Objective: Robotic and endoscopic approaches have become more accepted in thyroid surgery, with current literature documenting the experience of high-volume centers. We adopted both approaches concurrently, and this series presents our initial experience to assess the more practical option for low- to moderate-volume centers starting out with transaxillary thyroidectomies.
Study design: Case series with chart review.
Setting: Tertiary academic center.
Subjects and methods: Over a period of 4 years, 101 patients underwent transaxillary thyroidectomies, of whom 48 underwent robotic thyroidectomy and 53 underwent endoscopic thyroidectomy. Data analysis includes patient characteristics, procedure time, thyroid pathology, and postoperative complications. A survey was conducted among surgeons to assess the subjective experience.
Results: Endoscopic hemithyroidectomies had a significantly shorter duration of operation (145.8 minutes) vs that of robotic hemithyroidectomies (193.6 minutes), P < .001. The mean time taken for the first 5 hemithyroidectomies vs the last 5 hemithyroidectomies showed a greater drop in the endoscopic group (49.1%) vs the robotic group (18.6%). There were 2 cases of transient recurrent laryngeal nerve injury. In the surgeon survey, the endoscopic technique was perceived to have less need for peripheral support, while the robotic technique was preferred for its shorter learning curve.
Conclusion: In terms of outcome, both techniques are comparable at least in the initial phase. Based on our early experience, the endoscopic technique may be less intuitive with a longer learning curve, although at steady state, it may be the quicker procedure. This is relevant for low- to moderate-volume centers starting their transaxillary thyroidectomy program.
Keywords: endoscopic thyroidectomy; robotic thyroidectomy; thyroid surgery.
© American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery Foundation 2015.