Trial reportSurgery today2025
Increased acute-phase reaction after the transoral endoscopic thyroidectomy vestibular approach (TOEVA) compared with minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy (MIVAT) for unilateral thyroidectomy.
Trial report in Surgery today, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposesWe analyzed the acute-phase response in unilateral thyroidectomy by comparing the transoral endoscopic thyroidectomy vestibular approach (TOEVA) with the minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy (MIVAT).
methodsPatients were randomly assigned to undergo either TOEVA or MIVAT, after we obtained their written informed consent to participate in this study. Blood count, C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), interleukin-1β (IL-1β), IL-6 and tumor necrosis factor (TNF-) were measured before surgery and then 4, 24, and 48 h after surgery. The VAS pain score, analgesic utilization, and time to resume normal activities were recorded.
resultsThere were 29 patients who underwent TOETVA and 30 who underwent MIVAT. The groups were well balanced in terms of age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and preoperative values. There were no postoperative complications in this series. The operation time was longer in the TOETVA group (p < 0.001). Patients recommenced routine activities earlier after MIVAT (p < 0.05). The TOETVA group showed a greater drop in lymphocyte count 4 h (p < 0.01) and 24 h (p = 0.04) postoperatively, a higher ESR value 48 h postoperatively (p = 0.02), a longer increase in IL-6 (p = 0.05), 24 (p = 0.003) and 48 h postoperatively (p < 0.001), and a higher CRP 24 (p = 0.05) and 48 h postoperatively (p = 0.01) than the MIVAT group. There was no difference in postoperative IL-1β, TNF, total white blood cell count, polymorphonuclear cell count, and VAS or analgesic requirement between the groups, except on the day of surgery.
conclusionsAn increased inflammatory response in the acute phase was observed after TOETVA compared with MIVAT, suggesting that TOETVA is associated with increased tissue trauma. This may account for the earlier recovery after the MIVAT procedure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39753907What 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.