Background The feasibility and safety of endoscopic thyroidectomy were evaluated by an approach of systematic review of published studies in the past decade.Methods A database searching was performed on MEDLINE, Cochr...Background The feasibility and safety of endoscopic thyroidectomy were evaluated by an approach of systematic review of published studies in the past decade.Methods A database searching was performed on MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, American College of Physicians Journal Club, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Both comparative and non-comparative studies about endoscopic thyroidectomy were selected and analyzed. For the comparative studies, RevMan 4.2 was used for statistical analysis; and for the non-comparative studies, data analysis was performed by SPSS 13.0.Results Seven comparative studies involving 367 patients （video-assisted thyroidectomy （VAT）, 174 patients; conventional thyroidectomy （CT）, 193 patients） were included in VAT-CT group. Age, gender, operative types, and pathological diagnosis were similar. Compared with CT, the mean operative time for VAT was significantly longer （VAT, 80.0 minutes; CT, 61.9 minutes, P 〈0.01）, but the postoperative hospital stay was shorter （VAT, 1.7 days; CT, 2.5 days, P 〈0.01）. The complication rate for VAT was 6.9%, while that for CT was 9.3% （P=0.35）. Three studies analyzed the postoperative pain and cosmetic evaluation, and indicated that the VAT group was superior to the CT group, but there was no significant difference after a meta-analysis. Three comparative studies involving 273 patients （totally endoscopic thyroidectomy （TET）, 145 patients; CT, 128 patients） were included in TET-CT group and the results generally resembled that of VAT-CT group. There were 18 and 14 non-comparative studies reporting the results of VAT and TET, respectively. The mean operative time for VAT was 76.8 minutes compared with 135.8 minutes for TET. The postoperative hospital stay was 1.8 and 3.8 days for VAT and TET respectively. The rates of conversion to open surgery for VAT and TET were similar （VAT, 2.8%; TET, 3.9%, P=0.105）. The complication rate for VAT was 8.6%, 展开更多
文摘Background The feasibility and safety of endoscopic thyroidectomy were evaluated by an approach of systematic review of published studies in the past decade.Methods A database searching was performed on MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, American College of Physicians Journal Club, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Both comparative and non-comparative studies about endoscopic thyroidectomy were selected and analyzed. For the comparative studies, RevMan 4.2 was used for statistical analysis; and for the non-comparative studies, data analysis was performed by SPSS 13.0.Results Seven comparative studies involving 367 patients （video-assisted thyroidectomy （VAT）, 174 patients; conventional thyroidectomy （CT）, 193 patients） were included in VAT-CT group. Age, gender, operative types, and pathological diagnosis were similar. Compared with CT, the mean operative time for VAT was significantly longer （VAT, 80.0 minutes; CT, 61.9 minutes, P 〈0.01）, but the postoperative hospital stay was shorter （VAT, 1.7 days; CT, 2.5 days, P 〈0.01）. The complication rate for VAT was 6.9%, while that for CT was 9.3% （P=0.35）. Three studies analyzed the postoperative pain and cosmetic evaluation, and indicated that the VAT group was superior to the CT group, but there was no significant difference after a meta-analysis. Three comparative studies involving 273 patients （totally endoscopic thyroidectomy （TET）, 145 patients; CT, 128 patients） were included in TET-CT group and the results generally resembled that of VAT-CT group. There were 18 and 14 non-comparative studies reporting the results of VAT and TET, respectively. The mean operative time for VAT was 76.8 minutes compared with 135.8 minutes for TET. The postoperative hospital stay was 1.8 and 3.8 days for VAT and TET respectively. The rates of conversion to open surgery for VAT and TET were similar （VAT, 2.8%; TET, 3.9%, P=0.105）. The complication rate for VAT was 8.6%,
