Introduction Since its first publication in 1997, minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy (MIVAT) has developed into the predominant minimally invasive surgery of the thyroid. A major advantage over conventional thyroid surgery is the superior cosmetic result. However, there are still few data comparing the long-term cosmetic results of the two methods. This paper compares the long-term cosmetic results of the two methods, based on follow-up assessments. Methods Between 2004 and 2011, 143 preselected patients underwent a MIVAT in our department. Additionally, 134 patients underwent a conventional thyroidectomy in our hospital in 2011. A total of 117 patients from the MIVAT group and 102 patients from the conventional thyroidectomy group received follow-up assessments after 23.1 and 23.6 months, respectively, using the patient and observer scar assessment scale. Results The measurable cervical scar length averaged 1.9 cm in the MIVAT group and 3.9 cm in the conventional group (P < 0.001). Some 11.1% of the patients in the MIVAT group and 7.1% of the patients in the conventional group had developed keloid (P = 0.391). The patient scar assessment score was 10.4 for the MIVAT group compared with 9.9 for the conventional thyroidectomy group (P = 0.691) and the observer scare assessment score was 8.6 for MIVAT compared with 9.9 for conventional thyroidectomy (P = 0.011). Conclusion In the patient assessment instrument, conventional thyroidectomy had a small advantage over MIVAT in the cosmetic long-term results. This difference between the two groups was, however, not significant. Our result contradicts short-term cosmetic results of published randomized studies with improvement for MIVAT. The Observer Score demonstrates a significant advantage of the MIVAT.
Comparison of minimally invasive video-assisted thyroidectomy and conventional thyroidectomy: a single-blinded, randomized controlled clinical trial