Kwangsoon Kim, Young Jun Chai, Mira Han, Sang-Wook Kang, Ji-Sup Yun
{"title":"The safety and anti-adhesive effect of acellular dermal matrix application after thyroid surgery: a multicenter randomized controlled trial.","authors":"Kwangsoon Kim, Young Jun Chai, Mira Han, Sang-Wook Kang, Ji-Sup Yun","doi":"10.4174/astr.2025.108.2.71","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Postoperative adhesions following thyroid surgery can lead to multiple complications that significantly impact quality of life. The use of an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) adhesion barrier device has been proposed as a potential solution to reduce the risk of such adhesions. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and anti-adhesive effect of an ADM in patients undergoing thyroid surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, patients undergoing thyroid surgery were randomly assigned to receive either ADM (n = 42) or no ADM (n = 39) during surgery. The primary outcome was the Swallowing Impairment Score (SIS-6), measured 6 weeks after surgery and compared between groups. Secondary outcomes included intergroup comparisons of the SIS-6, the Voice Handicap Index (VHI)-10, and the Glasgow-Edinburgh Throat Scale (GETS) at baseline, and 2, 6, and 18 weeks after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At week 6, the mean SIS-6 scores were 4.0 ± 4.1 and 3.3 ± 4.2 in the ADM and control groups, respectively, which was not significantly different. Both groups showed similar postoperative improvements in SIS-6, VHI-10, and GETS scores over time, without significant differences between groups at any time point, indicating that the ADM did not reduce the incidence of postoperative adhesions or alter the course of recovery compared to the control group.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Although application of the ADM is safe for use in patients undergoing thyroid surgery, it did not produce a clinically significant advantage in preventing postoperative adhesions. Future research should focus on identifying specific patient populations or surgical scenarios where the use of the ADM may be beneficial.</p>","PeriodicalId":8071,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research","volume":"108 2","pages":"71-78"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11813551/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2025.108.2.71","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Postoperative adhesions following thyroid surgery can lead to multiple complications that significantly impact quality of life. The use of an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) adhesion barrier device has been proposed as a potential solution to reduce the risk of such adhesions. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and anti-adhesive effect of an ADM in patients undergoing thyroid surgery.
Methods: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, patients undergoing thyroid surgery were randomly assigned to receive either ADM (n = 42) or no ADM (n = 39) during surgery. The primary outcome was the Swallowing Impairment Score (SIS-6), measured 6 weeks after surgery and compared between groups. Secondary outcomes included intergroup comparisons of the SIS-6, the Voice Handicap Index (VHI)-10, and the Glasgow-Edinburgh Throat Scale (GETS) at baseline, and 2, 6, and 18 weeks after surgery.
Results: At week 6, the mean SIS-6 scores were 4.0 ± 4.1 and 3.3 ± 4.2 in the ADM and control groups, respectively, which was not significantly different. Both groups showed similar postoperative improvements in SIS-6, VHI-10, and GETS scores over time, without significant differences between groups at any time point, indicating that the ADM did not reduce the incidence of postoperative adhesions or alter the course of recovery compared to the control group.
Conclusion: Although application of the ADM is safe for use in patients undergoing thyroid surgery, it did not produce a clinically significant advantage in preventing postoperative adhesions. Future research should focus on identifying specific patient populations or surgical scenarios where the use of the ADM may be beneficial.
期刊介绍:
Manuscripts to the Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research (Ann Surg Treat Res) should be written in English according to the instructions for authors. If the details are not described below, the style should follow the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publications available at International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) website (http://www.icmje.org).