Three-dimensional versus two-dimensional endoscopic-assisted thyroidectomy via the anterior chest approach: a preliminary report
- 206 Downloads
The objective of the study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of three-dimensional (3D) endoscopy for thyroidectomy and compare it to two-dimensional (2D) endoscopy. The major limitations of conventional endoscopy include its lack of depth perception and tactile feedback. The 3D endoscopy technique, which involves 3D imaging, is widely used. However, few reports have described the use of 3D endoscopic systems in thyroid surgery.
In this single-institutional study, 103 consecutive patients who underwent endoscopic thyroidectomy between July 2013 and April 2014 were enrolled. Of these, 32 patients chose 3D endoscopy, and 71 patients chose 2D endoscopy and were used as a control group. All patients were stratified by type of operation.
All 103 patients underwent a successful endoscopic-assisted thyroidectomy with no conversion to open surgery. There were no differences in operation time, intraoperative bleeding, postoperative drainage, the number of lymph nodes (LNs) dissected, major complications, and hospital stays. During a median follow-up of 28.0 months, no patients experienced a recurrence of thyroid cancer.
Our preliminary report demonstrates that 3D endoscopy achieved the same level of safety and effectiveness as 2D endoscopy in endoscopic-assisted thyroidectomies. Additionally, 3D endoscopy provided good depth perception and allowed the surgeon to easily recognize critical anatomical landmarks. Further large-scale studies, preferably prospective randomized control trials, are required to confirm this finding.
KeywordsThree-dimensional endoscopy Endoscopic thyroidectomy Papillary thyroid carcinoma
This study was supported by a research grant from the Sun Yat-sen University Clinical Research 5010 Program (Grant 2010008).
Compliance with ethical standards
Shi-tong Yu, Ping Han, Faya Liang, Qian Cai, Peiliang Lin, Renhui Chen, and Xiaoming Huang have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Supplementary material 1 (MP4 247140 KB)
Supplementary material 2 (MP4 265114 KB)
- 6.Marcus HJ, Hughes-Hallett A, Cundy TP, Di Marco A, Pratt P, Nandi D, Darzi A, Yang GZ (2014) Comparative effectiveness of 3-dimensional vs. 2-dimensional and high-definition vs. standard-definition neuroendoscopy: a preclinical randomized crossover study. Neurosurgery 74 (4):375–380 (discussion 380–371). doi: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000000249 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Haugen BR, Alexander EK, Bible KC, Doherty GM, Mandel SJ, Nikiforov YE, Pacini F, Randolph GW, Sawka AM, Schlumberger M, Schuff KG, Sherman SI, Sosa JA, Steward DL, Tuttle RM, Wartofsky L (2016) 2015 American Thyroid Association Management Guidelines for Adult Patients with Thyroid Nodules and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer: The American Thyroid Association Guidelines Task Force on Thyroid Nodules and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer. Thyroid 26(1):1–133. doi: 10.1089/thy.2015.0020 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 16.Lee SG, Lee J, Kim MJ, Choi JB, Kim TH, Ban EJ, Lee CR, Kang SW, Jeong JJ, Nam KH, Jo YS, Chung WY (2016) Long-term oncologic outcome of robotic vs. open total thyroidectomy in PTC: a case-matched retrospective study. Surg Endosc 30(8):3474–3479. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4632-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Chung EJ, Park MW, Cho JG, Baek SK, Kwon SY, Woo JS, Jung KY (2015) A prospective 1-year comparative study of endoscopic thyroidectomy via a retroauricular approach vs. conventional open thyroidectomy at a single institution. Ann Surg Oncol 22(9):3014–3021. doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-4361-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar