Feasibility and Safety of Outpatient Thyroidectomy: A Narrative Scoping Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Outpatient thyroid surgery is gaining popularity as it can reduce length of hospital stay, decrease costs of care, and increase patient satisfaction. There remains a significant variation in the use of this practice including a perceived knowledge gap with regards to the safety of outpatient thyroidectomies and how to go about implementing standardized institutional protocols to ensure safe same-day discharge. This review summarizes the information available on the subject based on existing published studies and guidelines. Methods: This is a scoping review of the literature focused on the safety, efficacy and patient satisfaction associated with outpatient thyroidectomies. The review also summarizes and editorializes the most recent American Thyroid Association guidelines. Results: In total, 11 studies were included in the analysis: 6 studies were retrospective analyses, 3 were retrospective reviews of prospective data, and 2 were prospective studies. The relative contraindications to outpatient thyroidectomy have been highlighted, including: complex medical conditions, anticipated difficult surgical dissection, patients on anticoagulation, lack of home support, and patient anxiety toward an outpatient procedure. Utilizing these identified features, an outpatient protocol has been proposed. Conclusion: The salient features regarding patient safety and selection criteria and how to develop a protocol implementing ambulatory thyroidectomies have been identified and reviewed. In conclusion, outpatient thyroidectomy is safe, associated with high patient satisfaction and decreased health costs when rigorous institutional protocols are established and implemented. Successful outpatient thyroidectomies require standardized preoperative selection, clear discharge criteria and instructions, and interprofessional collaboration between the surgeon, anesthetist and same-day nursing staff.
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 | 0.008 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".