ReviewNature reviews. Urology2016
Contemporary evidence for robot-assisted radical cystectomy for treating bladder cancer.
Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ileal Conduit Versus Orthotopic Neobladder Urinary Diversion in Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy: Results from a Multi-institutional Series.European urology open science · 2023Article
- Open vs. robot-assisted radical cystectomy with extracorporeal or intracorporeal urinary diversion for bladder cancer A pairwise meta-analysis of outcomes and a network meta-analysis of complications.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2023Article
- Robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion decreases postoperative complications only in highly comorbid patients: findings that rely on a standardized methodology recommended by the European Association of Urology Guidelines.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion - The new 'gold standard'? Evidence from a systematic review.Arab journal of urology · 2018Review
- Landmarks in the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer.Nature reviews. Urology · 2017Review
- Robotic assistance helps low-volume surgeons deliver better outcomes to their patients.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) is an evolving technique for the treatment of muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC); however, its effectiveness compared with open radical cystectomy (ORC) - the established modality - is debated. Six specific areas of evidence are critically important for supporting the continuing use of RARC for MIBC, including technical aspects of surgery, perioperative outcomes, complications, oncological outcomes, functional outcomes, and financial costs. Considerable progress has been made regarding these aspects and data show that RARC replicates the technical benchmarks of ORC in terms of success of cystectomy, lymph node dissection, and urinary diversion, and could offer advantages over the more-established technique. Despite some clear benefits of RARC (such as reduced blood loss) other perioperative outcomes, including duration of inpatient stay and 30-90 day complication rates, seem to be similar to those of ORC. Current data on oncological and functional outcomes are promising, but robust data from prospective studies will help determine the indications for use of RARC for treating MIBC in the future.
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.