首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Surgical Oncology >Comparison of surgical outcomes between endoscopic and robotic thyroidectomy
【24h】

Comparison of surgical outcomes between endoscopic and robotic thyroidectomy

机译:内镜和自动甲状腺切除术的手术效果比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Objectives Gasless transaxillary endoscopic thyroidectomy offers a distinct advantage over the conventional open operation because it leaves no visible neck scar. Indications have expanded with the development of new surgical techniques and instruments. However, because of the two-dimensional view and the nonflexible instruments, this procedure is not easily amenable for total thyroidectomy. So, robotic surgery has been introduced and offers improved visualization and dexterity. But, it remains unclear whether robotic thyroidectomy offers any potential benefits over endoscopic thyroidectomy. The aim of this present study was to determine whether robotic surgery is superior to endoscopic surgery through a comparison of surgical outcomes. Methods Between May 2009 and February 2011, 165 patients underwent endoscopic thyroidectomy (endoscopy group) and 46 patients underwent robotic thyroidectomy (robot group). A gasless transaxillary approach was used in both groups. The two groups were compared in terms of patient characteristics, perioperative clinical results, pathologic findings, and postoperative complication. Results Both patient groups were similar in terms of patient characteristics, mean number of retrieved central lymph nodes, pathological features, length of hospital stays, postoperative complication rate, and serum Tg level. However, the mean total operation time for thyroidectomy was 126.2±37.84min in the endoscopy group and 179.6±44.34min in the robot group (P<0.001). Postoperative total drainage for lobectomy was 153.3±45.64 for the endoscopy group and 179.9±49.15 for the robot group (P=0.031). Cost effectiveness is also an important consideration when evidence for predominance of two surgical techniques is lacking. The mean cost of robotic thyroidectomy was $6,655, compared with $829 for endoscopic thyroidectomy (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in postoperative complications as hypocalcemia, recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, chyle leakage and tracheal injury in the two groups (P=0.332). Conclusion Robotic thyroidectomy was lengthier in duration than endoscopic thyroidectomy, more costly, and associated with increased postoperative drainage with no improvement in oncologic outcomes or complication rates. Therefore our data do not support any advantage of robotic surgery over endoscopic surgery.
机译:目的无气经胸腔内镜甲状腺切除术比传统的开放手术具有明显的优势,因为它不会留下可见的颈部疤痕。随着新外科技术和仪器的发展,适应症也有所扩大。然而,由于二维视图和不灵活的器械,该手术不容易进行全甲状腺切除术。因此,已经引入了机器人手术,并提供了更好的可视性和灵活性。但是,尚不清楚机器人甲状腺切除术是否比内窥镜甲状腺切除术具有任何潜在的好处。本研究的目的是通过比较手术结果来确定机器人手术是否优于内窥镜手术。方法2009年5月至2011年2月,对165例患者进行了内镜甲状腺切除术(内窥镜检查组),对46例患者进行了机器人甲状腺切除术(机器人检查组)。两组均采用无气体经腋窝入路。比较两组患者的特征,围手术期临床结果,病理结果和术后并发症。结果两组患者在患者特征,平均中央淋巴结清扫数量,病理特征,住院时间,术后并发症发生率和血清Tg水平方面均相似。但是,内窥镜检查组平均甲状腺切除术的平均手术时间为126.2±37.84min,机器人检查组为179.6±44.34min(P <0.001)。内镜组肺叶切除术后总引流为153.3±45.64,机器人组为179.9±49.15(P = 0.031)。当缺乏两种手术技术优势的证据时,成本效益也是一个重要的考虑因素。机器人甲状腺切除术的平均成本为6,655美元,而内窥镜甲状腺切除术的平均成本为829美元(P <0.001)。两组的术后并发症如低血钙,喉返神经损伤,乳糜漏和气管损伤无明显差异(P = 0.332)。结论机器人甲状腺切除术的持续时间比内窥镜甲状腺切除术更长,成本更高,并且伴有术后引流增加,肿瘤学结局或并发症发生率没有改善。因此,我们的数据不支持机器人手术优于内窥镜手术的任何优势。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号