ArticleWorld journal of urology2014
Oncologic outcomes between open and robotic-assisted radical cystectomy: a propensity score matched analysis.
Article in World journal of urology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Oncologic outcomes after robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2019Pooled it
- Robotic versus open radical cystectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2015Pooled it
- Complications and oncologic outcomes following robot-assisted radical cystectomy: What is the real benefit?Investigative and clinical urology · 2016Article
- Tips and tricks for intracorporeal robot-assisted urinary diversion.Current urology reports · 2014Article
- Advances in surgical management of muscle invasive bladder cancer.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare oncologic outcomes between open radical cystectomy (ORC) and robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) using propensity score (PS) matching of preoperative variables.
methodsA group of 51 consecutive patients who underwent RARC between 2009 and 2012 were matched by propensity scoring with an equal number of patients who underwent ORC. Patient demographics, clinical staging, pathologic staging, pathologic grading, histology, positive margin status, lymph node yield, duration of hospital stay, and overall survival were examined.
resultsPS-matched ORC and RARC cohorts demonstrated no significant differences with respect to preoperative variables, pathologic stage, grade, histology, metastasis at preoperative staging, and postoperative positive margin status. There were statistically significant differences in nodal status (66.7 % N0 for ORC vs. 80.4 % N0 for RARC, p = 0.039) and median lymph node yield (6 for ORC vs. 18 for RARC, p < 0.0001). No positive soft tissue margins were observed in the RARC group compared to 5.9 % in the ORC group (p = 0.332). There were no significant differences in mean duration of hospital stay or mean overall survival between ORC and RARC.
conclusionORC and RARC represent effective surgical approaches for the treatment of bladder cancer. Histopathologic outcomes for RARC compare favorably to ORC with respect to soft tissue margin rates and lymph node yield. These data suggest that RARC is an acceptable surgical approach for treatment of bladder cancer that can achieve outcomes that are equal or superior to those of ORC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24469858What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.