Abstract
IMPORTANCE: With advancements in robotic surgery, robotic-assisted thyroidectomy is gaining popularity. The introduction of the 3-port transoral robotic thyroidectomy (T-TORT) offers an alternative approach with potential benefits in postoperative recovery compared to traditional methods. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and feasibility of T-TORT in comparison to the transoral endoscopic thyroidectomy vestibular approach (TOETVA). DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study with 1:1 propensity score matching was conducted to compare perioperative outcomes between T-TORT and TOETVA. The learning curve was analyzed using cumulative summation (CUSUM). SETTING: Tertiary A hospital. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred sixty-two patients who underwent either T-TORT or TOETVA were included. INTERVENTION OR EXPOSURES: The T-TORT group underwent three-port robotic thyroidectomy, while the TOETVA group received standard transoral vestibular endoscopic thyroidectomy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Demographics and perioperative data were compared. The learning curve was evaluated using CUSUM. RESULTS: Compared with the TOETVA group the operation time in minutes of the T-TORT group was relatively longer (136.14 ± 36.52 vs 122.49 ± 34.85, P = .012), the postoperative stay, in days, was shorter (2.77 ± 0.78 vs 3.51 ± 0.95, P < .001), the drainage volume on a postoperative day 1 (POD1) and POD2, in milliliter, was less (POD1 56.57 ± 23.29 vs 65.12 ± 26.04, P = .029 and POD2 27.43 ± 25.29 vs 38.21 ± 25.09, P = .008). The other statistics, including bleeding amount, retrieved and metastatic central lymph nodes, visual analog scale score, and drainage volume on an operative day were comparable between the 2 groups. Meanwhile, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in postoperative complication rates. The turning point of the learning curve was in the 16th case with a hemithyroidectomy with central neck dissection (CND) and the 21st case with a bilateral thyroidectomy with CND. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: T-TORT is a safe and feasible option with enhanced postoperative recovery compared to TOETVA. It may be a preferable choice in specific clinical situations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (UIN: ChiCTR2300069021, https://www.chictr.org.cn) in accordance with the World Medical Association's Declaration of Helsinki, 2013.