4.4 Article

Incidence of permanent hypocalcaemia after total thyroidectomy with or without central neck dissection for thyroid carcinoma: a nationwide claim study

Journal

CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY
Volume 85, Issue 3, Pages 483-487

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cen.13082

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Seoul Metropolitan Government Seoul National University (SMG-SNU) Boramae Medical Center [02-2015-8]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ObjectivePermanent hypocalcaemia is the most common and serious complication after total thyroidectomy (TT). This study examined the impact of central neck dissection (CND) and institutional volume on rates of permanent hypocalcaemia by analysing data held in the nationwide claim database of South Korea. DesignData from patients who underwent TT due to thyroid carcinoma from 2007-2013 were obtained from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database. Of these, patients prescribed more than 1000 mg of elemental calcium for more than 288 days during the first 360 days postsurgery were defined as having permanent hypocalcaemia. ResultsIn total, 192 333 patients (32 988 male and 159 345 female) were eligible for analysis. Of these, 52 707 (274%) underwent TT alone and 139 626 (726%) underwent TT plus CND. The incidence of permanent hypocalcaemia was greater in the TT plus CND group than in the TT alone group (54% vs 46%, P < 0001). The age- and sex-adjusted risk for permanent hypocalcaemia in the TT plus CND group was 120 (P < 0001). CND did not raise the rates of permanent hypocalcaemia in institutes with a low volume of annual cases (<200), whereas permanent hypocalcaemia was more common in the TT plus CND group than in the TT alone group (35% vs 29%, P = 0002) in institutes with a large volume of annual cases (800). ConclusionsTT plus CND was associated with a greater risk of permanent hypocalcaemia than TT alone. Surgeons should consider the risk of permanent hypocalcaemia when deciding whether to perform CND.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available