Comparing Technical Feasibility of Non-robotic Retroauricular Versus Transcervical Approach Neck Dissection in Oral Cancers—a Preliminary Single Institute Experience

Endoscope-assisted versus conventional neck dissection in patients with oral cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Meta-analysis of the three studies using hidden incisions revealed a similar number of LNs yielded between the two ND groups (MD, − 0.46; 95% CI − 2.88 to 1.96) (Fig. 2 B) [ 13 , 16 , 17 ]. Meta-analysis of the two studies using minimal incisions also showed no intergroup differences (MD, 0.66; 95% CI − 0.43 to 1.74) (Fig.…”

“…After removing 44 duplicated and 186 articles by screening the titles and abstracts, the full-text review was performed for the remaining 10 potentially eligible studies. Finally, we included six articles in this review [ 12 – 17 ]. Figure 1 shows a flow diagram explaining the processes involved in identifying and including/excluding studies.…”

“…Five of the six included studies reported the number of LNs retrieved from ND [ 12 – 17 ]. The pooled analysis of the overall study group did not demonstrate a significant difference between the two groups regarding the number of LNs yielded (MD, 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], − 0.44 to 1.29) (Fig.…”

“…Five of the six studies recorded the operative time needed to complete ND [ 12 – 15 , 17 ]. The pooled results of the overall study groups showed that the operative time was longer in the END group than the CND group (MD, 30.72; 95% CI 12.27 to 49.17).…”

“…Meta-analysis of the two hidden-incision studies showed that the operative time was longer in the END group (MD, 18.81; 95% CI 13.48 to 24.15) (Fig. 3 B) [ 13 , 17 ]. Meta-analysis of the three minimal-incision studies also revealed that the operative time was longer in the END group (MD, 35.18; 95% CI 9.65 to 60.72) (Fig.…”