No Surgery for Thyroglossal Ducts 101: Ethanol Ablation Instead of Surgery.

No Surgery for Thyroglossal Ducts 101: Ethanol Ablation Instead of Surgery.

No Surgery for Thyroglossal Ducts 101: Ethanol Ablation Instead of Surgery.

No Surgery for Thyroglossal Ducts 101: Ethanol Ablation EA Instead of Surgery.

Dr.Guttler’s comments:

  1. 345 patients (289, surgery; 56, EA) treated for TGDC at four institutions between May 2005 and June 2014.
  2. EA demonstrated higher treatment failures (19.6% vs. 2.4%).
  3. EA had fewer complications (1.8% vs. 10.0%) than surgery.
  4. EA achieved 85.7% of treatment success up to second sessions.
  5. Volume reduction rate after EA was 82.3%.
  6.  Treatment failures occurred with younger age.
  7. Both surgery and EA had acceptable treatment efficacy in the management of TGDC.
  8.  EA has a better safety profile than surgery.
  9. However the trade off is a more likely higher treatment failure rate with EA.
  10. Call me for treatment with ethanol at 310-393-8860 or email to thyroid.manager@protonmail.com.
  11. Dr.G.

img_0368

 

 

European Radiology

, Volume 27, Issue 7, pp 2708–2716 | Cite as

Mi Sun Chung et al

To compare the efficacy and safety of ethanol ablation (EA) for thyroglossal duct cyst (TGDC) against surgery.

Methods

This study included 345 patients (289, surgery; 56, EA) treated for TGDC at four institutions between May 2005 and June 2014. Surgery (whole surgery and Sistrunk operation which is the current standard surgical method) and EA were compared with respect to the treatment failure and complication rates. The cost of EA and surgery was also compared. The Cox regression hazard model and linear regression were used for the adjustment of covariates.

Results

EA demonstrated higher treatment failures (19.6% vs. 2.4%, p < 0.001[whole surgery] and 1.2%, p = 0.004 [Sistrunk operation]), but fewer complications (1.8% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.04 [whole surgery] and 10.2%, p = 0.06 [Sistrunk operation]), and lower cost (₩423,801 vs. ₩1,435,707 [whole surgery]) than surgery. EA achieved 85.7% of treatment success up to second session. The mean volume reduction rate after EA was 82.3% at last follow-up. Young age and EA were correlated with treatment failure (p = 0.01 and 0.001, respectively).

Conclusion

Both surgery and EA had acceptable treatment efficacy in the management of TGDC. Although there is a higher likelihood of treatment failure with EA, it has a better safety profile than surgery.

Key Points

Both surgery and ethanol ablation show acceptable treatment efficacy for TGDC.

Considering treatment failure, surgery manages TGDC more effectively than EA.

EA is safer than surgery and presents no major complications.

EA could be an alternative treatment for TGDC in selected patients.

Add Your Comment

Contact Info
1328 16th Street, Santa Monica, CA 90404
Monday – Friday
9:00 AM to 5:00 PM
(310) 393-8860