Bilateral axillo-breast approach robotic thyroidectomy (BABA-RT) versus transoral robotic thyroidectomy (TORT): a systematic review and meta-analysis.

The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all comparative studies that evaluated the surgical outcomes between bilateral axillo-breast approach-robotic thyroidectomy (BABA-RT) and transoral robotic thyroidectomy (TORT). The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were screened until July 2022. The Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies for Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool was used to evaluate study quality. The data were summarized as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in a fixed-effects or random-effects model. Five comparative observational studies met the inclusion criteria comprising 923 patients (TORT = 408 and BABA-RT = 515). The study quality varied and included low (n = 4) and moderate (n = 1) risk of bias. There was no significant difference between both groups regarding the mean operative time (MD = 19.98 min, 95% CI [-11.33, 51.28], p = 0.21), mean hospital stay (MD = -0.14 days, 95% CI [-0.66, 0.38], p = 0.60), mean number of retrieved lymph nodes (MD = 0.42, 95% CI [-0.16, 0.99], p = 0.16), and rate of recurrent laryngeal nerve injury (RR = 0.39, 95% CI [0.13, 1.19], p = 0.10). However, the TORT group had significantly reduced mean postoperative pain score (MD = -0.39, 95% CI [-0.51, -0.26], p < 0.001) and lower rate of hypocalcemia (RR = 0.08, 95% CI [0.02, 0.26], p < 0.001) than the BABA-RT group. TORT and BABA-RT have comparable surgical outcomes. Both methods are largely safe and effective when patients are carefully chosen. However, TORT appears to offer better results regarding postoperative pain and hypocalcemia. Further clinical trials with extended follow-up periods are needed to confirm our findings.

Dry versus wet temporalis fascia graft in type-I tympanoplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the efficacy of dry versus wet temporalis fascia graft among patients undergoing type-I tympanoplasty. METHODS: Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, and CENTRAL databases were screened from inception until July 2022. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the quality of included RCTs. The outcomes were summarized as risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) in a random-effects model. RESULTS: Eight RCTs with 989 patients (dry group = 514 and wet group = 475) were included. The overall quality was 'low', 'some concerns', and 'high' risk of bias in five, two, and one RCT(s), respectively. There were no significant differences between both groups regarding the surgical success rate (n = 8 RCTs, RR 0.99, 95% CI [0.95, 1.03], p = 0.6), audiological success rate (n = 5 RCTs, RR = 0.93, 95% CI [0.73, 1.13], p = 0.48), mean difference in pure tone average (n = 2 RCTs, MD = 2.73 Hz, 95% CI [- 2.31, 7.77], p = 0.29), and mean difference in graft placement time (n = 3 RCTs, MD = - 2.18 min, 95% CI [- 5.11, 0.76], p = 0.15). However, the mean difference in operative time was significantly lower in favor of the wet compared with the dry temporalis fascia group (n = 2 RCTs, MD = 2.95 min, 95% CI [- 1.80, 4.11], p < 0.001). The surgical success rate was not significantly different between both groups according to the tympanic membrane perforation size and site. CONCLUSIONS: The type of temporalis fascia graft (dry or wet) did not influence the clinical outcomes of type-I tympanoplasty.