A Comparison between Endoscopic Thyroidectomy Performed by the Axillary Approach and by a Conventional Thyroidectomy.
10.16956/kjes.2006.6.2.77
- Author:
Ho Joong CHOI
1
;
Jong Min BAEK
;
Ji Il KIM
;
Gi Young SUNG
;
Dong Ho LEE
;
Young Jin SEO
;
Seung Hye CHOI
;
Woo Chan PARK
;
Do Sang LEE
;
Byung Joo SONG
;
Se Jeong OH
;
Jeong Soo KIM
;
Wook KIM
;
Il Young PARK
;
Sang Seol JUNG
;
Jong Man WON
;
Chung Soo CHUN
Author Information
1. Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea. skyhfh@catholic.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Axillary approach;
Endoscopic thyroidectomy
- MeSH:
Anesthesia, General;
Diagnosis;
Humans;
Length of Stay;
Operative Time;
Pain, Postoperative;
Paresthesia;
Thyroid Neoplasms;
Thyroid Nodule;
Thyroidectomy*
- From:Korean Journal of Endocrine Surgery
2006;6(2):77-82
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: Endoscopic thyroidectomy has not become a widespread procedure because of limited advantages to its use. We have performed endoscopic thyroidectomies by use of the axillary approach. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of this surgical procedure. METHODS: Between June of 2002 and December of 2002, 17 patients underwent an endoscopic thyroidectomy by use of the axillary approach while 11 patients underwent a conventional thyroidectomy. Each procedure was performed by one surgeon under general anesthesia. Patients with thyroid carcinoma at the preoperative diagnosis or who received a bilateral thyroidectomy were excluded. We compared the age, size of the tumor, postoperative pain (48 hours after surgery), surgical time, cosmetic result, length of hospital stay, and paresthesia. Statistical analysis was determined by use of the Mann-Whitney test and the chi-square test using SPSS software. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 46.6 years who received a conventional thyroiodectomy and 32.9 years who underwent the axillary approach. The size of the tumor was 3.1 cm for patients who received conventional thyroiodectomy and 3.3 cm for patients who underwent the axillary approach. The operation time was 80.91±16.1 (65~100) minutes for the conventional thyroiodectomy and 135.3± 34.6 (80~210) minutes for the axillary approach. The difference between the two approaches in regards to parameters such as postoperative pain, parethesia, and total hospital days was negligible. The degree of satisfaction was 2.7±0.8 for the conventional thyroiodectomy and 1.1±0.3 for the axillary approach. CONCLUSION: While conventional thyroidectomy still offers an advantage in terms of surgical time, performance of endoscopic thyroidectomy by the axillary approach has an advantage in producing better cosmetic results. Although a multitude of patients will be necessary to follow in further studies, the use of endoscopic thyroidectomy by the axillary approach could become the procedure of choice by offering better cosmetic results to young patients who present with thyroid nodules.
