Does Surgical Volume Influence the Need for Second Surgery? A Pilot Study

Paul D. Judge, Joseph Menousek, Jordan C. Schramm, Robert Cusick, William Lydiatt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Scopus citations


Objective: To examine outcomes of pediatric thyroidectomy in the context of training background, institution, and experience of the surgeon. Study Design: Case series with chart review. Setting: A tertiary academic medical center and a pediatric hospital. Subjects and Methods: Eighty-one thyroidectomy patients younger than 18 years. Outcomes were major complications (recurrent laryngeal nerve injury, permanent hypocalcemia, and wound infection), length of stay (LOS), and need for repeat surgery. Results: Eighty-one patients, 39 from the University of Nebraska Medical Center and 42 from the Children’s Hospital and Medical Center–Omaha, were identified over a 12-year time period. No difference was found in surgeon training (otolaryngology/head and neck surgery vs general/pediatric surgery) for complications (1 vs 1, odds ratio [OR] = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.05, 13.1]), LOS >1 day (5 vs 13, OR = 0.39, 95% CI = [0.13, 1.24]), or need for second surgery (4 vs 7, OR = 1.47, 95% CI = [0.39, 5.49]). Higher surgeon volume (≥12 surgeries) was found to be significant for decreased need for second surgery (3 vs 8, OR = 6.67, 95% CI = [1.57, 27.17]). Patients of higher-volume surgeons were 4.2 times more likely to stay in the hospital 1 day or less compared with those patients operated on by surgeons with less experience (7 vs 11, 95% CI = [1.59, 15.0]). Conclusions: Need for second surgery in pediatric thyroidectomy may be predicted by surgical volume.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalOTO Open
Issue number3
StatePublished - 2017


  • carcinoma
  • papillary
  • pediatric
  • thyroidectomy
  • volume

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Otorhinolaryngology


Dive into the research topics of 'Does Surgical Volume Influence the Need for Second Surgery? A Pilot Study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this