4.6 Article

Lobectomy Is Feasible for 1-4 cm Papillary Thyroid Carcinomas: A 10-Year Propensity Score Matched-Pair Analysis on Recurrence

Journal

THYROID
Volume 29, Issue 1, Pages 64-70

Publisher

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/thy.2018.0554

Keywords

papillary thyroid carcinoma; lobectomy; total thyroidectomy; recurrence

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Current guidelines allow lobectomy as treatment for 1-4 cm papillary thyroid carcinomas (PTCs), as previous studies reported no clear survival advantages for total thyroidectomy (TT). However, data on recurrence based on surgical extent are limited. Methods: This study enrolled 2345 patients with 1-4 cm PTC. Those with lateral cervical lymph node metastasis or initial distant metastasis were excluded. Disease-free survival (DFS) was compared after 1:1 propensity score matching by age, sex, tumor size, extrathyroidal extension, multifocality, and cervical lymph node metastasis. Results: Lobectomy was performed in 383 (16.3%) and TT in 1962 (83.7%) patients. In the matched-pair analysis (381 patients in each group), no significant difference in DFS was observed during the median follow-up of 9.8 years (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.35 [confidence interval (CI) 0.40-1.36], p = 0.33). When stratified by tumor size, DFS did not differ between the group with 1-2 cm tumors and that with 2-4 cm tumors (HR = 1.57 [CI 0.75-3.25], p = 0.228; HR = 0.93 [CI 0.30-2.89], p = 0.902, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that the surgical extent did not play an independent role in structural persistent/recurrent disease development (HR = 1.43 [CI 0.72-2.83], p = 0.306). Conclusion: Patients with 1-4 cm PTCs who underwent lobectomy exhibited DFS rates similar to those who underwent TT after controlling for major prognostic factors. This supports the feasibility of lobectomy as initial surgical approach for these patients and emphasizes that tumor size should not be an absolute indication for TT.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available