Trial reportJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Drainage During Endoscopic Thyroidectomy.
Trial report in JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Is drain placement necessary in transoral endoscopic thyroidectomy via vestibular approach?BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Risk factors for increased drain output after endoscopic thyroidectomy via areola approach: a retrospective cohort study.Gland surgery · 2024Article
- Evaluation of the Effect of a New Surgical Medical Drain Anti-Dislodgement Fixation Patch and Fixation Method in Postoperative Thyroid Care: A Randomized Trial.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2024Article
- Drainage Tube Placement May Not Be Necessary During Endoscopic Thyroidectomy Bilateral Areola Approach: A Preliminary Report.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Risk factors and outcomes of conversion to open surgery in endoscopic thyroidectomy via bilateral areola approach: a retrospective Chinese population study.Updates in surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConventional cervical drainage tubes are placed crossing the suprasternal fossa during endoscopic thyroidectomy. In our clinical experience, some patients show shallow or absent suprasternal fossa, which affects the cosmetic outcome in the patient. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the feasibility and significance of restoring the suprasternal fossa by changing the position of neck drainage tubes. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 117 female patients were enrolled and divided into 2 groups, including 59 and 58 individuals in the Conventional (conventional anterior neck region negative pressure drainage) and Improvement (improved method with a negative pressure drainage) groups. Then, restoration of the suprasternal fossa in all subjects was observed at 1 day postsurgery, the day of extubation, and 3 months postoperatively. In addition, drainage volume, the time to extubation, and abnormal neck sensations were compared between the groups.
resultsCompared with the Conventional group, the Improvement group showed improved restoration of the suprasternal fossa, with the patients more satisfied with the cosmetic outcome. However, operation time, postoperative drainage volume, and extubation time were not significantly different between the 2 groups.
conclusionsIn endoscopic thyroidectomy via the chest and breast approach, using the new drainage technique described here could yield improved restoration of the suprasternal fossa, ameliorating the cosmetic outcome and patient satisfaction.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.