• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer

Log in
www.sages.org

SAGES

Reimagining surgical care for a healthier world

  • Home
    • SAGES Home
    • SAGES Foundation Home
  • About
    • Awards
    • Who Is SAGES?
    • Leadership
    • Our Mission
    • Advocacy
    • Committees
      • SAGES Board of Governors
      • Officers and Representatives of the Society
      • Committee Chairs and Co-Chairs
      • Committee Rosters
      • SAGES Past Presidents
    • Why Should You Support SAGES?
    • SAGES Swag
  • Meetings
    • SAGES NBT Innovation Weekend
    • SAGES Annual Meeting
      • 2026 Annual Meeting
      • 2027 Scientific Session Call for Abstracts
      • 2027 Emerging Technology Call for Abstracts
    • CME Claim Form
    • SAGES Past, Present, Future, and Related Meeting Information
    • SAGES Related Meetings & Events Calendar
  • Join SAGES!
    • Membership Application
    • Membership Benefits
    • Membership Types
      • Requirements and Applications for Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Affiliate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Associate Active Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for Candidate Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements and Applications for International Membership in SAGES
      • Requirements for Medical Student Membership
    • Member Spotlight
    • Give the Gift of SAGES Membership
  • Patients
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Healthy Sooner – Patient Information for Minimally Invasive Surgery
    • Choosing Wisely – An Initiative of the ABIM Foundation
    • All in the Recovery: Colorectal Cancer Alliance
    • Find A SAGES Surgeon
  • Publications
    • Clinical / Practice / Training Guidelines, Statements, and Standards of Practice
    • Sustainability in Surgical Practice
    • SAGES Stories Podcast
    • SAGES Lead Up Podcast
    • Patient Information Brochures
    • Patient Information From SAGES
    • TAVAC – Technology and Value Assessments
    • Surgical Endoscopy and Other Journal Information
    • Innovative Surgical Trends
    • SAGES Manuals
    • MesSAGES – The SAGES Newsletter
    • COVID-19 Archive
    • Troubleshooting Guides
  • Education
    • Wellness Resources – You Are Not Alone
    • Avoid Opiates After Surgery
    • SAGES Subscription Catalog
    • SAGES TV: Home of SAGES Surgical Videos
    • The SAGES Safe Cholecystectomy Program
    • Masters Program
    • Resident and Fellow Opportunities
      • MIS Fellows Course
      • SAGES Robotics Residents and Fellows Courses
      • SAGES Free Resident Webinar Series
      • Advanced Laparoscopy and Fluorescence-Guided Surgery Course for Fellows
      • Fellows’ Career Development Course
    • SAGES S.M.A.R.T. Enhanced Recovery Program
    • SAGES @ Cine-Med Products
      • SAGES Top 21 Minimally Invasive Procedures Every Practicing Surgeon Should Know
      • SAGES Pearls Step-by-Step
      • SAGES Flexible Endoscopy 101
    • SAGES OR SAFETY Video Activity
    • Foregut Video Atlas
  • Opportunities
    • Join the SAGES Patient Partner Network (PPN)
    • Fellowship Recognition Opportunities
    • SAGES Advanced Flexible Endoscopy Area of Concentrated Training (ACT) SEAL
    • Multi-Society Foregut Fellowship Certification
    • Research Opportunities
    • FLS
    • FES
    • FUSE
    • Jobs Board
    • SAGES Go Global: Global Affairs
  • Learning Hub
You are here: Home / Abstracts / Gasless Transaxillary Robotic vs Endoscopic Thyroidectomy: Exploring the Frontiers of Scarless Thyroidectomy Through a Preliminary Comparison Study

Gasless Transaxillary Robotic vs Endoscopic Thyroidectomy: Exploring the Frontiers of Scarless Thyroidectomy Through a Preliminary Comparison Study

Andreas Kiriakopoulos, MD, Dimitrios Linos, MD. Department of Surgery, Hygeia Hospital, Athens, Greece

 

Aim: Robotic – assisted thyroidectomy has been inadvertently associated with lengthy operative times mainly due to fussy robot preparation and docking maneuvers. We propose a purely endoscopic approach using a novel platform comparing its results with the former approach
Patients and Methods: 8 patients (6 females and 2 males, mean age 38.8 yrs, range: 30-56) having favorable body habitus (mean BMI 23.4, range: 18-30) underwent robotic-assisted thyroidectomy through a gasless transaxillary approach using the da Vinci S surgical robot system. Another 4 female patients (mean age 31 yrs, range: 27-43) underwent a purely endoscopic method. Skin flap dissection and gasless thyroidectomy comprised the common operative steps in both procedures. Robotic thyroidectomy necessitated an additional robot docking maneuver. Patient’s demographic data, operative time, complications, conversions, hospital stay and postoperative pain VAPS are compared.
Results: 3 lobectomies, 2 near-totals, 2 totals and one total thyroidectomy with lateral lymph node dissection have been performed in the robotic group. 2 lobectomies and 2 near total thyroidectomies were performed in the endoscopic group. Mean diameter of the largest nodule in the robotic series was 26.5 mm (range: 18-60) vs 42.5 mm (range: 35-55) in the endoscopic group. Mean total operative time was 211 min (range: 165-250) for the robot {consisting of a mean 32 min (range: 20-40) flap dissection time, a mean 13 min (range: 10-20) docking time and a 166 min (range: 130-210) console time} vs 160 min (range: 100-190) for the endoscopic series. We had no conversions in both procedures and a drain was left in place in all patients. We had one temporary recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis in the robotic group. Two patients from the robotic group exhibited transient symptomatic hypocalcemia vs 1 from the other group. Hypoesthesia/disturbed sensation in the flap dissection area was referred by 3 patients of the robotic and two patients of the endoscopic groups. Mean hospital stay was 1.5 days (range: 1-3) for both groups. Postoperative pain was also similar in both groups.
Conclusions: Our preliminary comparison shows that robotic-assisted and purely endoscopic transaxillary approaches are safe, feasible and are associated with similar results. Both applications give excellent view of the critical neck anatomy that allows precise tissue handling and dissection. However, the endoscopic approach results in a significantly faster and more convenient thyroidectomy
 


Session Number: SS07 – Solid Organ
Program Number: S041

Related



Hours & Info

15821 Ventura Blvd Ste 400
Encino, CA 91436

1-310-437-0544

[email protected]

Monday – Friday
8am to 5pm Pacific Time

Find Us Around the Web!

  • Bluesky
  • X
  • Instagram
  • Facebook
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2026 · SAGES · All Rights Reserved

Important Links

Healthy Sooner: Patient Information

SAGES Guidelines, Statements, & Standards of Practice

SAGES Manuals

Refine Search