Table 2. Oncologic outcomes of robotic modified radical neck dissection.
| Author | No. of patients (open vs. robot) | No. of LNs (central) | P value | No. of LNs (lateral) | P value | sTg | P value | Approach | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Open [range] | Robot [range] | Open [range] | Robot [range] | Open | Robot | ||||||
| Kim et al. (25) [2015] | 65 vs. 13 | 12.7±7.3 [2-42] | 12.8±6.4 [6-26] | 0.978 | 27.0±16.6 [10-129] | 28.9±12.9 [8-50] | 0.699 | 2.81±4.81 | 2.57±5.0 | NS | BABA |
| Kang et al. (28) [2012] | 109 vs. 56 | 8.6±6.1 | 6.5±4.6 | 0.03 | 31.0±11.3 | 31.1±12.1 | 0.966 | 0.54±0.98 | 0.64±1.63 | 0.684 | TAA |
| Lee et al. (18) [2013] | 66 vs. 62 | 7.9±6.2 | 8.1±6.7 | 0.214 | 31.8±12.4 | 32.8±11.2 | 0.411 | 0.51±0.48 | 0.61±0.49 | 0.741 | TAA |
Values in the table are means ± standard deviations. LN, lymph node; sTg, stimulated thyroglobulin; NS, not significant; BABA, bilateral axillo-breast approach; TAA, trans-axillary approach.