Effectiveness of prophylactic central compartment neck dissection following Hemithyroidectomy in papillary thyroid cancer: a meta-analysis.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
P Zhao, L-L Liang, Y-B Luo, Q-K Liang, B-D Xiang
{"title":"Effectiveness of prophylactic central compartment neck dissection following Hemithyroidectomy in papillary thyroid cancer: a meta-analysis.","authors":"P Zhao, L-L Liang, Y-B Luo, Q-K Liang, B-D Xiang","doi":"10.1111/ans.19210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In this study, we aimed to assess the effect of prophylactic central compartment neck dissection (pCCND) in conjunction with hemithyroidectomy (HT) for clinically low-risk node-negative (cN0) papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A thorough literature search was performed utilizing PubMed and EMBASE for articles published until October 2023. Subsequently, a meta-analysis was performed on studies involving patients with cN0 PTC, with postoperative locoregional recurrence (LRR) and survival data, treated with HT + pCCND or HT. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024560962).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included seven studies in this meta-analysis, including 2132 patients who met the inclusion criteria: six retrospective cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial. The HT + pCCND group consisted of 1090 cases, and the HT group had 1042 cases. The LRR rates after HT with or without pCCND were similar (3.58% vs. 4.51%; odds ratio (OR) = 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.41-1.03). Five of the seven studies provided prognostic and survival data, particularly the log hazard ratio (log HR) of disease-free survival (DFS) between the two groups. There was also no significant difference in terms of DFS between the HT + pCCND and HT groups (OR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.42-1.07).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There was no significant difference in LRR and DFS between the HT + pCCND and HT groups. pCCND did not demonstrate significant efficacy in improving oncological outcomes for low-risk patients with cN0 PTC. Therefore, for patients with low-risk cN0 PTC, thyroid surgeons should make reasonable and individualized decisions regarding the extent of surgical removal.</p>","PeriodicalId":8158,"journal":{"name":"ANZ Journal of Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ANZ Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.19210","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: In this study, we aimed to assess the effect of prophylactic central compartment neck dissection (pCCND) in conjunction with hemithyroidectomy (HT) for clinically low-risk node-negative (cN0) papillary thyroid carcinoma (PTC).

Methods: A thorough literature search was performed utilizing PubMed and EMBASE for articles published until October 2023. Subsequently, a meta-analysis was performed on studies involving patients with cN0 PTC, with postoperative locoregional recurrence (LRR) and survival data, treated with HT + pCCND or HT. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024560962).

Results: We included seven studies in this meta-analysis, including 2132 patients who met the inclusion criteria: six retrospective cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial. The HT + pCCND group consisted of 1090 cases, and the HT group had 1042 cases. The LRR rates after HT with or without pCCND were similar (3.58% vs. 4.51%; odds ratio (OR) = 0.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.41-1.03). Five of the seven studies provided prognostic and survival data, particularly the log hazard ratio (log HR) of disease-free survival (DFS) between the two groups. There was also no significant difference in terms of DFS between the HT + pCCND and HT groups (OR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.42-1.07).

Conclusions: There was no significant difference in LRR and DFS between the HT + pCCND and HT groups. pCCND did not demonstrate significant efficacy in improving oncological outcomes for low-risk patients with cN0 PTC. Therefore, for patients with low-risk cN0 PTC, thyroid surgeons should make reasonable and individualized decisions regarding the extent of surgical removal.

甲状腺乳头状癌半甲状腺切除术后预防性中央区颈部切除术的效果:一项荟萃分析。
简介本研究旨在评估预防性中央区颈部切除术(pCCND)与甲状腺半切除术(HT)联合治疗临床低风险结节阴性(cN0)甲状腺乳头状癌(PTC)的效果:利用 PubMed 和 EMBASE 对 2023 年 10 月之前发表的文章进行了全面的文献检索。随后,对cN0 PTC患者术后局部复发(LRR)和生存数据、接受HT+pCCND或HT治疗的研究进行了荟萃分析。该研究已在 PROSPERO(CRD42024560962)注册:我们在此次荟萃分析中纳入了七项研究,包括2132名符合纳入标准的患者:六项回顾性队列研究和一项随机对照试验。HT + pCCND 组有 1090 例,HT 组有 1042 例。有无 pCCND 的 HT 后 LRR 率相似(3.58% vs. 4.51%;几率比 (OR) = 0.65;95% 置信区间 (CI) = 0.41-1.03)。七项研究中有五项提供了预后和生存数据,特别是两组间无病生存期(DFS)的对数危险比(log HR)。HT+pCCND组与HT组的无病生存期也无明显差异(OR = 0.67; 95% CI = 0.42-1.07):pCCND在改善cN0 PTC低危患者的肿瘤预后方面未显示出明显疗效。因此,对于低危的 cN0 PTC 患者,甲状腺外科医生应该就手术切除的范围做出合理的个体化决定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ANZ Journal of Surgery
ANZ Journal of Surgery 医学-外科
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
720
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: ANZ Journal of Surgery is published by Wiley on behalf of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons to provide a medium for the publication of peer-reviewed original contributions related to clinical practice and/or research in all fields of surgery and related disciplines. It also provides a programme of continuing education for surgeons. All articles are peer-reviewed by at least two researchers expert in the field of the submitted paper.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信