Return
American Thyroid Association Statement on Remote-Access Thyroid Surgery
DOI:10.1089/thy.2015.0407.png)
Abstract
En 中文
Background: Remote-access techniques have been described over the recent years as a method of removing the thyroid gland without an incision in the neck. However, there is confusion related to the number of techniques available and the ideal patient selection criteria for a given technique. The aims of this review were to develop a simple classification of these approaches, describe the optimal patient selection criteria, evaluate the outcomes objectively, and define the barriers to adoption. Methods: A review of the literature was performed to identify the described techniques. A simple classification was developed. Technical details, outcomes, and the learning curve were described. Expert opinion consensus was formulated regarding recommendations for patient selection and performance of remote-access thyroid surgery. Results: Remote-access thyroid procedures can be categorized into endoscopic or robotic breast, bilateral axillo-breast, axillary, and facelift approaches. The experience in the United States involves the latter two techniques. The limited data in the literature suggest long operative times, a steep learning curve, and higher costs with remote-access thyroid surgery compared with conventional thyroidectomy. Nevertheless, a consensus was reached that, in appropriate hands, it can be a viable option for patients with unilateral small nodules who wish to avoid a neck incision. Conclusions: Remote-access thyroidectomy has a role in a small group of patients who fit strict selection criteria. These approaches require an additional level of expertise, and therefore should be done by surgeons performing a high volume of thyroid and robotic surgery.
Keywords:
TRANSAXILLARY TOTAL THYROIDECTOMY
ROBOTIC-ASSISTED THYROIDECTOMY
ENDOSCOPIC THYROIDECTOMY
CONVENTIONAL OPEN
AXILLO-BREAST
EXPERIENCE
COMPLICATIONS
AI Summary
Key information extracted from the uploaded paper, including a brief overview, abstract, background, key highlights, visual analysis, and future outlook.
Journal
IF:
6.7
Papers:
5.9K
Citations:
1.6W

