IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0298153.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A meta-analysis of unilateral axillary approach for robotic surgery compared with open surgery for differentiated thyroid carcinoma

Author

Listed:
  • Xinjun Zhang
  • Junkang Yu
  • Jinhui Zhu
  • Haibo Wei
  • Ning Meng
  • Mingrong Hu
  • Jingjie Tang

Abstract

Objective: The Da Vinci Robot is the most advanced micro-control system in endoscopic surgical instruments and has gained a lot of valuable experience today. However, the technical feasibility and oncological safety of the robot over open surgery are still uncertain. This work is to systematically evaluate the efficacy of the unilateral axillary approach for robotic surgery compared to open surgery for differentiated thyroid carcinoma. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were utilized to search for relevant literatures of robotic thyroid surgery using unilateral axillary approach compared to open thyroid surgery, and a meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software version 5.3. Statistical analysis was performed through Mantle-Haenszel and inverse variance methods. Results: Twelve studies with a total of 2660 patients were included in the meta-analysis. The results showed that compared with the open group, the robotic group had a longer total thyroidectomy time, shorter hospital stay, less intraoperative bleeding, more postoperative drainage, fewer retrieved central lymph nodes, and higher cosmetic satisfaction (all P 0.05). Conclusions: The unilateral axillary approach for robotic thyroid surgery may achieve outcomes similar to those of open surgery. Further validation is required in a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Suggested Citation

  • Xinjun Zhang & Junkang Yu & Jinhui Zhu & Haibo Wei & Ning Meng & Mingrong Hu & Jingjie Tang, 2024. "A meta-analysis of unilateral axillary approach for robotic surgery compared with open surgery for differentiated thyroid carcinoma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(4), pages 1-18, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0298153
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0298153
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0298153
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0298153&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0298153?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0298153. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.