ABSTRACT
Background: Thyroidectomy is the most commonly performed procedure in endocrine surgery. Since the thyroid gland is highly vascular, therefore, rapid and absolute hemostasis is extremely required. Conventional thyroidectomy is commonly used with acceptable outcomes, however, it is time‑consuming and resulted in significant intraoperative blood loss with the possible risk of postoperative hemorrhage, injury to parathyroid glands and laryngeal nerves. The advent of focus harmonic devices was encouraging for improving safety, effectiveness, and reduction of operative time, especially in thyroid surgery. Aim of this study: The purpose of this study was to analyze the effectiveness and surgical outcomes of using ultrasonic harmonic scalpel for thyroid surgery compared to conventional techniques.Methods: This was a prospective, randomized study in which 60 patients with various types of goiters presented for thyroidectomy. The patients were divided into two comparable groups. Group A (30 patients) included patients who had focus harmonic thyroidectomy and Group B (30 patients) included patients who underwent conventional thyroidectomy.Results: Focus harmonic thyroidectomy showed a significant reduction in operative time, intraoperative blood loss, volume of postoperative fluid drainage and meantime for hospital stay compared with conventional thyroidectomy. There were no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative hypocalcemia, seroma, hematoma, wound infection and laryngeal nerve injury between both groups.Conclusions: Focus harmonic thyroidectomy was a safe, effective, faster, and appealing alternative to conventional technique since it reduced the operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage and hospital stay with comparable postoperative complications.
ABSTRACT
Este estudio describe los resultados de la tiroidectomía abierta mínimamente invasiva y los compara con los obtenidos en tiroidectomía convencional. La tiroidectomía abierta mínimamente invasiva fue realizada a través de una incisión cervical transversal de 3,0-4,5, sin división del plano muscular pretiroideo. Los 233 pacientes que fueron sometidos a tiroidectomía abierta mínima se comparan prospectivamente con 218 propuestos para cirugía convencional en varios tipos de nódulos tiroideos. La longitud de la incisión 3,9±0,9 vs 9,9 ± 3,5 centímetros, el tiempo operatorio, 54,3 ± 10,3 vs 89,8 ± 33,5 minutos, la perdida de sangre 17,3 ± 12,6 vs 58,1 ± 25,3 mL y la hospitalización 1,3 ± 0,5 vs 4,7 ± 2,9 días fueron más reducidas en la cirugía mínimamente invasiva. La dosis de analgásicos fue significativamente menor en los procedimientos mininvasivos en comparación con la cirugía tradicional. Estos resultados demuestran la seguridad y eficacia de la tiroidectomía mínimamente invasiva, con mínimo porcentaje de complicaciones, mejores resultados cosméticos satisfacción y calidad de vida.
This report describes of performing minimally invasive open thyroidectomy and compares with conventional. Minimally invasive open thyroidectomy was performed by a small skin incision, 3,0-4.5 cm long, and approaching the thyroid directly via transverse not division of the strap muscles. The outcomes of 233 patients who underwent a minimally invasive open thyroidectomy were prospective compared with 218 patients who underwent conventional thyroidectomy for various types of thyroid nodules. The length of the skin incision, at 3.9 ± 0.9 vs 9.9 ± 3,5 cm, operative time, at 54.3 ± 10.3 vs 89.8 ± 33.5 min, blood loss, 17.3 ± 12.6 vs 58.1 ± 25.3 mL, and 1.3 ± 0.5 vs 4.7 ± 2.9 days, were significantly reduced in the minimally invasive open thyroidectomy group (P< 0.05). Moreover, the number of patients who required postoperative analgesia was significantly less in the minimally invasive open thyroidectomy. These results show that minimally invasive open thyroidectomy provides surgeons with a clear operative field, and that it has proven to be simple, safe.