Does the surgical approach affect quality of life outcomes?--a comparison of minimally invasive parathyroidectomy with open parathyroidectomy

Abstract

Background: Quality of life has been shown to improve significantly after successful parathyroid surgery and normalisation of serum calcium levels. What is not known is how much of that effect is related to the patient's perception of their procedure, and whether or not patients may perceive that a minimally invasive operation provides a better outcome than that of an open procedure.

Methods: Two hundred and two consecutive patients who had undergone parathyroid surgery were selected for telephone interview. Of that group, 152 had had an open parathyroidectomy and 50 a minimally invasive approach, either an endoscopic assisted or a direct minimal access approach. Post-operative quality of life was assessed with both the Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) and a disease-specific questionnaire. The SF-36 results were compared with a matched Australian population.

Results: Patients who underwent a direct minimal access parathyroidectomy had significantly better vitality and emotional role limitation scores than those having an open procedure. The health status scores of all patients having surgery for primary hyperparathyroidism were significantly lower in five out of the eight domains than those of a matched Australian population. There was a significantly lower incidence of post-operative symptoms in the minimally invasive group as a whole.

Conclusions: Minimally invasive parathyroidectomy is associated with a greater improvement in post-operative quality of life than the open technique despite the fact that both result in equivalent normalisation of serum calcium levels. It is not clear if this is due to differences in the technique itself or is related to the patients' perceptions of having had a "less invasive" surgical procedure.