World Journal of Surgery

, Volume 38, Issue 3, pp 696–703 | Cite as

A Survey of Preferences Regarding Surgical Approach to Thyroid Surgery

  • Nicholas E. Coorough
  • David F. Schneider
  • Monica Woll Rosen
  • Rebecca S. Sippel
  • Herbert Chen
  • Margaret L. Schwarze
  • Haggi Mazeh
Article
  • 211 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Transaxillary thyroidectomy (TAT) has gained popularity in East Asian countries; however, to date there have been no attempts to evaluate the preferences regarding TAT in the US population. The aim of this study is to assess the preferences and considerations associated with TAT in an American cohort.

Methods

Self-administered surveys were distributed to 966 adults at various locations in a single state. Questions assessed preferences for the surgical approach, acceptable risks and extra costs, and willingness to pursue TAT despite reduced cancer treatment efficacy.

Results

The response rate was 84 %, with a mean age of 40 ± 17 years. The majority of respondents were female. Of the respondents, 82 % preferred TAT to a cervical thyroidectomy (CerT), all risks being equal; 51 % of the respondents were willing to accept a 4 % complication rate with TAT, and 16 % stated they would agree to pay up to an additional $US5,000 for the TAT approach. When presented with thyroid cancer, 20 % of all respondents still preferred TAT, even if it would not cure their disease. Patients preferring TAT over CerT were younger, female, more willing to accept complications and spend additional money, and, most significantly, preferred the TAT approach, even if it was less likely to cure their cancer.

Conclusions

Although this survey presents a hypothetical question for people who do not have thyroid disease, the majority of respondents preferred TAT over CerT. Furthermore, a substantial number were willing to accept higher complication rates and increased costs for TAT.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Mohammed Chohan, Megan Hannigan, Zach Nigogosyan, Devin Snyder, Amanda Timek, Perla Lozoya, Mariah Clark, Miles Russell, Emily Biersdorf, Adrian Ng, Demitri Price, Lisa Wendt, Matthew Holtz, Mayra Miranda, Leema John, Johnathon McCormick, and Delaney Wagener for their assistance with the survey distribution. The project described was supported by the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program, previously through the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR) grant 1UL1RR025011, and now by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), grant 9U54TR000021 (Dr. Schwarze).

