. Secondary end-points were operating time, scar length, pain intensity assessed by the visual-analogue scale, analgesia request rate, analgesic consumption, quality of life within 7 postoperative days (SF-36), cosmetic satisfaction, duration of postoperative hospitalization, and cost-effectiveness analysis.
RESULTS: All patients were cured. In 2 patients, an intraoperative iPTH assay revealed a need for further exploration: in one MIVAP patient, subtotal parathyroidectomy for parathyroid hyperplasia was performed with the video-assisted approach, and in an OMIP patient, the approach was converted to unilateral neck exploration with the final diagnosis of double adenoma. MIVAP versus OMIP patients were characterized by similar operative time (44.2 +/- 18.9 vs. 49.7 +/- 15.9 minutes; P = 0.22), transient hypocalcemia rate (3 vs. 3 individuals; P = 1.0), lower pain intensity at 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours after surgery (24.9 +/- 6.1 vs. 32.2 +/- 4.6; 26.4 +/- 4.5 vs. 32.0 +/- 4.0; 19.6 +/- 4.9 vs. 25.4 +/- 3.8; 15.5 +/- 5.5 vs. 20.4 +/- 4.7 points, respectively; P < 0.001), lower analgesia request rate (63.3% vs. 90%; P = 0.01), lower analgesic consumption (51.6 +/- 46.4 mg vs. 121.6 +/- 50.3 mg of ketoprofen; P < 0.001), better physical functioning aspect and bodily pain aspect of the quality of life on early recovery (88.4 +/- 6.9 vs. 84.6 +/- 4.7 and 90.3 +/- 4.7 vs. 87.5 +/- 5.8; P = 0.02 and P = 0.003, respectively), shorter scar length (17.2 +/- 2.2 mm vs. 30.8 +/- 4.0 mm; P < 0.001), and higher cosmetic satisfaction rate at 1 month after surgery (85.4 +/- 12.4% vs. 77.4 +/- 9.7%; P = 0.006). Cosmetic satisfaction was increasing with time, and there were no significant differences at 6 months postoperatively. MIVAP was more expensive (US$1,150 +/- 63.4 vs. 1,015 +/- 61.8; P < 0.001) while the mean hospital stay was similar (28 +/- 10.1 vs. 31.1 +/- 9.7 hours; P = 0.22). Differences in serum calcium values and iPTH during 6 months of follow-up were nonsignificant. Transient laryngeal nerve palsy appeared in one OMIP patient (P = 0.31). There was no other morbidity or mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: Both MIVAP and OMIP offer a valuable approach for solitary parathyroid adenoma with a similar excellent success rate and a minimal morbidity rate. Routine use of the intraoperative iPTH assay is essential in both approaches to avoid surgical failures of overlooked multiglandular disease. The advantages of MIVAP include easier recognition of recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN), lower pain intensity within 24 hours following surgery, lower analgesia request rate, lower analgesic consumption, shorter scar length, better physical functioning and bodily pain aspects of the quality of life on early recovery, and higher early cosmetic satisfaction rate. However, these advantages are achieved at higher costs because of endoscopic tool involvement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16547619     DOI: 10.1007/s00268-005-0312-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg        ISSN: 0364-2313            Impact factor:   3.352


  31 in total

1.  Long-term outcome of unilateral parathyroid exploration for primary hyperparathyroidism due to presumed solitary adenoma.

Authors:  Stanley Sidhu; Adrian K Neill; Colin F J Russell
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2003-02-27       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Surgery for primary hyperparathyroidism: what is the best approach?

Authors:  Herbert Chen
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Impact of localization studies on feasibility of minimally invasive parathyroidectomy in an endemic goiter region.

Authors:  Gerhard Prager; Christian Czerny; Sedan Ofluoglu; Amir Kurtaran; Christian Passler; Klaus Kaczirek; Christian Scheuba; Bruno Niederle
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 6.113

Review 4.  Intraoperative parathyroid hormone monitoring.

Authors:  William B Inabnet
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2004-11-04       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Unilateral versus bilateral neck exploration for primary hyperparathyroidism: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Anders Bergenfelz; Pia Lindblom; Sten Tibblin; Johan Westerdahl
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 6.  Unilateral open and minimally invasive procedures for primary hyperparathyroidism: a review of selective approaches.

Authors:  K Lorenz; P Nguyen-Thanh; H Dralle
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 3.445

7.  Results of video-assisted parathyroidectomy: single institution's six-year experience.

Authors:  Paolo Miccoli; Piero Berti; Gabriele Materazzi; Marco Massi; Antonella Picone; Michele N Minuto
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2004-11-11       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Open minimally invasive parathyroid surgery.

Authors:  Robert Udelsman; Patricia I Donovan
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2004-11-04       Impact factor: 3.352

9.  Conventional bilateral cervical exploration versus open minimally invasive parathyroidectomy under local anaesthesia for primary hyperparathyroidism.

Authors:  A Bergenfelz; V Kanngiesser; A Zielke; C Nies; M Rothmund
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 6.939

10.  Limits and drawbacks of video-assisted parathyroidectomy.

Authors:  P Berti; G Materazzi; A Picone; P Miccoli
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 6.939

View more
  41 in total

1.  Preoperative ¹¹C-methionine PET/CT enables focused parathyroidectomy in MIBI-SPECT negative parathyroid adenoma.

Authors:  Christina Lenschow; Peter Gassmann; Christian Wenning; Norbert Senninger; Mario Colombo-Benkmann
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Three-dimensional ultrasonography before minimally invasive focused parathyroidectomy: the importance of coronal images.

Authors:  Rika Miyabe
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2009-02-07       Impact factor: 2.549

3.  Evaluation of Halle, Miami, Rome, and Vienna intraoperative iPTH assay criteria in guiding minimally invasive parathyroidectomy.

Authors:  Marcin Barczynski; Aleksander Konturek; Alicja Hubalewska-Dydejczyk; Stanislaw Cichon; Wojciech Nowak
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2009-06-16       Impact factor: 3.445

4.  MR appearance of parathyroid adenomas at 3 T in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism: what radiologists need to know for pre-operative localization.

Authors:  B Sacconi; R Argirò; Daniele Diacinti; A Iannarelli; M Bezzi; C Cipriani; D Pisani; V Cipolla; C De Felice; S Minisola; C Catalano
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2015-05-31       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 5.  Video-assisted endocrine neck surgery: state of the art.

Authors:  Luca Sessa; Celestino Pio Lombardi; Carmela De Crea; Marco Raffaelli; Rocco Bellantone
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2017-06-15

6.  Multiparametric ultrasonography and ultrasound elastography in the differentiation of parathyroid lesions from ectopic thyroid lesions or lymphadenopathies.

Authors:  Andrea M Isidori; Vito Cantisani; Elisa Giannetta; Daniele Diacinti; Emanuele David; Valerio Forte; Daniela Elia; Corrado De Vito; Emilia Sbardella; Daniele Gianfrilli; Francesco Monteleone; Jessica Pepe; Salvatore Minisola; Giorgio Ascenti; Vito D'Andrea; Carlo Catalano; Ferdinando D'Ambrosio
Journal:  Endocrine       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 3.633

7.  Is minimally invasive parathyroidectomy without QPTH monitoring justified?

Authors:  Philipp Riss; Christian Scheuba; Reza Asari; Christian Bieglmayer; Bruno Niederle
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2009-05-14       Impact factor: 3.445

8.  Surgery for sporadic primary hyperparathyroidism: controversies and evidence-based approach.

Authors:  Antonio Sitges-Serra; Prieto Rosa; Mónica Valero; Estela Membrilla; Joan J Sancho
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2008-02-21       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 9.  Video-assisted minimally invasive parathyroidectomy: benefits and long-term results.

Authors:  Celestino P Lombardi; Marco Raffaelli; Emanuela Traini; Carmela De Crea; Salvatore M Corsello; Rocco Bellantone
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2009-11       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 10.  The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review.

Authors:  O A J van der Meijden; M P Schijven
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-01-01       Impact factor: 4.584

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.