Effectiveness of Preventative and Other Surgical Measures on Hypocalcemia Following Bilateral Thyroid Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A variety of measures have been proposed to reduce the incidence of post-thyroidectomy hypocalcemia. The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of preventive and other surgical measures on post-thyroidectomy hypocalcemia as reported in the literature. METHODS: Comprehensive searches of the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were performed, and the quality of included papers was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool or a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The results of all included studies were summarized, and meta-analyses were performed where appropriate. RESULTS: Thirty-nine randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 37 observational studies were included. Measures studied included hemostatic techniques, extent of thyroidectomy and central neck dissection, surgical approach, calcium/vitamin D/thiazide diuretic supplements, parathyroid gland autotransplantation (PGAT) and intraoperative parathyroid gland (PG) identification, truncal ligation of inferior thyroid artery (ITA), preoperative magnesium infusion, and use of magnification loupes and Surgicel. Measures associated with significantly lower rates of transient hypocalcemia in meta-analysis were postoperative calcium and vitamin D supplementation compared to either calcium supplements alone (odds ratio (OR) 0.66; p=0.04) or no supplements (OR 0.34; p=0.007), and bilateral subtotal thyroidectomy (BST) compared to Hartley Dunhill (HD) procedure (OR 0.35; p=0.01). Meta-analyses did not demonstrate any measure to be significantly associated with a reduction in permanent hypocalcemia. CONCLUSION: This review identified postoperative calcium and vitamin D supplementation and bilateral subtotal thyroidectomy (over HD) as being effective in prevention of transient hypocalcemia. However, the majority of RCTs were of low quality, primarily due to a lack of blinding. The wide variability in study design, definitions of hypocalcemia, and methods of assessment prevented meaningful summation of results for permanent hypocalcemia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.030 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.043 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".