PubMed:23321178 JSONTXT

{"project":"Allie","denotations":[{"id":"SS1_23321178_2_0","span":{"begin":169,"end":217},"obj":"expanded"},{"id":"SS2_23321178_2_0","span":{"begin":219,"end":225},"obj":"abbr"},{"id":"SS1_23321178_2_1","span":{"begin":231,"end":278},"obj":"expanded"},{"id":"SS2_23321178_2_1","span":{"begin":280,"end":285},"obj":"abbr"}],"relations":[{"id":"AE1_23321178_2_0","pred":"abbreviatedTo","subj":"SS1_23321178_2_0","obj":"SS2_23321178_2_0"},{"id":"AE1_23321178_2_1","pred":"abbreviatedTo","subj":"SS1_23321178_2_1","obj":"SS2_23321178_2_1"}],"text":"Comparison between transareola singlesite endoscopic thyroidectomy and minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy.\nOBJECTIVES: To compare surgical outcomes between transareola single-site endoscopic thyroidectomy (TASSET) and minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy (MIVAT).\nMETHODS: Patients with thyroid nodules were randomized to TASSET (n = 24) or MIVAT (n = 24). Surgical outcomes and patient-rated cosmetic results, based on numerical (0 [worst], 10 [best]) and verbal (1 [poor], 4 [excellent]) response scales, were compared.\nRESULTS: There were no significant differences between groups for age, sex, indication for operation, estimated blood loss, postoperative pain and length of postoperative stay. TASSET was associated with a significantly longer mean ± SD operative time than MIVAT (156.84 ± 41.42 vs. 66.38 ± 17.58 min), and significantly improved cosmetic results according to the numerical (9.63 ± 0.60 vs 7.90 ± 1.38) and verbal response (3.8 ± 0.5 vs 3.1 ± 0.7) scales. Postoperative complaints were comparable between the two approaches, although MIVAT involved a shorter operation time.\nCONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with TASSET had superior cosmetic results compared with those treated with MIVAT."}