| Literature DB >> 22247619 |
Panagiotis Touzopoulos1, Michael Karanikas, Paul Zarogoulidis, Alexandros Mitrakas, Konstantinos Porpodis, Nikolaos Katsikogiannis, Vasilis Zervas, Ioannis Kouroumichakis, Theodoros C Constantinidis, Dimitrios Mikroulis, Konstantinos E Tsimogiannis.
Abstract
Thyroid nodules are a common clinical problem for surgeons. The clinical importance of nodules is the need to exclude thyroid cancer, which occurs in 5%-15% of patients. If fine needle aspiration cytology is positive, or suspicious for malignancy, surgery is recommended. During the past decade, with the tendency to develop smaller incisions, an endoscopic approach has been applied to thyroid surgery, called minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy. This approach was immediately followed by other minimally invasive or scarless neck techniques, such as the breast approach, axillary-breast approach, and robot-assisted method. All these techniques follow the same principles of surgery and oncology. This review presents the current surgical management of the thyroid gland, including the surgical techniques and compares them by describing benefits and drawbacks of each one.Entities:
Keywords: surgical techniques; thyroid cancer; thyroidectomy
Year: 2011 PMID: 22247619 PMCID: PMC3256004 DOI: 10.2147/JMDH.S26349
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Multidiscip Healthc ISSN: 1178-2390
Figure 1Different incision margins based on the technique used.
Abbreviation: MIVAT, minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy.
Indications, advantages, and disadvantages of surgical techniques for thyroid surgery
| Surgical techniques | Indications | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|
| Open thyroidectomy | Any indication for thyroidectomy, lymph node dissection | Standardized method | Poor cosmetic result |
| Minimally invasive methods | ≤30 mL of thyroid volume | Better cosmetic result | Difficult learning curve |
| Breast and axillary-breast approaches | <6 cm diameter of thyroid | Scarless technique | Greater postoperative pain |
| Robot-assisted thyroidectomy | <6 cm diameter of thyroid | Better cosmetic result | Highest cost |
Published data from large studies comparing operation outcomes between surgical techniques
| Study | Number of patients | Open thyroidectomy | MIVAT | SET | Robotic thyroidectomy | Operating time | Hospital stay | Complications | Postoperative pain | Quality of life | Outcomes for |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Miccoli et al | 1320 | √ | √ | – | – | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | Operating time was 66 ± 24 in MIVAT group, 45 ± 14.9 in Open group ( |
| Del Rio et al | 200 | √ | √ | – | – | – | – | √ | √ | – | The postoperative pain at 24 hours in MIVAT group was 1.033 ± 0.87, whereas in open group it was 1.915 ± 1.24 ( |
| Lombardi et al | 20 | √ | √ | – | – | √ | – | – | √ | √ | VAS at 48 hours was 10 ± 3 in MIVAT group, 8 ± 8 in Open group ( |
| El-Labban | 76 | √ | √ | – | – | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | VAS at 24 hours was 2.6 ± 0.2 in MIVAT group, 3.4 ± 0.6 in open group ( |
| Lang and Chow | 46 | – | – | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | – | Operating time was higher in robotic group ( |
| Tae et al | 67 | √ | – | √ | – | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | Operating time was 192.4 ± 56.6 in endoscopic group vs 101.6 ± 33.3 in open group ( |
| Lee et al | 84 | √ | – | – | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | √ | Operating time was 128.6 ± 36.3 for robotic group, 98 ± 22 for open group ( |
Notes: We present random studies that compare the operative outcomes between various surgical techniques in thyroid surgery.
Quality of life shows patient satisfaction on the cosmetic results of surgery.
Abbreviations: MIVAT, minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy; SET, scarless endoscopic thyroidectomy (noncervical technique); VAS, visual analog scale from 1 to 10.