4.5 Article

Yonsei Experience of 5000 Gasless Transaxillary Robotic Thyroidectomies

期刊

WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY
卷 42, 期 2, 页码 393-401

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00268-017-4209-y

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Since the use of robot systems in thyroid surgery was introduced in 2007, we have advanced a novel method of robotic thyroidectomy (RT) using a gasless transaxillary approach (TAA). We report our experience with this technique and detail the surgical outcome of 5000 robotic thyroidectomies. Methods From October 2007 to May 2016, we successfully performed 5000 robotic thyroidectomies using a gasless TAA at the Department of Surgery, Yonsei University Health System. The medical records of the patients are reviewed retrospectively, and the details of clinicopathologic characteristics, operation times, perioperative complications, and oncologic outcomes are analyzed. Results The 5000 patients with thyroid tumor (4804 with cancer and 196 with benign tumor) underwent RT using a gasless TAA. Mean operation time was 134.5 +/- 122.0 min. The most common histologic subtype of thyroid cancer was papillary (98%), and the mean tumor size was 8.0 +/- 6.0 mm. Stage I was found in 85.4% patients regarding tumor nodes metastasis staging. The 196 benign tumors consisted of 104 adenomatous hyperplasias (53.0%), 43 follicular adenomas (21.9%), 30 Graves' diseases (15.3%), and 19 others (9.7%). Postoperative complication occurred in 24.1% without any serious one, and overall morbidity tended to decrease over time. No disease-specific mortality was observed during the follow-up period. Locoregional recurrence was developed in 26 patients (0.5%). Conclusion The authors have tried to improve RT technique using gasless TAA and achieved acceptable surgical outcomes. The rapid evolution of surgical robot technology and our constant effort to advance RT technique using gasless TAA would make it possible to reduce the perioperative morbidity and gain the best possible operative and oncologic outcomes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据