Comparative short- and long-term outcomes of TOETVA, ETGUA, and COT in thyroid cancer: a propensity score-matched study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aims to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of three surgical approaches for thyroid cancer: Transoral Endoscopic Thyroidectomy Vestibular Approach (TOETVA), Gasless Unilateral Axillary Endoscopic Thyroidectomy (ETGUA), and Conventional Open Thyroidectomy (COT). Methods: A total of 466 thyroid cancer patients who underwent surgery were initially included. After propensity score matching (PSM), 318 patients were analyzed, with 106 patients in each group (TOETVA, ETGUA, and COT). The primary outcomes compared included surgical parameters (incision length, blood loss, operation time, lymph node dissection), postoperative inflammation (WBC, CRP, IL-6), postoperative complications, postoperative pain (Visual Analog Scale, VAS), scar assessment (Vancouver Scar Scale, VSS), wound satisfaction, costs, and quality of life (36-Item Short Form Health Survey, SF-36). Results: After matching, the operation time for TOETVA was longer than that for both ETGUA and COT. The number of lymph nodes dissected in ETGUA was fewer than in TOETVA and COT. There were no significant differences in postoperative complications, VAS scores, costs, or hospital stay among the three groups. On the first postoperative day, TOETVA and ETGUA showed higher levels of WBC and CRP than COT, but no significant differences were observed by day three. TOETVA had the shortest incision and the lowest VSS score. Wound satisfaction was significantly higher in both TOETVA and ETGUA compared to COT, with no significant difference between TOETVA and ETGUA. In terms of quality of life, some dimensions in TOETVA and ETGUA were higher than in COT. Each surgical approach has its own advantages and disadvantages. Conclusion: TOETVA demonstrated the shortest incision and the lowest VSS score, while both TOETVA and ETGUA showed the best wound satisfaction and specific domains of quality of life. However, TOETVA had the longest operation time, and ETGUA had the fewest lymph nodes dissected.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".