# Current Practices in Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Transoral Endoscopic Thyroid and Parathyroid Surgery: A Comparative Study

## TL;DR

This study compares two antibiotic strategies for preventing infections in scar-free thyroid and parathyroid surgery, finding that a shorter course may be sufficient.

## Contribution

The study provides empirical evidence comparing perioperative versus extended antibiotic prophylaxis in transoral endoscopic thyroid and parathyroid surgery.

## Key findings

- Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis alone did not increase surgical site infection risk compared to extended prophylaxis.
- Extended antibiotic prophylaxis was associated with longer surgery times and higher complication rates, though not statistically significant.
- Surgical duration was an independent predictor of complications, suggesting learning curve effects.

## Abstract

Background and Objectives: The transoral endoscopic thyroidectomy-vestibular approach (TOETVA) and parathyroidectomy-vestibular approach (TOEPVA) are scar-free alternatives to conventional surgery but are classified as clean-contaminated due to the oral incision, raising concerns about surgical site infections (SSIs). This study evaluates whether perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis (pABX) alone is sufficient compared to extended antibiotic prophylaxis (eABX) in preventing SSIs in TOET/PVA, particularly considering the surgical learning curve. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study analyzed 162 patients undergoing TOET/PVA at a single center from January 2018 to June 2024. Patients were divided into two groups: 82 received eABX (intravenous cefazolin preoperatively plus 7 days of oral amoxicillin/clavulanate), and 80 received pABX alone (intravenous cefazolin). The inclusion criteria included complete postoperative hemogram and C-reactive protein (CRP) records; exclusions comprised other surgical approaches or missing data. Outcomes included postoperative white blood cell (WBC) count, CRP levels, and complications (seroma, cellulitis, and flap perforation), defined using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines. The statistical analysis comprised t-tests, chi-square tests, and logistic regression, adjusting for confounders like age and sex. Results: The postoperative WBC and CRP levels were significantly higher in the pABX group (p = 0.001), but all values remained within the laboratory normal limits. Complications were observed in 14 patients: seroma in 11, cellulitis in 2, and flap perforation in 1. Complications occurred more frequently in the eABX group but without statistical significance (p = 0.103). The duration of surgery was longer in the eABX group (117.93 ± 52.35 vs. 72.44 ± 22.54 min, p = 0.001) and was an independent predictor of complications (OR = 1.018, 95% CI: 1.006–1.031, p = 0.004). Conclusions: Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis alone does not increase the risk of SSIs compared to extended prophylaxis in TOETVA. However, eABX may be prudent during the learning curve due to longer operative times and higher complication risks. Future prospective, randomized trials are needed to standardize prophylaxis regimens.