[非充气锁骨下入路、腋窝入路与传统开放手术治疗单侧甲状腺癌的临床队列研究]

[Clinical cohort study of non inflated subclavian approach,axillary approach,and traditional open surgery for unilateral thyroid cancer].

作者信息

Li M C, Fan X, Chen Z, Zhao Y T, Zhang H, Chen G, Lyu J, Tian W, Zhang Q S

机构信息

Department of Thyroid Surgery,Zhengzhou Central Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University,Zhengzhou 450007, China.

Department of General Surgery, the First Medical Center of Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital, Beijing 100853, China.

出版信息

Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2025 Jul 1;63(7):611-617. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn112139-20241030-00478.

Abstract

To compare surgical-related indicators between non-inflated subclavian endoscopic surgery and axillary and traditional open surgery for the treatment of right lobe thyroid cancer,as well as their effects on postoperative anterior cervical function and cosmetic outcomes. This retrospective cohort study analyzed 151 cases of thyroid cancer patients who underwent surgical treatment at the Department of Thyroid Surgery,Zhengzhou Central Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University from June 2024 to October 2024. Based on the surgical approach,patients were divided into three groups:56 cases of traditional open surgery group, 44 cases of non-inflated axillary approach group,and 51 cases of non-inflated subclavian approach group. Comparative indicators included surgical time, parathyroid autotransplantation rate,complete exposure rate of central area, number of lymph node dissections, number of positive lymph nodes, anterior cervical function, and satisfaction with incision beauty. One-way analysis of variance,non-parametric test,Kruskal-Wallis test,Pearson test and Fisher's exact probability method were used to compare the results of the three groups and subsequent pairwise comparisons,respectively. All laparoscopic surgeries were successfully completed without conversion to open surgery. (1) Surgical time:the traditional open surgery group had the shortest operative time ((IQR))(71.5(16.0)minutes), significantly shorter than both endoscopic groups (both <0.01); among the endoscopic approaches, the non-inflated subclavian approach group (97.0(10.0)minutes) had a significantly shorter operative time than the non-inflated axillary approach group (115.0(11.0)minutes)(<0.01). (2) Parathyroid autotransplantation rate:the rates were 53.6%(30/56) in the traditional group, 70.5%(31/44) in the non-inflated axillary approach group, and 66.7%(34/51) in the non-inflated subclavian approach group, with no statistically significant differences (>0.05). (3) Complete exposure rate of the central area:the exposure rate was 100%(56/56) in the traditional open surgery group, 86.4%(38/44) in the non-inflated axillary approach group, and 96.1%(49/51) in the non-inflated subclavian approach group. A significant difference was observed between the traditional open surgery group and the non-inflated axillary approach group (²=8.124,<0.01), but not observed between other groups. (4) Number of lymph node dissection:no significant difference was found among the three groups (8(6)(range:2 to 17) in the traditional open surgery group,7(3)(range:2 to 16) in the non-inflated axillary approach group,7(4)(range:2 to 16) in the non-inflated subclavian approach group)(=0.078).(5) Number of positive lymph nodes:no significant differences were observed among the three groups(=0.923). (6) Postoperative anterior cervical function:① Visual analogue scale: there was no significant difference between the non-insufflation transaxillary approach group and the non-insufflation subclavian approach group at 3 days and 1 month postoperatively (0.017). However, the two groups had significantly lower scores than the traditional open group (both <0.01). ② Neck disability index:at 3 days post-surgery, there were significantly lower in the axillary and subclavian groups compared to the traditional open group (<0.01), with no significant difference between the two endoscopic groups(>0.017); at 1 month postoperatively, the traditional open surgery group, gasless axillary approach group, and gasless subclavian approach group, with statistically significant differences between each group (both <0.01). ③ Swallowing disorder index: no significant differences were observed at 3 days post-surgery(>0.05); however, at 1 month post-surgery, the endoscopic groups showed significantly lower scores compared to the traditional open group(both <0.01).(7) Satisfaction with incision beauty:significant differences were found among the three groups in terms of vancouver scar scores, patient scar assessment scores, and observer scar assessment scores(all <0.01). Compared to the non-inflated axillary endoscopic thyroidectomy, the non-inflated subclavian approach offers a technically simpler procedure, better exposure of the central lymph node dissection area, and superior protection of anterior cervical function, although it results in less favorable cosmetic outcomes. Under strict preoperative evaluation and appropriate indications,both non-inflated subclavian and axillary approaches can achieve outcomes comparable to traditional open surgery for cN0 thyroid cancer,demonstrating good clinical application value.

