Skip to main content
Log in

Minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy compared with conventional thyroidectomy in a general surgery department

  • Published:
Surgical Endoscopy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

We retrospectively evaluated a series of patients who underwent minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy (MIVAT) to define its advantages or disadvantages.

Methods

Between May 2005 and March 2008, 68 patients underwent MIVAT. Sixty-nine patients who underwent conventional thyroidectomy (CT) during the period before the introduction of the MIVAT technique in our department—chosen with the same inclusion criteria used for MIVAT—served as matched controls. The eligibility criteria for both groups was thyroid nodules ≤35 mm, thyroid volume <25 ml, no thyroiditis, and no previous surgery.

Results

Forty-five MIVAT and 43 CT patients underwent hemithyroidectomy. Twenty-three MIVAT and 26 CT patients underwent total thyroidectomy. No differences were found in terms of complications, operative time, and radicality of the procedure. Patients who underwent MIVAT experienced significantly less pain, better cosmetic results, and shorter hospital stay than patients who underwent conventional surgery

Conclusion

The MIVAT technique, in selected patients, seems to be a valid option for thyroidectomy and even preferable to conventional surgery because of its significant advantages, especially in terms of cosmetic results, postoperative pain, and postoperative recovery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gagner M (1996) Endoscopc subtotal parathyroidectomy in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism. Br J Surg 83:875

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Miccoli P, Berti P, Raffaelli M, Materazzi G, Baldacci S, Rossi G (2001) Comparison between minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy and conventional thyroidectomy: a prospective randomised study. Surgery 130:1039–1043

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Yeung GH (1998) Endoscopic surgery of the neck. Surg Laparosc Endosc 8:227–232

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Huscher CSG, Chiodini S, Napolitano C, Recher A (1997) Endoscopic right thyroid lobectomy. Surg Endosc 1:877

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bellantone R, Lombardi CP, Raffaelli M, Rubino F, Boscherini M, Perilli W (1999) Minimally invasive, totally gasless video-assisted thyroid lobectomy. Am J Surg 177:342–343

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Shimizu K, Akira S, Jasmi AY, Kitamura Y, Kitagawa W, Akasu H, Tanaka S (1999) Video-assisted neck surgery: endoscopic resection of thyroid tumors with a very minimal neck wound. J Am Coll Surg 188:697–703

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Miccoli P, Berti P, Raffaelli M, Conte M, Materazzi G, Galleri D (2001) Minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy. Am J Surg 181:567–570

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ujiki MB, Sturgeon C, Denham D, Yip L, Angelos P (2006) Minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy for follicular neoplasm: is there an advantage over conventional thyroidectomy? Ann Surg Oncol 13:182–186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Perigli G, Cortesini C, Qirici E, Boni D, Cianchi F (2008) Clinical benefits of minimally invasive techniques in thyroid surgery. World J Surg 32:45–50

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Miccoli P, Bellantone R, Mourad M, Walz M, Raffaelli M, Berti P (2002) Minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy: multi-institutional experience. World J Surg 26:972–975

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Miccoli P, Elisei R, Materazzi G, Walz M, Raffaelli M, Berti P. Minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy for papillary carcinoma: a prospective study of its completeness. Surgery 132: 1070–1073

  12. Lombardi CP, Raffaelli M, de Crea C, Princi P, Castaldi P, Spaventa A, Salvatori M, Bellantone R (2007) Report on 8 years of experience with video-assisted thyroidectomy for papillary thyroid carcinoma. Surgery 142:944–951

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Defechereux T, Rinken F, Maweja S, Hamoir E, Meurisse M (2003) Evaluation of the ultrasonic dissector in thyroid surgery. A prospective randomised study. Acta Chir Belg 103:274–277

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Siperstein AE, Berber E, Morkoyun E (2002) The use of the harmonic scalpel vs conventional knot tying for vessel ligation in thyroid surgery. Arch Surg 137:137–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lombardi CP, Raffaelli M, Princi P, De Crea C, Bellantone R (2006) Video-assisted thyroidectomy: report of a 7 year experience in Rome. Langenbecks Arch Surg 391:174–177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Calò PG, Tatti A, Farris S, Nicolosi A (2007) Length of hospital stay and complications in thyroid surgery. Our experience. Chir Ital 59:149–153

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chiara Dobrinja.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dobrinja, C., Trevisan, G., Makovac, P. et al. Minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy compared with conventional thyroidectomy in a general surgery department. Surg Endosc 23, 2263–2267 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0303-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-008-0303-4

Keywords

Navigation