Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38347218›Full record

ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024

Clinical analysis of a new multifunctional instrument set for gasless endoscopic thyroidectomy with two different approaches.

Bo Hu, Yuqing Chen, Yannan Jin, Xianfu Liu, Yansong Chen, Jingwei Tang, Yuan Liu, Zhe Zhang, Nanhai Wang, Ru Bai and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Progress in gasless endoscopic thyroidectomy.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024
    Review
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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Bo HuDepartment of Oncological Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China.
Yuqing ChenDepartment of Oncological Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China.
Yannan JinQueen Mary School, Nanchang University, Nanchang, China.
Xianfu LiuDepartment of Oncological Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China.
Yansong ChenDepartment of Oncological Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China.
Jingwei TangDepartment of Oncological Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China.
Yuan LiuDepartment of Oncological Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China.
Zhe ZhangDepartment of Oncological Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China.
Nanhai WangDepartment of Anesthesiology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China.
Ru BaiDepartment of Oncological Nursing Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China.
Gongsheng JinDepartment of Oncological Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital, Bengbu Medical College, Anhui, China. jgs2007@qq.com.
First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College · CNNanchang University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFollowing 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.

objectiveTo investigate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the self-developed instruments for gasless endoscopic thyroidectomy in two different approaches.

methodsA 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.

resultsAll 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).

conclusionAlthough 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.

Indexed as

ThyroidectomyThyroid NeoplasmsEndoscopyHumansNeck DissectionRetrospective StudiesThyroid Cancer, PapillaryGasless endoscopic thyroidectomyMultifunctional instrumentsThyroid carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID38347218
PMCPMC10978638
OpenAlexW4391743620

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.