Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33478479›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of surgical oncology2021

Comparison between 3-dimensional and 2-dimensional endoscopic thyroidectomy for benign and malignant lesions: a meta-analysis.

Zigao Huang, Haiquan Qin, Jiankun Liao, Linghou Meng, Yongjie Qin, Baojia Li, Hao Lai, Xianwei Mo

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of surgical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Zigao Huang *Guangxi Clinical Research Center for Colorectal Cancer, Guangxi Cancer Hospital and Guangxi Medical University Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi Autonomous Region, China.
Haiquan Qin *Guangxi Clinical Research Center for Colorectal Cancer, Guangxi Cancer Hospital and Guangxi Medical University Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi Autonomous Region, China.
Jiankun LiaoGuangxi Clinical Research Center for Colorectal Cancer, Guangxi Cancer Hospital and Guangxi Medical University Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi Autonomous Region, China.
Linghou MengGuangxi Clinical Research Center for Colorectal Cancer, Guangxi Cancer Hospital and Guangxi Medical University Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi Autonomous Region, China.
Yongjie QinGuangxi Clinical Research Center for Colorectal Cancer, Guangxi Cancer Hospital and Guangxi Medical University Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi Autonomous Region, China.
Baojia LiGuangxi Clinical Research Center for Colorectal Cancer, Guangxi Cancer Hospital and Guangxi Medical University Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi Autonomous Region, China.
Hao LaiGuangxi Clinical Research Center for Colorectal Cancer, Guangxi Cancer Hospital and Guangxi Medical University Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi Autonomous Region, China.
Xianwei MoGuangxi Clinical Research Center for Colorectal Cancer, Guangxi Cancer Hospital and Guangxi Medical University Affiliated Cancer Hospital, Nanning, 530021, Guangxi Autonomous Region, China. moxianwei888@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4245-2836
Guangxi Medical University · CN

Funding

Guangxi Zhuang Region Health Department Z2016506
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of 3-dimensional (3D) endoscopic thyroidectomy (ET) has been increasing, but its feasibility and safety have not been well documented for thyroidectomy. Hence, to systematically investigate the comparative outcomes during 3D-ET and 2-dimensional (2D) ET for benign and malignant lesions, we conducted this meta-analysis.

methodsBased on the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic database search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Chinese Wanfang databases was performed. The eligible studies were published in English and Chinese up to October 2020. The major endpoints evaluated were procedure time, blood loss, postoperative drainage, postoperative hospitalization, postoperative complications, total number of lymph node dissections (LNDs), and total cost.

resultsA total of 15 relevant studies including 1190 patients (583 for 3D-ET and 607 for 2D-ET) compared the application of 3D and 2D laparoscopic systems in thyroid surgery, of which 8 were endoscopic benign thyroidectomy (EBT) and 7 were endoscopic malignant thyroidectomy (EMT). Our meta-analysis indicated that 3D-ET generally had advantages over 2D-ET in terms of procedure time (P = 0.000), blood loss (P = 0.000), postoperative drainage (P = 0.000), postoperative complications (P = 0.000), and LNDs (P = 0.006). However, there were no significant differences between the two systems in terms of total cost (P = 0.245) or postoperative hospitalization (P = 0.068). Subgroup analysis showed consistency of the overall outcomes in each subset, but a shorter postoperative hospitalization in 3D-EBT was revealed.

conclusionsCompared to 2D-ET, 3D endoscopic thyroidectomy is an efficient, safe, and reliable method with better depth perception and stereoscopic vision, and an equally satisfactory outcome. More clinical RCTs with long-term follow-up are required to reproduce these promising results.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyThyroid NeoplasmsChinaEndoscopyHumansLymph Node ExcisionPrognosisThyroidectomyTreatment Outcome2-Dimensional3-DimensionalEndoscopic thyroidectomyMeta-analysis

Identifiers

PMID33478479
PMCPMC7819346
OpenAlexW3123709115

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.