Nicole R Jackson1, Lu Yao, Ralph P Tufano, Emad H Kandil. 1. Department of Surgery, Division of Endocrine and Oncological Surgery, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana; Department of Epidemiology, Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study compared the efficacy of robotic thyroidectomy via a gasless, axillary approach with conventional cervical and endoscopic techniques by meta-analysis. METHODS: Articles were identified from the following keyword searches: robotic/robot-assisted thyroidectomy/thyroid surgery. Outcomes included operative time, hospital stay, complications, and cosmetic satisfaction after surgery. Between-group outcome differences were calculated using random-effects models. RESULTS: In all, 87 publications were identified and 9 studies met inclusion criteria, totaling 2881 patients, 1122 of whom underwent robotic thyroidectomy. Those who underwent robotic surgery reported greater cosmetic satisfaction, with a pooled net mean difference of -1.35 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.69, -1.09). Robotic approach operative time was longer than that of the conventional approach (95% CI: 29.23, 54.87), with a trend to be shorter than the endoscopic approaches. Robotic surgery had similar risks to open and endoscopic approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis suggests that robotic thyroidectomy is as safe, feasible, and efficacious as conventional cervical and endoscopic thyroidectomy, showing superior cosmetic satisfaction than that of conventional thyroidectomy.
BACKGROUND: This study compared the efficacy of robotic thyroidectomy via a gasless, axillary approach with conventional cervical and endoscopic techniques by meta-analysis. METHODS: Articles were identified from the following keyword searches: robotic/robot-assisted thyroidectomy/thyroid surgery. Outcomes included operative time, hospital stay, complications, and cosmetic satisfaction after surgery. Between-group outcome differences were calculated using random-effects models. RESULTS: In all, 87 publications were identified and 9 studies met inclusion criteria, totaling 2881 patients, 1122 of whom underwent robotic thyroidectomy. Those who underwent robotic surgery reported greater cosmetic satisfaction, with a pooled net mean difference of -1.35 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.69, -1.09). Robotic approach operative time was longer than that of the conventional approach (95% CI: 29.23, 54.87), with a trend to be shorter than the endoscopic approaches. Robotic surgery had similar risks to open and endoscopic approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis suggests that robotic thyroidectomy is as safe, feasible, and efficacious as conventional cervical and endoscopic thyroidectomy, showing superior cosmetic satisfaction than that of conventional thyroidectomy.
Authors: Amir Szold; Roberto Bergamaschi; Ivo Broeders; Jenny Dankelman; Antonello Forgione; Thomas Langø; Andreas Melzer; Yoav Mintz; Salvador Morales-Conde; Michael Rhodes; Richard Satava; Chung-Ngai Tang; Ramon Vilallonga Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2014-11-08 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Seo Ki Kim; Jung-Woo Woo; Inhye Park; Jun Ho Lee; Jun-Ho Choe; Jung-Han Kim; Jee Soo Kim Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg Date: 2016-10-24 Impact factor: 3.445
Authors: Christopher R Razavi; Mai G Al Khadem; Akeweh Fondong; James H Clark; Jeremy D Richmon; Ralph P Tufano; Jonathon O Russell Journal: Head Neck Date: 2018-05-13 Impact factor: 3.147