4.7 Article

Re-do Operation Using a Robotic System due to Locoregional Recurrence after Initial Thyroidectomy for Thyroid Cancer

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-15908-x

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigated the feasibility of using a robotic system for re-do operation in locoregional recurrent thyroid cancer. The results showed that re-do robotic operation can be a feasible alternative with similar oncologic outcomes and superior cosmetic satisfaction.
Locoregional recurrent thyroid cancer is commonly treated with re-do operation. This study aimed to investigate the feasibility of using robotic system for re-do operation in locoregional recurrent thyroid cancer. Sixty-five patients who underwent re-do robotic operation using trans-axillary approach for locoregional recurrent thyroid cancer from October 2007 to April 2021 at Yonsei University Hospital were analyzed. Completion total thyroidectomy (CTT) was performed in 26 cases, CTT and modified radical neck node dissection (mRND) in 16, and mRND in 23. Most of the re-do robotic operations were performed at site of previous incision. All patients were diagnosed with papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC). CTT with central compartment neck dissection (CCND) took 117.6 +/- 26.3 min, CTT with mRND 255.6 +/- 38.6 min, and mRND, 211.7 +/- 52.9 min. Transient hypocalcemia occurred in 17 (26.2%) patients and permanent hypocalcemia occurred in 3 (4.6%). There was one case of recurrent laryngeal nerve(RLN) injury. One patient was diagnosed with structural recurrence after re-do robotic operation. Median follow-up duration was 50.7 +/- 37.1 months. Re-do robotic operation can be an alternative for patients who are diagnosed with locoregional recurrent thyroid cancer after thyroidectomy, with no increase in morbidity, similar oncologic outcomes, and superior cosmetic satisfaction.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available