OBJECTIVE To define the conversion risk to open procedure during robot-assisted thyroid surgery (RATS) identifying potential specific subclasses of procedures or accesses at higher conversion risk. METHODS In a PRISMA–compliant framework, all original prospective studies providing RATS conversion rates from multiple databases were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis. Conversion rates were compared between different typologies of thyroid surgery and robotic access. RESULTS Thirteen studies were deemed eligible. Four conversions from two studies were reported out of 398 procedures. No significant heterogeneity was observed (Cochran’s Q p = .932; I2 = 0%). The pooled conversion rate was 1% (95% confidence interval, 0.1%–2%). The ANOVA-Q test failed to show significant differences when comparing type of thyroid surgery or robotic access (respectively p=0.766 and p=0.457). CONCLUSION While the conversion rate appears consistently low across studies, prospective data collection and systematic reporting of procedural complications are required for framing high-risk procedures and accesses.

Conversion rates in robotic thyroid surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis / B. Martino, L. Nitro, L. Pasquale, P. Lozza, A. Maccari, L. Castellani, M. Piazzoni, M. Cardellicchio, A.M. Bulfamante, C. Pipolo, G. Felisati, A.M. Saibene. - In: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ROBOTICS AND COMPUTER ASSISTED SURGERY. - ISSN 1478-5951. - (2022). [Epub ahead of print] [10.1002/rcs.2427]

Conversion rates in robotic thyroid surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

B. Martino
Primo
;
L. Nitro
Secondo
;
L. Castellani;A.M. Bulfamante;C. Pipolo;G. Felisati
Penultimo
;
A.M. Saibene
Ultimo
2022

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To define the conversion risk to open procedure during robot-assisted thyroid surgery (RATS) identifying potential specific subclasses of procedures or accesses at higher conversion risk. METHODS In a PRISMA–compliant framework, all original prospective studies providing RATS conversion rates from multiple databases were pooled in a random-effects meta-analysis. Conversion rates were compared between different typologies of thyroid surgery and robotic access. RESULTS Thirteen studies were deemed eligible. Four conversions from two studies were reported out of 398 procedures. No significant heterogeneity was observed (Cochran’s Q p = .932; I2 = 0%). The pooled conversion rate was 1% (95% confidence interval, 0.1%–2%). The ANOVA-Q test failed to show significant differences when comparing type of thyroid surgery or robotic access (respectively p=0.766 and p=0.457). CONCLUSION While the conversion rate appears consistently low across studies, prospective data collection and systematic reporting of procedural complications are required for framing high-risk procedures and accesses.
robotic surgery; minimally invasive surgery; complications; adverse events; thyroidectomy; hemithyroidectomy
Settore MED/31 - Otorinolaringoiatria
Settore MED/18 - Chirurgia Generale
29-mag-2022
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
conversion rates in RATS (2022).pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Pre-print (manoscritto inviato all'editore)
Dimensione 951.72 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
951.72 kB Adobe PDF Visualizza/Apri
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/2434/929734
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact