Content uploaded by Rakesh Katna
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Rakesh Katna on Feb 14, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2010; 92: 361–362 361
Thyroid surgery has evolved considerably from the times of
Billroth and Kocher due to better understanding of the sur-
gical principles, better equipment and advanced surgical
techniques. Kocher, in 1909, pioneered what is today known
as the conventional thyroidectomy. It has remained the
standard approach to the thyroid gland and is still the most
widely used technique world-wide. A recent advance is
minimal access thyroid surgery (MITS). Though the con-
cept of minimal access surgery is not new and it has been
practiced in many other surgical specialties for over two
decades now,1its acceptance in head and neck surgery
remained rather slow. Since Gagner et al.2reported an
endoscopic approach to the parathyroid glands, various
techniques have been described and popularised for thyroid
surgery as well. Shifting focus of thyroid surgery towards
less invasive techniques for better aesthetic outcomes has
resulted in the emergence of minimally invasive approach-
es for the thyroid gland/compartment. The concept of MITS
is attractive because patients are concerned not only about
the results of treating their thyroid disease, but also out-
comes such as better cosmesis, reduced hospital stay and
decreased pain.
MITS has expanded in the last decade and is being con-
sidered as an alternative to conventional thyroidectomy
simply because it reduces tissue trauma and postoperative
pain, and provides excellent cosmetic results.3Many different
techniques have been developed for MITS over a short period;
these can be broadly classified into pure endoscopic tech-
niques, video-assisted techniques and minimally invasive
open surgery. In pure endoscopic techniques, the thyroid
compartment is approached using different routes with the
help of endoscopes with or without carbon dioxide gas insuf-
flation. The lateral neck,4axillary,5anterior chest 6and breast7
approaches have all been described. All these approaches
have in common the use of a 30º endoscope. They differ only
by the site of placement of the access cannulas. This tech-
nique avoids a visible neck scar, provides excellent cosmet-
ic results and allows early return to work.
Minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy
(MIVAT) is the most widely used MITS technique. MIVAT
was first introduced and popularised by Miccoli et al.8in
Italy in the late 1990s. It has been extensively used in other
parts of the world and appears to be an excellent minimal-
ly invasive approach to the thyroid. A small incision
(1.5 cm) is made in the cervical skin crease and the opera-
tion is completed using a video-endoscope, except for the
final delivery of the gland, which is removed through the
original neck incision. Another less commonly used modifi-
cation of MIVAT technique is the video-assisted neck sur-
gery where an anterior neck flap is lifted without using gas
insufflation and a tent-like working space is created.9
Minimally invasive open surgery techniques are also
known as ‘small incision thyroidectomy’ and do not require
specialised instruments like endoscopes and video assis-
tance.10 Broadly speaking these techniques are similar to
conventional thyroidectomy but differ only in the length of
the incision.
Major advantages of MITS techniques include reduced
tissue trauma, shorter hospital stay, better cosmetic results,
minimal postoperative pain, reduced cost of healthcare and,
above all, patient comfort. Video-assisted endoscopic tech-
niques in addition offer a magnified, illuminated view of the
operating field. Miccoli et al.,8who have reported the
largest series of MIVAT, noted reduced postoperative pain,
better cosmetic results and short hospitalisation stay. In
another prospective study, the authors reported significant
reduction in postoperative pain and better cosmetic results
in the MIVAT group as compared to the conventional sur-
gery group.11
The main disadvantages of MITS procedures are the
longer duration of surgery, steep learning curve and
increased cost of surgery due to equipment usage. The
reported rate of important complications (like recurrent
laryngeal nerve palsy and hypoparathyroidism) are similar
to those seen in after conventional thyroid surgery. Miccoli
et al.8,11 reported rates of recurrent nerve palsy and
GUEST EDITORIAL
Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2010; 92: 361–362
doi 10.1308/003588410X12699663903755
Minimal access thyroid surgery – a new dawn?
REHAN KAZI1, RAKESH KATNA2, RAGHAV C DWIVEDI1
1Head and Neck Unit, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK
2Grant Medical College, Mumbai, India
CORRESPONDENCE TO
Rehan Kazi, Head and Neck Unit, Royal Marsden Hospital, Fulham Road, London SW3 6JJ, UK
E: drrehankazi@gmail.com
KAZI1 KATNA DWIVEDI MINIMAL ACCESS THYROID SURGERY – A NEW DAWN?
Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2010; 92: 361–362
362
hypoparathyroidism of 1.3% and 0.3%, respectively, in their
report of MIVAT.
There is an expanding role of MITS techniques for thy-
roid malignancies especially papillary thyroid carcinoma
(PTC). Malignancies of the thyroid were not considered
suitable for an endoscopic approach until 2002, when
Miccoli et al.12 reported a series of endoscopic surgery for
PTC. The authors found no significant statistical difference
between MIVAT and conventional thyroidectomy in these
patients, both in terms of iodine (131I) uptake and circulating
thyroglobulin (Tg) levels. It appears that MITS can be an
effective alternative to conventional thyroidectomy for
selected patients with well differentiated thyroid cancers,
especially PTC.
Judicious patient selection is the most important corner-
stone for the success of any MITS technique for both benign
and malignant thyroid swellings. At present, there are no
specific criteria laid down for deciding suitability of a par-
ticular candidate for MITS; however, there appears to be a
consensus on the size of tumour (< 35 mm for benign and
< 20 mm for malignant thyroid nodule/gland). Other com-
monly agreed indications for MITS are that there should be
no previous irradiation or surgery. Low-risk papillary carci-
noma without any sub-sternal extension and extrathyroidal
spread is the only malignant thyroid disease suitable at the
moment.
As technology continues to develop and impact on surgical
techniques, it is likely that these minimally invasive
approaches will become more widely used and easier to per-
form. As of now, MITS appears to be a useful addition to con-
ventional thyroid surgery. We need more long-term follow-up
and comparative trials to validate these interesting tech-
niques. There is a need to look into the expanding indica-
tions as well as the completeness of MITS procedures, espe-
cially in cases with malignant thyroid disease.
References
1. Mouret P. How I developed laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Ann Acad Med
Singapore 1996; 25: 744–7.
2. Gagner M. Endoscopic subtotal parathyroidectomy in patients with primary
hyperparathyroidism. Br J Surg 1996; 83: 875.
3. Ikeda Y, Takami H, Sasaki Y, Takayama J,Kurihara H. Are there significant ben-
efits of minimally invasive endoscopic thyroidectomy? World J Surg 2004; 28:
1075–8.
4. Inabnet III WB, Gagner M. Endoscopic thyroidectomy. J Otolaryngol 2001; 30:
41–2.
5. Ikeda Y, Takami H, Sasaki Y, Niimi M. Endoscopic neck surgery by the axillary
approach. J Am Coll Surg 2000; 191: 336–40.
6. Takami H, Ikeda Y. Minimally invasive thyroidectomy. Aust NZ J Surg 2002; 72:
841–2.
7. Ohgami M, Ishii S, Arisawa Y. Scarless endoscopic thyroidectomy: breast
approach for better cosmesis. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech 2000; 10:
1–4.
8. Miccoli P, Berti P, Materazzi G, Minuto M,Barellini L. Minimally invasive video
assisted thyroidectomy: five years of experience. J Am Coll Surg 2004; 199:
243–8.
9. Shimizu K, Kitagawa W, Akasu H, Hatori N,Hirai K,Tanaka S. Video-assisted
endoscopic thyroid and parathyroid surgery using a gasless method of anterior
neck skin lifting: a review of 130 cases. Surg Today 2002; 32: 862–8.
10. Terris DJ, Bonnet A, Gourin CG, Chin E. Minimally invasive thyroidectomy using
the Sofferman technique. Laryngoscope 2005; 115: 1104–8.
11. Miccoli P, Berti P, Raffaeli M, Materazzi G,Baldacci S,Rossi G. Comparison
between minimally invasive video assisted thyroidectomy and conventional thy-
roidectomy: a prospective randomized study. Surgery 2001; 130: 1039–43.
12. Miccoli P, Elisei R, Materazzi G, Capezzone M,Galleri D,Pacini F et al.
Minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy for papillary carcinoma: a
prospective study of its completeness. Surgery 2002; 132: 1070–4.
The Annals online
Fellows and Members of the College and subscribers to the Annals can already access the journal
online and download all Annals content. Articles can also be downloaded by non-subscribers on a
pay-per-view basis. Now, however, the leading article and review from each issue as well as case
reports, book reviews and the correspondence section are available to all free of charge. To read
them, please visit: <http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/rcse/arcs>.