Department of Anesthesiologic, Surgical and Emergency Sciences, Second University of Naples, Via Sergio Pansini 5, 80131 Naples, Italy.
Department of Anesthesiologic, Surgical and Emergency Sciences, Second University of Naples, Via Sergio Pansini 5, 80131 Naples, Italy.
Int J Surg. 2014;12 Suppl 1:S194-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.05.010. Epub 2014 May 23.
Lymph nodal involvement in papillary thyroid cancers is very common, but the role of lymph node dissection is still controversial. Surgeons are consequently divided between opposed to and in favor of routine central neck dissection associated with total thyroidectomy.
Clinical records of 210 patients undergoing from January 2000 to December 2006 total thyroidectomy without routine lymph node dissection were retrospectively evaluated. One hundred and ninety eight patients (94.2%) underwent radioiodine ablation as well, followed by Thyroid Stimulating Hormone suppression therapy. In patients with loco regional lymph nodal recurrence, central (VI) and ipsilateral (III-IV) lymph node dissection was performed.
Incidence of permanent hypoparathyroidism (iPTH < 10 pg/ml) and permanent vocal fold paralysis were respectively 1.4% and 1.9%. After an 8-year mean follow-up, the rate of loco regional recurrence was 4.2%-9/210 patients. In these cases selective lymph node dissection was carried out without complications.
The role of neck dissection in papillary thyroid cancer management, is still subject of research and controversial regarding routine or therapeutic indications, surgical extension, its impact on local recurrence and survival.
A low loco regional recurrence rate may be observed after total thyroidectomy without prophylactic lymph node dissection. Lymph nodal recurrences were more frequent in young male patients, sometime affected by follicular variant, in each case less than 2 cm. There is a general agreement about the extension of therapeutic lymph node dissection, while routine central neck dissection is still controversial and may be indicated in high risk patients.
甲状腺乳头状癌的淋巴结转移非常常见,但淋巴结清扫的作用仍存在争议。因此,外科医生对于甲状腺全切除术中是否常规行中央区淋巴结清扫术存在分歧。
回顾性分析了 2000 年 1 月至 2006 年 12 月期间 210 例未行常规淋巴结清扫的甲状腺全切除术患者的临床资料。198 例(94.2%)患者术后行放射性碘消融治疗,并进行甲状腺刺激激素抑制治疗。对于局部区域淋巴结复发的患者,行中央区(VI 区)和同侧(III-IV 区)淋巴结清扫术。
永久性甲状旁腺功能减退(iPTH<10pg/ml)和永久性声带麻痹的发生率分别为 1.4%和 1.9%。平均随访 8 年后,210 例患者中有 4.2%(9 例)出现局部区域复发。在这些病例中,行选择性淋巴结清扫术,无并发症发生。
在甲状腺乳头状癌的治疗中,颈淋巴结清扫术的作用仍然是研究的主题,对于常规或治疗性适应证、手术范围、对局部复发和生存的影响等方面存在争议。
甲状腺全切除术后不预防性行淋巴结清扫术,局部区域复发率可能较低。淋巴结复发更常见于年轻男性患者,有时为滤泡状变异型,每个病例的直径均小于 2cm。对于治疗性淋巴结清扫术的范围,大家已经达成共识,而常规中央区淋巴结清扫术仍存在争议,可能适用于高危患者。