跳至主要内容
临床试验/NCT03239769
NCT03239769已完成不适用

A Study to Evaluate and Compare the Surgical Outcomes, Aesthetic Effects and Incision Length of Different Access Procedures in Patients With DTC

Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute0 个研究点目标入组 120 人开始时间: 2012年6月1日最近更新:
适应症
干预措施

试验速览

阶段
不适用
状态
已完成
发起方
入组人数
120
主要终点
Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS)

研究概览

简要总结

One hundred twenty female patients who underwent thyroidectomy were evenly distributed into three groups: conventional access (CA), aesthetic principles access (APA) and minimally invasive access (MIA). The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) was used as the assessment tool for the linear scar. After one year follow-up, the cosmetic outcomes were assessed.

详细描述

A prospective study in patients with DTC at the Department of Head and Neck Surgery at Perking University Cancer Hospital (also called Beijing Cancer hospital). A total of 120 female patients who underwent surgical treatment for DTC were enrolled in the study from June 2012 to June 2014. All patients were diagnosed with DTC through preoperative fine needle aspiration biopsy pathology. These patients were individually randomly assigned (1:1:1 ratio) into the conventional access group (CA), the aesthetic principles access group (APA) or the minimally invasive access group (MIA). Lobectomy plus ipsilateral central lymph node dissection (CLND) was adopted in each patient. DTC staging was T1N0M0 or T1N1M0. The investigators retrieved the patients' information, including age, incision length, incision closure procedure, incidence of complications, and cosmetic assessment from patients' medical records. Patients with other medical diseases, such as diabetes or obesity, a smoking history, a keloid tendency, a history of radiotherapy to the head and neck, or with incomplete information, were excluded. RLN function was evaluated by electronic fiber laryngoscopy 6 months postoperatively. The follow-up time was 12.3 months. The research was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of Peking University Cancer Hospital, and informed consent was obtained from all patients to publish the information/image(s) in an online open-access publication. The study was open-label with no blinding of patients, clinicians, or research staff.

研究设计

研究类型
Interventional
分配方式
Randomized
干预模型
Parallel
主要目的
Treatment
盲法
None

入排标准

年龄范围
18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
性别
Female
接受健康志愿者
否

入选标准

  • •Patients diagnosed with DTC through preoperative fine needle aspiration biopsy pathology.
  • •DTC staging was T1N0M0 or T1N1M
  • •Age over 18 years
  • •Subjects who fully understand the study process, participate voluntarily

排除标准

  • •Patients with other medical diseases, such as diabetes or obesity, a smoking history, a keloid tendency, a history of radiotherapy to the head and neck, or with incomplete information.

研究组 & 干预措施

conventional access group (CA)

Active Comparator

A 4- to 5-cm incision was created, subplatysmal flaps were raised, and the strap muscles were mobilized. Then, the superior pole of the thyroid gland was exposed and the gland was delivered through the surgical incision, and the thyroid isthmus was divided. Finally, CLND was performed. The strap muscles were re-approximated with No.1 silk suture. The full-thickness skin was closed with interrupted monofilament.

干预措施: thyroidectomy (Procedure)

aesthetic principles access group (APA)

Experimental

The key difference focused on the disposal incision using aesthetic principles, which are depicted below. The incision was protected by Vaseline ointment. Excessive skin traction was avoided to prevent the injury on the skin edge. Bleeding was stanched with a low-power bipolar coagulation device. The surgical field does not have to be pulled in every direction to show the full operation field. The cervical linea alba was closed by continuous sutures with 3-0 absorbable Vicryl sutures. Interrupted sutures of 4-0 Vicryl were used to re-approximate the subcutaneous tissues. The epidermis was fixed with 3M steri-strip elastic skin closures rather than skin sutures.

干预措施: thyroidectomy (Procedure)

minimally invasive access group (MIA)

Experimental

With the MIA approach, a shorter incision of between 3 and 4 cm was created. The procedure used the Harmonic scalpel as an auxiliary device. First, the isthmus was divided. Second, the lower pole of the thyroid was dissected from the adipose tissue, and the inferior thyroid vessels were divided close to the thyroid gland for mobilization. The RLN and parathyroid glands were carefully dissected. Third, the superior pole of the thyroid gland was disconnected. Finally, CLND was performed. The closure procedure for the incision was similar to that for APA.

干预措施: thyroidectomy (Procedure)

结局指标

主要结局

Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS)

时间窗: 12 months post-operation

The POSAS scale is a reliable and feasible tool for linear scar evaluation. The POSAS included the observer scale and the patient scale. The Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS) score was obtained by the same observer; this scale includes 5 items graded on a 10-point scale with 1 indicating normal skin and 10 indicating the worst scar imaginable. A summary score of 5 indicates normal skin, and a summary score of 50 is the worst possible scar result. The Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS) consists of 6 items. All items are graded by the patient on a 10-point scale; a summary score of 6 to 60 represents the range from normal skin to the worst imaginable scar. After scoring the items, the observer and the patients rated the overall scar appearance on a visual analogue scale corresponding to a 10-point scale.

次要结局

  • Duration of drainage(till extubation, an average of 48 hours post-operation)
  • Operation time(Day 1 (on the day of operation))
  • Blood loss(Day 1 (on the day of operation))
  • Scar length(12 months post-operation)
  • Amount of drainage(till extubation, an average of 48 hours post-operation)
  • Number of CLND(up to 2 weeks post-operation)

研究者

发起方
Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute
申办方类型
Other
责任方
Principal Investigator
主要研究者

Xiao Ma

Associate chief physician

Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute

相似试验