Serkan Karaisli1, Selda Gucek Haciyanli2, Mehmet Haciyanli2. 1. Department of General Surgery, Izmir Kâtip Celebi University Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey. skaraisli@hotmail.com. 2. Department of General Surgery, Izmir Kâtip Celebi University Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) paralysis is one of the most devastating complications after thyroidectomy. Thyroid reoperation is a great challenge for surgeons due to anatomical distortion and fibrosis and associated with a higher risk of RLN injury. In this study, we aimed to compare stimulating dissector (SD) with intermittent stimulating probe (ISP) in thyroid reoperations. This study is the first one which compares the impact of different nerve stimulating devices in thyroid reoperations. METHODS: Included in this randomized prospective study were patients who had a bilateral subtotal thyroidectomy and would undergo a completion thyroidectomy due to a diagnosis of thyroid papillary cancer between January 2015 and January 2017. Patients were divided into two groups as SD group and ISP group. Age, sex, nerve amplitudes, latencies, the first identification time of RLN and complications were compared in both groups. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients, 16 in both groups, were included in the study. The demographics, nerve signal amplitudes and latencies were similar in both groups (p > 0.05). The mean RLN identification time in the SD group was 17.4 ± 4.3 min, which was significantly shorter than those in the ISP group (mean 21.3 ± 3.9) (p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: The first identification of RLN in the thyroid reoperations was faster with the use of SD than with the use of the ISP. Since the electromyographic amplitudes of RLN and vagus nerve with using SD were similar to the bipolar ISP, SD can be used safely for thyroid reoperations.
PURPOSE: Recurrent laryngeal nerve (RLN) paralysis is one of the most devastating complications after thyroidectomy. Thyroid reoperation is a great challenge for surgeons due to anatomical distortion and fibrosis and associated with a higher risk of RLN injury. In this study, we aimed to compare stimulating dissector (SD) with intermittent stimulating probe (ISP) in thyroid reoperations. This study is the first one which compares the impact of different nerve stimulating devices in thyroid reoperations. METHODS: Included in this randomized prospective study were patients who had a bilateral subtotal thyroidectomy and would undergo a completion thyroidectomy due to a diagnosis of thyroid papillary cancer between January 2015 and January 2017. Patients were divided into two groups as SD group and ISP group. Age, sex, nerve amplitudes, latencies, the first identification time of RLN and complications were compared in both groups. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients, 16 in both groups, were included in the study. The demographics, nerve signal amplitudes and latencies were similar in both groups (p > 0.05). The mean RLN identification time in the SD group was 17.4 ± 4.3 min, which was significantly shorter than those in the ISP group (mean 21.3 ± 3.9) (p = 0.014). CONCLUSION: The first identification of RLN in the thyroid reoperations was faster with the use of SD than with the use of the ISP. Since the electromyographic amplitudes of RLN and vagus nerve with using SD were similar to the bipolar ISP, SD can be used safely for thyroid reoperations.
Authors: E O Gür; M Haciyanli; S Karaisli; S Haciyanli; E Kamer; T Acar; Y Kumkumoglu Journal: Ann R Coll Surg Engl Date: 2019-06-20 Impact factor: 1.891