ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2016
Complications and oncologic outcomes following robot-assisted radical cystectomy: What is the real benefit?
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A review and meta-analysis: comparing the efficacy of robot-assisted and open radical cystectomy in elderly bladder cancer patients.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Perioperative outcomes and safety of robotic vs open cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 12,640 cases.World journal of urology · 2021Pooled it
- Comparison of perioperative complications and health-related quality of life between robot-assisted and open radical cystectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2019Pooled it
- Robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Lower bleeding volume contributes to decreasing surgical site infection in radical cystectomy: A propensity score-matched comparison of open versus robot-assisted radical cystectomy.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2024Article
- Comparing Bladder Neck Contracture Rate Between Robotic Intracorporeal and Extracorporeal Neobladder Construction.Cureus · 2024Article
- Feasibility and safety of laparoscopic radical cystectomy for male octogenarians with muscle-invasive bladder cancer.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- The down-regulation of SNCG inhibits the proliferation and invasiveness of human bladder cancer cell line 5637 and suppresses the expression of MMP-2/9.International journal of clinical and experimental pathology · 2020Article
- Peri-operative efficacy and long-term survival benefit of robotic-assisted radical cystectomy in septuagenarian patients compared with younger patients: a nationwide multi-institutional study in Japan.International journal of clinical oncology · 2019Article
- Article
- Predictors of postoperative complications after robot-assisted radical cystectomy with extracorporeal urinary diversion.Cancer management and research · 2019Article
- Complications in robotic urological surgeries and how to avoid them: A systematic review.Arab journal of urology · 2018Review
- A preliminary oncologic outcome and postoperative complications in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical cystectomy: Initial experience.Investigative and clinical urology · 2017Article
- Robotic assisted adrenalectomy: Is it ready for prime time?Investigative and clinical urology · 2016Review
- Decrease in skeletal muscle index 1 year after radical cystectomy as a prognostic indicator in patients with urothelial bladder cancer.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
- The current status of robot-assisted cystectomy.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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to assess the advantages of robotic surgery, comparing perioperative and oncological outcomes between robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and open radical cystectomy (ORC). MATERIALS AND
methodsBetween August 2008 and May 2014, 112 radical cystectomies (42 RARCs and 70 ORCs) were performed at a single academic institution following Institutional Review Board approval. Patient demographics, perioperative variables (e.g., complications), and oncologic outcomes including metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS) were reported using the Kaplan-Meier analyses.
resultsThe median follow-up period was 40 months (range, 0-70 months) vs. 42 months (range, 0-74 months) in RARC and ORC, respectively. Baseline characteristics of both groups were balanced. Blood loss (median, [range]; 300 mL [125-925 mL] vs. 598 mL [150-2,000 mL], p=0.001) and perioperative transfusion rates (23.8% vs. 45.7%, p=0.020) were significantly lower in the RARC group than in the ORC group. The overall complication rates were greater in the ORC group, but this was not statistically significant (65.7% vs. 64.3%, p=0.878). However, there were significantly higher major complication rates in the ORC group (45.7% vs. 26.2%, p=0.040). No significant differences were found with regards to MFS, CSS, and OS.
conclusionsWhile histopathological findings, overall complications, and survival rates do not reveal definite differences, RARC has more advantages compared to ORC in terms of estimated blood loss, perioperative transfusion rates and fewer perioperative major complications. We propose that RARC is a safer treatment modality with equivalent oncological outcomes compared to ORC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.