Trial reportSurgical endoscopy2026
Axillo-breast versus bilateral axillo-breast endoscopic thyroidectomy: a randomized quality-of-life study.
Trial report in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThyroid lesions, both benign and malignant, are common worldwide. Although conventional open thyroidectomy remains effective, the visible cervical scar is a cosmetic concern, particularly for younger patients. Endoscopic thyroidectomy techniques such as the Axillo-Breast Approach (ABA) and Bilateral Axillo-Breast Approach (BABA) were developed to overcome this limitation. This study aimed to compare these two approaches with respect to postoperative health-related quality of life (QOL).
methodsIn this randomized controlled trial, 64 adult patients (> 18 years) with Bethesda category III or lower cytology and thyroid gland volume < 40 mL were randomized to undergo endoscopic hemithyroidectomy via either ABA or BABA. The primary outcome was postoperative QOL assessed using the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire and a thyroid-specific questionnaire at 2, 6, and 12 weeks after surgery. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, duration of hospital stay, pain scores, conversion to open surgery, and ease of performing the procedure.
resultsAt 6 weeks, significantly higher scores were observed in the ABA group for Vitality (p = 0.045) and Social Function (p = 0.027), whereas no significant differences were identified in the remaining SF-36 domains. At 2 weeks, ABA showed a trend toward higher general health and vitality scores. On thyroid-specific assessment at 2 weeks, ABA was associated with significantly less neck and chest numbness (p = 0.0028) and better neck mobility (p = 0.004) compared to BABA; these differences resolved by 6-12 weeks. Minor complications such as subcutaneous emphysema and ecchymosis were self-limiting. Pain scores, operative difficulty, and hospital stay were similar between groups.
conclusionsBoth ABA and BABA endoscopic hemithyroidectomy techniques were safe. No statistically significant differences were observed in most quality-of-life outcomes between the two approaches. ABA provided a short-term advantage in reducing early postoperative neck numbness and movement restriction, although these differences resolved during follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42521830What 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.