Association of Vessel-Sealant Devices vs Conventional Hemostasis With Postoperative Neck Hematoma After Thyroid
Jennifer M Siu1,2, Justin C McCarty1,3, Shekhar Gadkaree4,5
1Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Importance:
Vessel-sealant devices (VSDs) have been popularized for use in thyroid operations; however, the association of their use with postoperative neck hematoma, a rare but potentially fatal complication, has not been well studied.
Objective:
To examine the association of VSDs vs conventional hemostasis (CH) in thyroid operations with the development of neck hematoma.
Design, Setting, And Participants:
This retrospective cohort study evaluated 10 903 patients in the Thyroid Procedure-Targeted Database of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2017. One-to-one nearest-neighbor propensity score matching was conducted to adjust for differences in baseline covariates, including demographics, comorbidities, indications for thyroid procedure (goiter, Graves disease, malignant and benign thyroid nodule), and several other thyroid-specific characteristics, between the VSD and CH groups.
Main Outcomes And Measures:
The primary outcome was postoperative hematoma requiring intervention with open evacuation, return to the operating room, tracheostomy, additional observation, or extended length of stay. Secondary outcomes include recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, operative duration, and hospital length of stay.
Results:
One-to-one propensity score matching yielded 6522 patients (mean [SD] age, 52 [15] years; 8544 [78.4%] female) with 3261 in each exposure group such that distribution of observed baseline covariates was not different between groups of the same propensity score. Within the matched cohort, CH was associated with higher odds of neck hematoma compared with VSD (odds ratio, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.55-3.49; P < .001), with 34 (1.0%) hematomas in the VSD group and 78 (2.4%) in the CH group. On the basis of this analysis, the number needed to treat with a VSD to prevent 1 postoperative hematoma was 74. Secondary outcomes included longer length of hospital stay (incidence rate ratio, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.23-1.36; P < .001]) in the CH group compared with the VSD group but no difference in the odds of recurrent laryngeal nerve injury (odds ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73-1.11; P = .32) or operative duration (incidence rate ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.96-1.01; P = .24).
Conclusions And Relevance:
Use of VSDs during thyroid operations was associated with reduced odds of neck hematoma compared with CH techniques without increasing odds of nerve injury. The results suggest that postoperative neck hematoma rates after thyroid surgery may differ based on the hemostasis technique and that these differences should be considered when developing strategies for quality improvement of postoperative outcomes.
