Bilateral vagal automatic periodic stimulation in single-incision transaxillary robotic total thyroidectomy

Robot-Assisted Thyroidectomy Versus Open Thyroidectomy in the Treatment of Well Differentiated Thyroid Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The incidence of thyroid cancer has increased worldwide during the last decade, becoming the most common endocrine malignancy and accounting for 3.8% of new cancer diagnosis. Surgical resection, namely conventional thyroidectomy, remains at the frontline of therapy, as surgical outcomes are undoubtedly successful. Minimally invasive techniques gained popularity through the years, in terms of feasibility, safety, and cosmesis. However, endoscopic approach could be characterized by some limitations concerning thyroid surgery. Robotic technology with its unique features was introduced to overcome these limitations. Since then, robotic thyroidectomy has been used for both benign and malignant thyroid disease.

DATABASE

This study presents the use of robot-assisted transaxillary thyroidectomy in well-differentiated thyroid carcinoma through an extensive review of the literature in the PubMed database, including previous meta-analyses and case series.

CONCLUSION

In terms of oncological efficacy, morbidity, and quality of life, outcomes seem comparable in thyroid cancer patients undergoing either open or robotic thyroidectomy. Surgical completeness also appears similar. Moreover, the rates of locoregional recurrence and survival outcome at 5 years are similar between the former and the latter, thus confirming the oncological value of robotic thyroidectomy for differentiated thyroid cancer. In order for more surgeons to adopt robotic approaches several issues need to be resolved, namely: expansion of robotic thyroidectomy in treating larger well-differentiated carcinomas and neck dissection, equipment costs, and prolonged operation times.

Successful Treatment of Differentiated Thyroid Carcinoma with Transaxillary Robotic Surgery and Radioiodine: The First European Experience

OBJECTIVES

Transaxillary robotic thyroidectomy surgery (TARS) has been reported to be a safe approach in patients with differentiated thyroid carcinoma, and oncological responses are promising.

STUDY DESIGN

This study aimed to evaluate the oncological outcomes of TARS followed by radioiodine (RAI) therapy in patients with differentiated thyroid carcinoma. Between 2011 and 2016, patients treated for differentiated thyroid carcinoma by TARS in a single institution, followed by RAI, were retrospectively included. The oncological response was performed according to the 2015 American Thyroid Association (ATA) guidelines 6-12 months later and at the last available visit.

RESULTS

A total of 42 patients (30 females) were included, with a median tumor size of 20 mm (12 cases of N1a and 5 cases of N1b on initial pathology report). According to ATA classification of recurrence risk after surgery, 17 and 25 patients were classified as low and intermediate risk, respectively. After RAI, all patients had a normal posttherapeutic whole body scan (except 1 patient, who had pathological lymph node uptake), but no unusual uptake was seen. At the 6- to 12-month evaluation (n = 37), 24 patients had excellent response, 8 had indeterminate response, and 5 had incomplete response (2 biological and 3 structural); no distant metastasis was found. At the last evaluation (median follow-up 15.9 months), 35 patients had no evidence of disease and 1 patient had a structural incomplete response. In total, a second open surgery was necessary for 3 patients to treat persistent lymph nodes (all intermediate risk).

CONCLUSION

In this study, TARS followed by RAI therapy seems to be curative, even for patients with lymph node metastases, after good preoperative staging. More studies are required to confirm the findings.

Robotic Thyroid Surgery: Current Perspectives and Future Considerations

Robotic transaxillary thyroidectomy, pioneered in South Korea, is firmly established throughout the Far East but remains controversial in Western practice. This relates to important population differences (anthropometry and culture) compounded by the smaller mean size of thyroid nodules operated on in South Korea due to a national thyroid cancer screening programme. There is now level 2 evidence (including from Western World centres) to support the safety, feasibility, and equivalence of the robotic approach to its open counterpart in terms of recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, hypoparathyroidism, haemorrhage, and oncological outcomes for differentiated thyroid cancer. Moreover, robotic thyroidectomy has been shown to be superior to open surgery for certain patient-reported outcome measures, namely scar cosmesis and pain. Downsides include its high cost, longer operative time, and risk of complications not encountered in open thyroidectomy (brachial plexus neurapraxia). Careful patient selection is paramount as this procedure is not for every patient, surgeon, or hospital. It should only be undertaken by high-volume surgeons operating as part of a multidisciplinary robotic team in specialised centres. Novel robotic approaches utilising the retroauricular and transoral routes for thyroidectomy have recently been described but further studies are required to establish their respective role in modern thyroid surgery.