Papillary thyroid cancer is the most common type of cancer, which accounts for about 80—85% of malignant tumors of this organ. In 20—30% of patients, a relapse of the disease is detected after treatment. Repeated surgical intervention increases the likelihood of complications. Minimally invasive techniques give the possibility of effective ablation of individual metastases of the neck less traumatically and with lower costs. Objective — to evaluate the effectiveness of minimally invasive treatment methods of isolated recurrent metastases of highly differentiated thyroid cancer. Materials and methods. The study involved 34 patients with recurrent metastases of papillary thyroid cancer in neck lymph nodes. Patients were allocated into two groups depending on the use of minimally invasive methods: 31 underwent percutaneous ethanol sclerotherapy, three patients underwent laser‑induced interstitial thermotherapy. All patients underwent volume treatment: thyroidectomy, central and lateral neck dissection, lymphadenectomy followed by radioiodine therapy. Patients had solitary altered lymph nodes, metastases size <1.5 cm3, at a safe distance from main vessels, trachea, or esophagus, high risk of postoperative complications, and/or refused repeated surgical intervention. Results. Percutaneous ethanol sclerotherapy technique in 28 patients resulted in the decrease in thyroglobulin levels by 33.6% at average; antibodies to thyroglobulin by 15.3%, and remission of the disease, according to ultrasound results. In three patients, the growth of a metastatic lymph node with an increase in the level of thyroglobulin was noted, which indicates that the described method wasn’t sufficiently effective. The laser‑induced interstitial thermotherapy procedure was performed only in three patients, this small group does not allow conducting a reliable analysis of the treatment results. Positive clinical, laboratory and pathomorphological effect was obtained in all three cases. Conclusions. Minimally invasive techniques have no sufficient effectiveness in comparison with surgery, but they are effective enough for patients with a high risk of postoperative complications, anesthetic risk, and/or for those who refused to undergo repeated surgery.