Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Cheonan, Republic of Korea.
Department of Physiology and Biomedical Engineering, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Surgery. 2023 Jun;173(6):1381-1390. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.02.021. Epub 2023 Mar 25.
To assess the surgical outcomes of various minimally invasive and remote-access surgical approaches for thyroid cancer patients.
We collected studies from January 2020 to July 2022 in 6 databases. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed for outcomes and complications of 9 minimally invasive interventions (minimally invasive video-assisted, endoscopic or robotic bilateral axillo-breast approach, endoscopic or robotic postauricular, endoscopic or robot transaxillary approach, transoral endoscopic thyroidectomy vestibular approach or robotic thyroidectomy) and conventional thyroidectomy (control).
Multiplicity and bilaterality of cancer, lymph node metastasis, and coincidence of thyroiditis showed no significant difference between minimally invasive interventions and control. However, larger tumor size (robotic bilateral axillo-breast approach standardized mean difference -1.3989, 95% confidence interval [-2.1717 to -0.6262]), higher body mass index (robot transaxillary approach standardized mean difference -0.5350, 95% confidence interval [-0.9557 to -0.1144], robotic bilateral axillo-breast approach standardized mean difference -0.2301, 95% confidence interval [-0.4389 to -0.0214]), and frequent extrathyroidal extension (robotic bilateral axillo-breast approach standardized mean difference 0.7435, 95% confidence interval [0.5602-0.9869]) were observed in control. In surgical outcomes and adverse effects, there was no significant difference in hospitalization or retrieved lymph node number between minimally invasive interventions and control. However, longer operative time was observed in the robotic bilateral axillo-breast approach(standardized mean difference 6.5393, 95% confidence interval [5.0476-8.0309]) and transoral robotic thyroidectomy (standardized mean difference 5.4946, 95% confidence interval [2.9984-7.9907]) groups than in control. In surgical completion, the rate of low postoperative serum thyroglobulin, postoperative thyroglobulin level, and postoperative radioactive iodine ablation dose showed no significant difference between minimally invasive interventions and control.
Minimally invasive thyroidectomy did not show inferior results compared to conventional thyroidectomy despite the longer operative time. Surgeons need to prudently consider all aspects of patients to determine the proper surgical approach for thyroid cancer.
评估各种微创和远程手术方法治疗甲状腺癌患者的手术结果。
我们从 2020 年 1 月至 2022 年 7 月在 6 个数据库中收集了研究。对 9 种微创干预(微创视频辅助、内镜或机器人双侧腋窝-乳房入路、内镜或机器人耳后入路、内镜或机器人经腋窝入路、经口内镜甲状腺切除术前庭入路或机器人甲状腺切除术)和常规甲状腺切除术(对照组)的结局和并发症进行了成对和网络荟萃分析。
微创手术组与对照组之间的癌症多发性和双侧性、淋巴结转移、甲状腺炎并存率无显著差异。然而,肿瘤较大(机器人双侧腋窝-乳房入路标准化均数差-1.3989,95%置信区间[-2.1717 至-0.6262])、较高的体重指数(机器人经腋窝入路标准化均数差-0.5350,95%置信区间[-0.9557 至-0.1144],机器人双侧腋窝-乳房入路标准化均数差-0.2301,95%置信区间[-0.4389 至-0.0214])和频繁的甲状腺外延伸(机器人双侧腋窝-乳房入路标准化均数差 0.7435,95%置信区间[0.5602-0.9869])在对照组中更为常见。在手术结果和不良反应方面,微创手术组与对照组之间的住院时间或取出的淋巴结数量无显著差异。然而,机器人双侧腋窝-乳房入路(标准化均数差 6.5393,95%置信区间[5.0476-8.0309])和经口机器人甲状腺切除术(标准化均数差 5.4946,95%置信区间[2.9984-7.9907])的手术时间明显长于对照组。在手术完成方面,微创手术组与对照组的术后低血清甲状腺球蛋白、术后甲状腺球蛋白水平和术后放射性碘消融剂量的比率无显著差异。
尽管手术时间较长,但微创甲状腺切除术并不比传统甲状腺切除术结果差。外科医生需要谨慎考虑患者的各个方面,以确定治疗甲状腺癌的适当手术方法。