摘要

比较非充气式锁骨下内镜手术与腋窝入路及传统开放手术治疗右叶甲状腺癌的手术相关指标,以及它们对术后颈前功能和美容效果的影响。本回顾性队列研究分析了2024年6月至2024年10月在郑州大学附属郑州中心医院甲状腺外科接受手术治疗的151例甲状腺癌患者。根据手术方式,患者分为三组:传统开放手术组56例,非充气腋窝入路组44例,非充气锁骨下入路组51例。比较指标包括手术时间、甲状旁腺自体移植率、中央区完全暴露率、淋巴结清扫数量、阳性淋巴结数量、颈前功能及切口美观满意度。分别采用单因素方差分析、非参数检验、Kruskal-Wallis检验、Pearson检验和Fisher确切概率法对三组结果及后续两两比较结果进行比较。所有腹腔镜手术均成功完成,无一例转为开放手术。(1)手术时间:传统开放手术组手术时间最短(四分位数间距)(71.5(16.0)分钟),显著短于两个内镜手术组(均<0.01);在内镜手术入路中,非充气锁骨下入路组(97.0(10.0)分钟)手术时间显著短于非充气腋窝入路组(115.0(11.0)分钟)(<0.01)。(2)甲状旁腺自体移植率:传统组为53.6%(30/56),非充气腋窝入路组为70.5%(31/44),非充气锁骨下入路组为66.7%(34/51),差异无统计学意义(>0.05)。(3)中央区完全暴露率:传统开放手术组暴露率为100%(56/56),非充气腋窝入路组为86.4%(38/44),非充气锁骨下入路组为96.1%(49/51)。传统开放手术组与非充气腋窝入路组之间差异有统计学意义(²=8.124,<0.01),其他组之间未观察到差异。(4)淋巴结清扫数量:三组之间差异无统计学意义(传统开放手术组8(6)(范围:2至17),非充气腋窝入路组7(3)(范围:2至16),非充气锁骨下入路组7(4)(范围:2至16))(=0.078)。(5)阳性淋巴结数量:三组之间差异无统计学意义(=0.923)。(6)术后颈前功能:①视觉模拟评分:术后3天和1个月时,非充气经腋窝入路组与非充气锁骨下入路组之间差异无统计学意义(0.017)。然而,这两组评分均显著低于传统开放手术组(均<0.01)。②颈部功能障碍指数:术后3天时,腋窝入路组和锁骨下入路组显著低于传统开放手术组(<0.01),两个内镜手术组之间差异无统计学意义(>0.017);术后1个月时,传统开放手术组、非充气腋窝入路组和非充气锁骨下入路组之间差异有统计学意义(均<0.01)。③吞咽障碍指数:术后3天时差异无统计学意义(>0.05);然而,术后1个月时,内镜手术组评分显著低于传统开放手术组(均<0.01)。(7)切口美观满意度:三组在温哥华瘢痕评分、患者瘢痕评估评分和观察者瘢痕评估评分方面差异有统计学意义(均<0.01)。与非充气腋窝内镜甲状腺切除术相比,非充气锁骨下入路手术操作技术更简单,中央淋巴结清扫区域暴露更好,对颈前功能保护更优,尽管美容效果欠佳。在严格的术前评估和适当的适应证下,非充气锁骨下入路和腋窝入路均可获得与传统开放手术治疗cN0甲状腺癌相当疗效,具有良好的临床应用价值。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索