Users Online : 1155 About us |  Subscribe |  e-Alerts  | Feedback | Login   |   
Journal of Minimal Access Surgery Current Issue | Archives | Ahead Of Print Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
           Print this page Email this page   Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size 
 ¤   Next article
 ¤   Previous article
 ¤   Table of Contents

 ¤   Similar in PUBMED
 ¤  Search Pubmed for
 ¤  Search in Google Scholar for
 ¤Related articles
 ¤   Citation Manager
 ¤   Access Statistics
 ¤   Reader Comments
 ¤   Email Alert *
 ¤   Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded368    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 23    

Recommend this journal


Year : 2009  |  Volume : 5  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 97-102

Minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy versus conventional thyroidectomy: A single-blinded, randomized controlled clinical trial

Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Suez Canal University, Ismailia, Egypt

Correspondence Address:
Gouda M El-Labban
Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Suez Canal University, Ismailia
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/0972-9941.59307

Rights and Permissions

We aimed to test the hypothesis that Minimally Invasive Video-assisted Thyroidectomy (MIVAT) affords comparable safety and efficacy as to the open conventional surgery, when dealing with patients with unilateral thyroid nodules or follicular lesions, in terms of cosmetic results, intraoperative and postoperative complications, postoperative pain and hospital stay. Materials And Methods: This was a single-blinded randomised controlled trial comparing the MIVAT with conventional thyroidectomy. The primary endpoints of the study were measurement of postoperative pain after 24 and 48 hours from operation and self-rated patient satisfaction with cosmetic outcome three months postoperatively. The secondary outcome measures were operative time, incidence of temporary and permanent recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, postoperative haematoma formation, length of incision, and duration of hospital stay. Results: Operative time was significantly less with open thyroidectomy than with MIVAT, while MIVAT was associated with less pain 24 hours postoperatively. Blood loss did not reach significance between procedures. Comparisons between the two procedures with regard to pain scores after 24 and 48 hours, respectively, depicted statistically significant differences in favour of the MIVAT after 24 hours. MIVAT was associated with less scarring and more satisfactory cosmetic results. There were statistically no significant differences between both procedures for the presence of transient recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy and hypoparathyroidism. Conclusions: MIVAT is a safe procedure that produces outcomes, in view of short-term adverse events, similar to those of open thyroidectomy, and is superior in terms of immediate postoperative pain and cosmetic results.


Print this article     Email this article

© 2004 Journal of Minimal Access Surgery
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
Online since 15th August '04