In the study, Terris and his colleagues reported their experience with this new procedure. Of the 44 middle-aged patients who had evidence of diseased thyroids, about 65 percent were eligible for the newer procedure. The average incision for those who underwent the conventional surgery, known as a thyroidectomy, was 9.1 centimeters compared to 4.9 centimeters with the minimally-invasive thyroidectomy. Both approaches were equally safe, although one patient who had the smaller incision developed a skin reaction, which cleared up with treatment.
In addition to a smaller scar, the minimally-invasive technique causes less trauma to the muscles around the neck, allowing the incision to be closed with medical-grade glue, rather than stitches. While this procedure does take longer to perform, Terris said that patients can use a local anesthetic and be sent home the same day. "It's a marked improvement," he said.
Most suspected thyroid growths turn out to be harmless, raising concerns about unnecessary surgery. While various tests can help determine if the gland is diseased, they are expensive and difficult to perform. Even a biopsy, which is considered the best method for determining thyroid disease, can be inconclusive about 15 percent of the time. "Sometimes we don't know until we operate," said Dr. Terris.
Terris said that he performs five to six of these procedures a week, and that they are beginning to use even smaller incisions on some patients. If a thyroid does turn out to be cancerous, Terris said that he follows the same small incision to remove the rest of the diseased tissue. Thyroid surgery should be avoided if at all possible, but the less-invasive approach makes a difficult situation more tolerable.
"At least it's a little less hard on the patient," said Dr. Terris.