SynthesisSurgical endoscopy2025
Implications of five endoscopic and conventional open surgery on lateral neck dissection outcomes in patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma: a network meta-analysis and systematic review.
Synthesis in Surgical endoscopy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Utility and safety of a self-developed patent chest strap in endoscopic transaxillary thyroid surgery: a prospective comparative effectiveness study.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- Multidisciplinary team diagnosis and treatment of well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma: current landscape and future prospects.The oncologist · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe efficacy and safety of different surgical approaches to thyroidectomy with lateral neck dissection remain unclear. This study aims to evaluate five endoscopic and open techniques for thyroidectomy with lateral neck dissection and identify the most effective method.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies comparing different surgical approaches across multiple outcome indicators. The risk of bias was analyzed, and publication bias was assessed using funnel plot asymmetry tests. Both global and local inconsistency tests were performed to evaluate the agreement between direct and indirect comparisons. Pairwise and network meta-analyses were conducted for each outcome, with approaches ranked using Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) values and curves.
resultsA total of 1251 patients across 13 clinical studies were included in the analysis. No significant statistical differences were found among the approaches for lymph node dissection and postoperative recurrence rates. The bilateral axillary breast approach yielded the highest number of lymph nodes (SUCRA value: 0.762). The suprasternal fossa approach had the lowest postoperative recurrence rate (SUCRA: 0.657) and performed well in metastatic lymph node dissection (SUCRA: 0.679). The bilateral axillary breast approach significantly reduced postoperative complication rates compared to the open and transaxillary approaches (mean differences: - 1.88 and - 0.23; 95% confidence intervals: - 3.87 to - 0.46 and - 0.62 to 0.29, respectively) and was the most effective in minimizing complications (SUCRA: 0.910). Open surgery demonstrated a significantly shorter operative duration.
conclusionEndoscopic approaches are viable and safe alternatives to open surgery, with fewer postoperative complications, albeit at the cost of longer operative durations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39915312What 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.