Department of Oncological Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China.
Queen Mary School, Nanchang University, Nanchang, China.
Surg Endosc. 2024 Apr;38(4):1958-1968. doi: 10.1007/s00464-024-10678-1. Epub 2024 Feb 12.
Following the rapid development of endoscopic thyroidectomy techniques, various surgical procedures have been developed (e.g., transoral, submandibular, areolar, axillary, retroauricular, and combined procedures), and each of these procedures has its own advantages. In recent years, gasless endoscopic thyroidectomy has emerged as a feasible procedure, and it has replaced traditional CO2 insufflation approaches because of advantages such as stable cavity construction, pollution reduction, resource saving, and risk reduction. However, each gasless procedure requires special instruments for cavity construction, and this results in enormous wastage of medical resources. In the present study, we introduced a set of instruments developed by our team. This set of instruments is designed to be compatible with the current gasless endoscopic thyroidectomy approaches, including transoral, submandibular, transareolar, transaxillary, retroauricular, combined, and lateral cervical lymph node dissection. Here, we introduced this set of instruments for two gasless endoscopic thyroidectomy procedures (transaxillary and transareolar). Following the incorporation of this set of instruments in regular clinical practice, it could be used for more gasless endoscopic thyroidectomy procedures in the future.
To investigate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the self-developed instruments for gasless endoscopic thyroidectomy in two different approaches.
A total of 180 patients diagnosed to have papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC) between January 2020 and April 2022 were retrospectively investigated. The patients were assigned to a gasless transaxillary group (group A) and a gasless transareolar group (group B). The same gasless endoscopic-assisted instruments were used for both groups. The clinical characteristics, treatment results, and complications were compared between the two groups.
All 180 patients were successfully operated. The extent of surgical resection in all patients was the same: "unilateral glandular lobectomy + isthmus combined with ipsilateral central zone lymph node dissection." There were 130 and 50 patients in group A and group B, respectively; one patient in the former group was converted to open surgery due to intraoperative bleeding. No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of gender, age, body mass index (BMI), education level, and proportion of concomitant Hashimoto's thyroiditis (P > 0.05). The establishment of cavity time was significantly longer in group A than in group B (35.62 ± 5.07 min vs. 17.46 ± 2.55 min, P < 0.01). The number of lymph nodes cleared was slightly less in group A than in group B (4.06 ± 2.93 vs. 4.52 ± 2.38, P = 0.07). Moreover, the two groups showed no significant differences (P > 0.05) in the total operative time (145.54 ± 45.11 min vs. 143.06 ± 46.70 min), tumor size (0.68 ± 0.46 cm vs. 0.71 ± 0.49 cm), postoperative hospital stay (4.08 ± 1.48 days vs. 3.72 ± 1.07 days), vocal cord paralysis [4 (3.1%) vs. 2 (4%)], postoperative swallowing discomfort [24 (18.5%) vs. 5 (10%)], and postoperative recurrence and satisfaction scores (3.27 ± 1.52 vs. 3.28 ± 1.53).
Although the two approaches of gasless endoscopic surgery have different operative paths and different time periods for cavity construction, both approaches are similar in terms of the principle of cavity construction, safe and reliable postoperative efficacy, and good cosmetic effect. Therefore, the same set of instruments can be used to complete the surgery in both approaches, thus saving medical resources and facilitating the popularization of this technology.
随着内镜甲状腺手术技术的快速发展,各种手术方法应运而生(例如经口、颏下、乳晕入路、腋窝入路、耳后入路和联合入路),每种方法都有其自身的优势。近年来,无气腔内镜甲状腺切除术已成为一种可行的手术方式,由于其具有稳定的腔构建、减少污染、节约资源和降低风险等优点,已取代了传统的 CO2 充气方法。然而,每种无气腔手术都需要特殊的器械来构建腔,这导致了医疗资源的巨大浪费。在本研究中,我们引入了一套由我们团队开发的器械。这套器械旨在与目前的无气腔内镜甲状腺切除术方法兼容,包括经口、颏下、乳晕入路、腋窝入路、耳后入路、联合入路和侧颈部淋巴结清扫术。这里,我们介绍了这两种无气腔内镜甲状腺切除术(腋窝入路和乳晕入路)的器械。在将这套器械纳入常规临床实践后,未来可能会用于更多的无气腔内镜甲状腺切除术。
探讨自行设计的无气腔内镜甲状腺手术器械在两种不同入路中的可行性、安全性和有效性。
回顾性分析 2020 年 1 月至 2022 年 4 月期间诊断为甲状腺乳头状癌(PTC)的 180 例患者。患者被分配到无气腔腋窝组(A 组)和无气腔乳晕组(B 组)。两组均采用相同的无气腔内镜辅助器械。比较两组的临床特征、治疗结果和并发症。
180 例患者均成功完成手术。所有患者的手术切除范围相同:“单侧腺叶切除术+峡部联合同侧中央区淋巴结清扫术”。A 组和 B 组分别有 130 例和 50 例患者,前者有 1 例患者因术中出血转为开放手术。两组在性别、年龄、体重指数(BMI)、教育水平和桥本甲状腺炎合并率方面无显著差异(P>0.05)。A 组的腔建立时间明显长于 B 组(35.62±5.07 min 比 17.46±2.55 min,P<0.01)。A 组清扫的淋巴结数量略少于 B 组(4.06±2.93 个比 4.52±2.38 个,P=0.07)。此外,两组的总手术时间(145.54±45.11 min 比 143.06±46.70 min)、肿瘤大小(0.68±0.46 cm 比 0.71±0.49 cm)、术后住院时间(4.08±1.48 d 比 3.72±1.07 d)、声带麻痹发生率[4(3.1%)比 2(4%)]、术后吞咽不适发生率[24(18.5%)比 5(10%)]、术后复发率和满意度评分[3.27±1.52 比 3.28±1.53]均无显著差异(P>0.05)。
虽然无气腔内镜手术的两种入路具有不同的手术路径和腔构建的不同时间,但腔构建的原理、安全可靠的术后疗效和良好的美容效果是相似的。因此,同一套器械可用于两种入路的手术,从而节约医疗资源,促进该技术的推广。