Asian Journal of Surgery (Oct 2022)

Effectiveness and safety of endoscopy-assisted versus conventional open lateral neck dissection: A meta-analysis

  • Yongqiang Chen,
  • Shuangta Xu,
  • Xiaoshan Zeng,
  • Yinghui Liang,
  • Jianhua Xu

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 45, no. 10
pp. 1809 – 1816

Abstract

Read online

The objective of this study was to systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of endoscopic-assisted lateral neck dissection (EALND) compared with conventional open lateral neck dissection (COLND) for the treatment of thyroid cancer with positive lymph node metastases. Medical literature databases including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wan Fang and VIP were systematically searched for articles that compared EALND and COLND for the treatment of thyroid carcinoma with lymph node metastasis, up to June 2019. The quality of included studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software after two evaluators independently screened the literature, extracted information and evaluated the methodological quality of included studies according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, resulting in the selection of seven studies with a total of 372 patients from six non-RCTs and an RCT. The results of meta-analysis showed that EALND was associated with a longer operative time (MD = 24.86, 95∗CI:21.76 to 27.96, P<0.05), with a shorter postoperative stay (MD = −1.45, 95%CI:-2.70 to −0.21,P = 0.02), reduced length of scar (MD = −8.14,95%CI:-8.41 to −7.88, P<0.00001) and a lower incidence of neck discomfort (OR = 0.19, 95%CI:0.07 to 0.58, P = 0.003) compared with COLND. The incidences in both groups of transient hypocalcemia (OR = 0.66,95%CI:0.28 to 1.55,P = 0.343), transient hoarseness (OR = 0.58,95%CI:0.17 to 1.93,P = 0.38),chylous fistula (OR = 0.69,95%CI:0.26 to 1.83,P = 0.45), choking on water (OR = 0.24,95%CI:0.04 to 1.31,P = 0.10) and the number of lymph nodes retrieved from the lateral cervical region (MD = 0.14,95%CI:-0.36 to 0.65,P = 0.59) were not statistically significant. It was concluded that EALND was safe and feasible compared with COLND, despite the longer operation time. The incision was more aesthetically pleasing and the postoperative recovery was quicker, which makes EALND a clinical procedure worthy of use in such cases.

Keywords