Feasibility and safety of minimal‐incision thyroidectomy for Graves' disease: A prospective, single‐center study

Abstract

Background. The role of minimally invasive surgery in Graves' disease is still controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing minimal-incision thyroidectomy with those undergoing conventional thyroidectomy for Graves' disease. Methods. A prospective study was performed on 148 patients undergoing total thyroidectomy. Seventy-one patients underwent minimal-incision thyroidectomy and 77 underwent conventional thyroidectomy. Minimal-incision thyroidectomy was proposed if the thyroid volume was 50 mL.Results. There were no significant differences in the operative time between minimal-incision thyroidectomy and conventional thyroidectomy. The length of skin incision was significantly shorter in the minimal-incision thyroidectomy than that in the conventional thyroidectomy group. The incidence of postoperative complications was similar in the 2 groups. Patients undergoing minimal-incision thyroidectomy experienced significantly less postoperative pain and were more satisfied with the cosmetic result than patients who underwent conventional thyroidectomy. Conclusions. Minimal-incision thyroidectomy is a feasible and safe option for the surgical treatment of selected patients with Graves' disease.

Feasibility of using minimal incision in thyroidectomy operation

“…9 Perigli et al reported mean postoperative hospital stay of 28.2±2 hours. 12 On the other hand, Ikeda et al reported that the patients remained hospitalized postoperatively for 4 days in their study. As regard to our results, we consider this is too long as we noticed no ill effect from the shorter postoperative hospital stay.…”

“…1 In study of Perigli et al the mean VAS scores (0-10) was 4.3±0.6 in 1 st group and 8.3±0.4 in 2 nd group. 12 In the study of Sywak et al the mean VAS scores (0-10) was 2.6 in 1 st group and 3.4 in 2 nd group. 14 In our study the mean satisfaction score as measured by NSS was 6.83±0.72 in 1 st group and 3.92±0.75 in 2 nd group with significant difference between both groups.…”

“…1 Perigli et al reported a mean operative time of 61.6±4.6 minutes. 12 Alvarado et al reported a mean operative time of 49 minutes with a range 34-54 minutes. 7 Sywak et al reported a mean operative time of 56 minutes with a range of 51-61 minutes.…”

“…1 Perigli et al incision length was 31.3±0.8 mm in minimal incision thyroidectomy group and 53.5±2.5 mm in conventional group. 12 Ikeda et al performed 21 operations of thyroidectomy through a 3 cm central incision. 2 Other series used smaller skin incisions, Govednik, et al (2014)used 2.46±0.2 cm skin incision.…”

“…1 And in study of Perigli et al was 8.4±0.3 in 1 st group and 3.8±0.9 in 2 nd group. 12 The minimal incision thyroidectomy seems to be suitable for thyroid disease than other new modalities in minimal access thyroid surgery, since this procedure is characterized by a small skin incision in the neck and the use of conventional instruments, retractors and a surgeon's finger with no additional burden of costs on patients or required specialized instruments.…”