[Clinical cohort study of non inflated subclavian approach,axillary approach,and traditional open surgery for unilateral thyroid cancer].

Abstract

Objective: To compare surgical-related indicators between non-inflated subclavian endoscopic surgery and axillary and traditional open surgery for the treatment of right lobe thyroid cancer,as well as their effects on postoperative anterior cervical function and cosmetic outcomes. Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed 151 cases of thyroid cancer patients who underwent surgical treatment at the Department of Thyroid Surgery,Zhengzhou Central Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University from June 2024 to October 2024. Based on the surgical approach,patients were divided into three groups:56 cases of traditional open surgery group, 44 cases of non-inflated axillary approach group,and 51 cases of non-inflated subclavian approach group. Comparative indicators included surgical time, parathyroid autotransplantation rate,complete exposure rate of central area, number of lymph node dissections, number of positive lymph nodes, anterior cervical function, and satisfaction with incision beauty. One-way analysis of variance,non-parametric test,Kruskal-Wallis test,Pearson χ² test and Fisher's exact probability method were used to compare the results of the three groups and subsequent pairwise comparisons,respectively. Results: All laparoscopic surgeries were successfully completed without conversion to open surgery. (1) Surgical time:the traditional open surgery group had the shortest operative time (M(IQR))(71.5(16.0)minutes), significantly shorter than both endoscopic groups (both P<0.01); among the endoscopic approaches, the non-inflated subclavian approach group (97.0(10.0)minutes) had a significantly shorter operative time than the non-inflated axillary approach group (115.0(11.0)minutes)(P<0.01). (2) Parathyroid autotransplantation rate:the rates were 53.6%(30/56) in the traditional group, 70.5%(31/44) in the non-inflated axillary approach group, and 66.7%(34/51) in the non-inflated subclavian approach group, with no statistically significant differences (P>0.05). (3) Complete exposure rate of the central area:the exposure rate was 100%(56/56) in the traditional open surgery group, 86.4%(38/44) in the non-inflated axillary approach group, and 96.1%(49/51) in the non-inflated subclavian approach group. A significant difference was observed between the traditional open surgery group and the non-inflated axillary approach group (χ²=8.124,P<0.01), but not observed between other groups. (4) Number of lymph node dissection:no significant difference was found among the three groups (8(6)(range:2 to 17) in the traditional open surgery group,7(3)(range:2 to 16) in the non-inflated axillary approach group,7(4)(range:2 to 16) in the non-inflated subclavian approach group)(P=0.078).(5) Number of positive lymph nodes:no significant differences were observed among the three groups(P=0.923). (6) Postoperative anterior cervical function:① Visual analogue scale: there was no significant difference between the non-insufflation transaxillary approach group and the non-insufflation subclavian approach group at 3 days and 1 month postoperatively (P>0.017). However, the two groups had significantly lower scores than the traditional open group (both P<0.01). ② Neck disability index:at 3 days post-surgery, there were significantly lower in the axillary and subclavian groups compared to the traditional open group (P<0.01), with no significant difference between the two endoscopic groups(P>0.017); at 1 month postoperatively, the traditional open surgery group, gasless axillary approach group, and gasless subclavian approach group, with statistically significant differences between each group (both P<0.01). ③ Swallowing disorder index: no significant differences were observed at 3 days post-surgery(P>0.05); however, at 1 month post-surgery, the endoscopic groups showed significantly lower scores compared to the traditional open group(both P<0.01).(7) Satisfaction with incision beauty:significant differences were found among the three groups in terms of vancouver scar scores, patient scar assessment scores, and observer scar assessment scores(all P<0.01). Conclusions: Compared to the non-inflated axillary endoscopic thyroidectomy, the non-inflated subclavian approach offers a technically simpler procedure, better exposure of the central lymph node dissection area, and superior protection of anterior cervical function, although it results in less favorable cosmetic outcomes. Under strict preoperative evaluation and appropriate indications,both non-inflated subclavian and axillary approaches can achieve outcomes comparable to traditional open surgery for cN0 thyroid cancer,demonstrating good clinical application value.