BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive techniques, such as laparoscopic appendectomy or minimally invasive thyroid surgery, are thought to produce better cosmetic results. However, cosmesis in thyroid surgery was rarely investigated using a standardized approach. The objectives of this study were to evaluate body image and cosmesis in patients who had either minimally invasive (MI) or conventional open (CO) thyroid surgery. METHODS:Two hundred fifty patients of 540 participated (46.3 %): 50 patients (20.0 %) had MI thyroid surgery and 200 (80.0 %) had CO thyroid surgery. The patients filled out a body image questionnaire that investigated body image, cosmesis, and self-confidence. SPSS 19.0 software was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Although the mean incision size was significantly shorter in the MI group than in the CO group (2.8 vs. 3.5 cm), the mean scores from the body image questionnaire (body image score, cosmetic score, and self-confidence score) were similar for both groups (p > 0.05). No significant differences in postoperative complications were observed in these groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Studies in the literature that evaluate body image and cosmesis in thyroid surgery using standardized methods are scarce. In our department, the results of a questionnaire showed that the MI approach has no advantage for body image and cosmesis over the CO approach. Further prospective randomized studies using different tools with a larger sample size are needed to investigate the use of MI procedures for thyroid surgery.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive techniques, such as laparoscopic appendectomy or minimally invasive thyroid surgery, are thought to produce better cosmetic results. However, cosmesis in thyroid surgery was rarely investigated using a standardized approach. The objectives of this study were to evaluate body image and cosmesis in patients who had either minimally invasive (MI) or conventional open (CO) thyroid surgery. METHODS: Two hundred fifty patients of 540 participated (46.3 %): 50 patients (20.0 %) had MI thyroid surgery and 200 (80.0 %) had CO thyroid surgery. The patients filled out a body image questionnaire that investigated body image, cosmesis, and self-confidence. SPSS 19.0 software was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Although the mean incision size was significantly shorter in the MI group than in the CO group (2.8 vs. 3.5 cm), the mean scores from the body image questionnaire (body image score, cosmetic score, and self-confidence score) were similar for both groups (p > 0.05). No significant differences in postoperative complications were observed in these groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Studies in the literature that evaluate body image and cosmesis in thyroid surgery using standardized methods are scarce. In our department, the results of a questionnaire showed that the MI approach has no advantage for body image and cosmesis over the CO approach. Further prospective randomized studies using different tools with a larger sample size are needed to investigate the use of MI procedures for thyroid surgery.
Authors: David S Cooper; Gerard M Doherty; Bryan R Haugen; Bryan R Hauger; Richard T Kloos; Stephanie L Lee; Susan J Mandel; Ernest L Mazzaferri; Bryan McIver; Furio Pacini; Martin Schlumberger; Steven I Sherman; David L Steward; R Michael Tuttle Journal: Thyroid Date: 2009-11 Impact factor: 6.568
Authors: M A Sprangers; M Groenvold; J I Arraras; J Franklin; A te Velde; M Muller; L Franzini; A Williams; H C de Haes; P Hopwood; A Cull; N K Aaronson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1996-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Celestino Pio Lombardi; Marco Raffaelli; Lucia D'Alatri; Maria Raffaella Marchese; Mario Rigante; Gaetano Paludetti; Rocco Bellantone Journal: Surgery Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Hans Martin Schardey; Stefan Schopf; Michael Kammal; Mirco Barone; Wolfgang Rudert; Thomas Hernandez-Richter; Stefan Pörtl Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2008-02-23 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: P F Alesina; W Wahabie; B Meier; J Hinrichs; W Mohmand; A Kapakoglou; P Kniazeva; M K Walz Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2021-05-13 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Kathy Bach; Samantha Prince; Susan C Pitt; Sarah Robbins; Nadine P Connor; Cameron Macdonald; Rebecca S Sippel; Kristin L Long Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2021-11-16 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Seok-Mo Kim; Ki Won Chun; Ho Jin Chang; Bup-Woo Kim; Yong Sang Lee; Hang-Seok Chang; Cheong Soo Park Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2014-07-04 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: Valeria Matteucci; Dan Bai; Lorenzo Fregoli; Piermarco Papini; Aleksandr Aghababyan; Giovanni Docimo; Paolo Miccoli; Gabriele Materazzi Journal: Updates Surg Date: 2020-05-12
Authors: Kwan Ho Lee; Eun Young Kim; Chan Heun Park; Yong Lai Park; Ji Sup Yun; Ga Young Lee Journal: Ann Surg Treat Res Date: 2017-10-27 Impact factor: 1.859