Feasibility and safety of minimal-incision thyroidectomy for Graves' disease: A prospective, single-center study

BACKGROUND: The role of minimally invasive surgery in Graves' disease is still controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing minimal-incision thyroidectomy with those undergoing conventional thyroidectomy for Graves' disease. METHODS: A prospective study was performed on 148 patients undergoing total thyroidectomy. Seventy-one patients underwent minimal-incision thyroidectomy and 77 underwent conventional thyroidectomy. Minimal-incision thyroidectomy was proposed if the thyroid volume was ≤50 mL. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the operative time between minimal-incision thyroidectomy and conventional thyroidectomy. The length of skin incision was significantly shorter in the minimal-incision thyroidectomy than that in the conventional thyroidectomy group. The incidence of postoperative complications was similar in the 2 groups. Patients undergoing minimal-incision thyroidectomy experienced significantly less postoperative pain and were more satisfied with the cosmetic result than patients who underwent conventional thyroidectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Minimal-incision thyroidectomy is a feasible and safe option for the surgical treatment of selected patients with Graves' disease.