Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Case series observes successful robotic excision of ectopic parathyroid adenomas in two patients, indicating a safe minimally invasive approach.
Background Ectopic mediastinal parathyroid adenomas are a rare cause of persistent primary hyperparathyroidism and present operative challenges due to proximity to major mediastinal structures. Robotic trans-subxiphoid resection using multi-port platforms has been described; however, experience with a true uniportal single-port robotic approach remains limited. Methods We report a case series of two patients with biochemically confirmed primary hyperparathyroidism and imaging-localized anterior mediastinal parathyroid adenomas who underwent excision using a single-port subxiphoid robotic technique with the da Vinci SP system. Operative variables, intraoperative parathyroid hormone (PTH) response, perioperative outcomes, and pathology were analyzed. Results Single-port subxiphoid robotic excision was completed successfully in 100% (2/2) of cases with no conversions and no intraoperative complications. Mean operative time was 150 min (170 and 130 min), and estimated blood loss was <50 mL in both cases. Critical structures, including the innominate vein and bilateral phrenic nerves, were clearly visualized and preserved. Intraoperative PTH levels decreased by >80% at 10 min post-excision in both patients, meeting Miami criteria. PTH decreased from 172 pg/mL to 22 pg/mL in one patient and from 296 pg/mL to 99 pg/mL, with subsequent normalization, in the other. Both patients were discharged on postoperative day one with normalization of ionized calcium at 1-week follow-up. Final pathology confirmed parathyroid adenoma in both cases. Conclusions This series demonstrates the safety and feasibility of a true uniportal single-port subxiphoid robotic approach for ectopic mediastinal parathyroid adenomas and highlights its potential as a highly minimally invasive alternative for selected patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hosseinzadeh et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: