The optimal surgical approach for differentiated thyroid cancer remains controversial, with debate regarding the comparative risks of upfront total thyroidectomy versus staged completion thyroidectomy following the initial lobectomy. This study aimed to assess the complication rates associated with these two strategies and identify the optimal timing for completion thyroidectomy using a multi-dimensional analysis of four cohorts: an institutional series (n = 148), the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database (n = 39,992), the TriNetX repository (n > 30,000), and a pooled literature review (10 studies, n = 6015). Institutional data revealed higher overall complication rates with total thyroidectomy (18.3%) compared to completion thyroidectomy (6.8%), primarily due to increased temporary hypocalcemia (10% vs. 0%, p = 0.004). The NSQIP analysis demonstrated that total thyroidectomy was associated with a 72% increased risk of transient hypocalcemia (p < 0.001) and a 25% increased risk of permanent hypocalcemia (p < 0.001). TriNetX data confirmed these findings and identified obesity and concurrent neck dissection as risk factors for complications. A meta-analysis showed that total thyroidectomy increased the rates of transient (RR = 1.63) and permanent (RR = 1.23) hypocalcemia (p < 0.001). Institutional and TriNetX data suggested that performing completion thyroidectomy between 1 and 6 months after the initial lobectomy minimized permanent complication rates compared to delays beyond 6 months. In conclusion, for differentiated thyroid cancer, total thyroidectomy is associated with higher risks of transient and permanent hypocalcemia compared to staged completion thyroidectomy. However, performing completion thyroidectomy within 1–6 months of the initial lobectomy may mitigate the risk of permanent complications. These findings can inform personalized surgical decision-making for patients with differentiated thyroid cancer.

Rithvik Vutukuri, Norio Kitagawa, Keiko Fukino, R. Shane Tubbs, Joe Iwanaga. Anat Cell Biol 2024;57:7-12. https://doi.org/10.5115/acb.23.232

Introduction: The role of research in the orthopaedic surgery residency application process has become increasingly important, particularly in the wake of the United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 examination transitioning to pass/fail. The purpose of this study was to determine the value that orthopaedic surgery residency program directors and other faculty place on various research elements included in residency applications. Methods: An anonymous cross-sectional survey was distributed to program directors and other faculty involved with the review of orthopaedic surgery residency applications within the Collaborative of Orthopaedic Education Research Group in February 2024. The survey asked questions related to the value placed on publication types, authorship position, dedicated research years, and the general importance of research. Results: Ten respondents, including 7 program directors, 2 assistant program directors, and 1 director of research, participated. Eight (80%) indicated that the number of publications is important, with 4 (40%) identifying a minimum number of publications of 2 to 3 to be considered competitive at their program. Respondents also identified the following components as important: journal impact factor (9; 90%), authorship position (5; 50%), and study type (7; 70%). Clinical research within orthopaedic surgery was most highly regarded (9; 90%), while case studies were deemed least valuable (9; 90%). Six respondents (60%) agreed that research is more important now that USMLE Step 1 is pass/fail. Conclusions: Since the transition of Step 1 to pass/fail, research has become an increasingly important part of an orthopaedic surgery resident's application. Residency programs value research productivity, particularly clinical research within orthopaedics. While the minimum number of publications varies, 2 to 3 are often considered competitive. Factors contributing to the perceived value of research include journal impact factor, authorship position, and study type. With this knowledge, applicants can align their research activities with the values of orthopaedic surgery residency programs. Level of Evidence: Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Ross Champagne, Rithvik Vutukuri, Chung Yoh Kim, R. Shane Tubbs, Joe Iwanaga. Anat Cell Biol 2024;57:1-6. https://doi.org/10.5115/acb.23.220