SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2025
Outcomes of transoral endoscopic thyroidectomy vestibular approach versus endoscopic thyroidectomy via areola approach in the treatment of thyroid carcinoma: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Endoscopic thyroidectomy via the submental approach: a balanced approach to aesthetics, safety, and recovery- a case series study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Trial
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: This meta-analysis was designed to compare the outcomes of transoral endoscopic thyroidectomy vestibular approach (TOETVA) versus endoscopic thyroidectomy via the areola approach (ETAA) for thyroid carcinoma. Materials and methods: Five databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus) were systematically searched for studies comparing endoscopic thyroidectomy via TOETVA versus ETAA in patients with thyroid carcinoma. The search was conducted from the databases' establishment to May 31, 2025. Operative time, intraoperative blood loss, number of central lymph node dissections, postoperative drainage volume, length of hospital stay, postoperative infection, hypoparathyroidism, perioperative recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, complication, hypocalcemia, subcutaneous ecchymosis, cough, trachyphonia, postoperative parathyroid hormone (PTH), postoperative blood calcium, pain score of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), swallowing discomfort, hematoma, central lymph node dissection time, and satisfaction with cosmetic effects were subjected to meta-analyses. Results: A total of 15 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The meta-analysis included a group of 1,961 patients diagnosed with thyroid carcinoma. Within this cohort, 777 patients underwent endoscopic thyroidectomy via TOETVA, while 1,184 patients underwent endoscopic thyroidectomy via ETAA. Compared with ETAA, TOETVA yielded lower intraoperative bleeding volume [weighted mean difference (WMD = -1 mL, 95% confidence interval (CI): -3 to 0, p = 0.03], higher number of central lymph node dissections (WMD = 1.4, 95% CI: 0.3 to 2.3, p = 0.02), and higher satisfaction with cosmetic effects of the patients (WMD = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.42 to 1.43, p = 0.0004), but longer operative time (WMD = 17 min, 95% CI: 8 to 26, p = 0.0002). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding postoperative drainage volume (WMD = -6 mL, 95% CI: -17 to 5, p = 0.31), postoperative infection [odds ratio (OR) = 1.43, 95% CI: 0.47 to 4.43, p = 0.53], perioperative recurrent laryngeal nerve injury (OR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.30 to 1.28, p = 0.20), hypocalcemia (OR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.40 to 1.91, p = 0.74), swallowing discomfort (OR = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.24 to 2.95, p = 0.78), hypoparathyroidism (OR = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.18 to 1.18, p = 0.11), and hospitalization time (WMD = 0.03 days, 95% CI: -0.13 to 0.19, p = 0.71). Conclusions: The findings indicated that both TOETVA and ETAA demonstrated safe and reliable clinical efficacy. TOETVA offers additional benefits concerning satisfaction with cosmetic effects and central lymph node dissection. TOETVA is an optimal option for patients seeking scarless surgical procedures. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD420251021663.
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.