References

  1. 1.
    Kocher A (1912) Discussion on partial thyroidectomy under local anaesthesia, with special reference to exophthalmic goiter. Proc R Soc Med 5:89–96PubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Harris R, Ryu H, Vu T et al (2012) Modern approach to surgical intervention of the thyroid and parathyroid glands. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 33:115–122PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mazeh H, Chen H (2011) Advances in surgical therapy for thyroid cancer. Nat Rev Endocrinol 7:581–588PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dhiman SV, Inabnet WB (2008) Minimally invasive surgery for thyroid diseases and thyroid cancer. J Surg Oncol 97:665–668PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Yoon JH, Park CH, Chung WY (2006) Gasless endoscopic thyroidectomy via an axillary approach: experience of 30 cases. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 16:226–231PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kang SW, Lee SC, Lee SH et al (2009) Robotic thyroid surgery using a gasless, transaxillary approach and the da Vinci S system: the operative outcomes of 338 consecutive patients. Surgery 146:1048–1055PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Patel D, Kebebew E (2012) Pros and cons of robotic transaxillary thyroidectomy. Thyroid 22:984–985PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kang SW, Jeong JJ, Yun JS et al (2009) Robot-assisted endoscopic surgery for thyroid cancer: experience with the first 100 patients. Surg Endosc 23:2399–2406PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lang BH (2010) Minimally invasive thyroid and parathyroid operations: surgical techniques and pearls. Adv Surg 44:185–198PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lang BH, Lo CY (2010) Technological innovations in surgical approach for thyroid cancer. J Oncol 2010:490719PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cabot JC, Lee CR, Brunaud L et al (2012) Robotic and endoscopic transaxillary thyroidectomies may be cost prohibitive when compared to standard cervical thyroidectomy: a cost analysis. Surgery 152:1016–1024PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Perrier ND, Randolph GW, Inabnet WB et al (2010) Robotic thyroidectomy: a framework for new technology assessment and safe implementation. Thyroid 20:1327–1332PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kuppersmith RB, Holsinger FC (2011) Robotic thyroid surgery: an initial experience with North American patients. Laryngoscope 121:521–526PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tufano RP, Kandil E (2010) Considerations for personalized surgery in patients with papillary thyroid cancer. Thyroid 20:771–776PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kandil EH, Noureldine SI, Yao L et al (2012) Robotic transaxillary thyroidectomy: an examination of the first one hundred cases. J Am Coll Surg 214:558–564 discussion 564–556PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jackson NR, Yao L, Tufano RP, Kandil EH (2014) Safety of robotic thyroidectomy approaches: meta-analysis and systematic review. Head Neck 36:137–143PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee KE, Koo do H, Kim SJ et al (2010) Outcomes of 109 patients with papillary thyroid carcinoma who underwent robotic total thyroidectomy with central node dissection via the bilateral axillo-breast approach. Surgery 148:1207–1213PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kang SW, Jeong JJ, Nam KH et al (2009) Robot-assisted endoscopic thyroidectomy for thyroid malignancies using a gasless transaxillary approach. J Am Coll Surg 209:e1–e7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lee J, Nah KY, Kim RM et al (2010) Differences in postoperative outcomes, function, and cosmesis: open versus robotic thyroidectomy. Surg Endosc 24:3186–3194PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kang SW, Jeong JJ, Yun JS et al (2009) Gasless endoscopic thyroidectomy using trans-axillary approach: surgical outcome of 581 patients. Endocr J 56:361–369PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Landry CS, Grubbs EG, Warneke CL et al (2012) Robot-assisted transaxillary thyroid surgery in the United States: is it comparable to open thyroid lobectomy? Ann Surg Oncol 19:1269–1274PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Landry CS, Grubbs EG, Morris GS et al (2011) Robot assisted transaxillary surgery (RATS) for the removal of thyroid and parathyroid glands. Surgery 149:549–555PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Inabnet WB 3rd (2012) Robotic thyroidectomy: must we drive a luxury sedan to arrive at our destination safely? Thyroid 22:988–990PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bellantone R, Lombardi CP, Bossola M et al (2002) Video-assisted vs conventional thyroid lobectomy: a randomized trial. Arch Surg 137:301–304 discussion 305PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lang BH, Wong KP (2013) A comparison of surgical morbidity and scar appearance between gasless, transaxillary endoscopic thyroidectomy (GTET) and minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy (VAT). Ann Surg Oncol 20:646–652PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Linos D, Kiriakopoulos A, Petralias A (2013) Patient attitudes toward transaxillary robot-assisted thyroidectomy. World J Surg 37(8):1959–1965. doi:10.1007/s00268-013-2090-x PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gutknecht S, Kaderli R, Businger A (2012) Perception of semiquantitative terms in surgery. Ann Surg 255:589–594PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bollschweiler E, Apitzsch J, Obliers R et al (2008) Improving informed consent of surgical patients using a multimedia-based program? Results of a prospective randomized multicenter study of patients before cholecystectomy. Ann Surg 248:205–211PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicholas E. Coorough
    • 1
  • David F. Schneider
    • 1
  • Monica Woll Rosen
    • 1
  • Rebecca S. Sippel
    • 1
  • Herbert Chen
    • 1
  • Margaret L. Schwarze
    • 1
    • 2
  • Haggi Mazeh
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of SurgeryUniversity of WisconsinMadisonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Medical History and BioethicsUniversity of WisconsinMadisonUSA
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryHadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center, Mount ScopusJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations