SynthesisPloS one2016
Robotic Assisted Radical Cystectomy with Extracorporeal Urinary Diversion Does Not Show a Benefit over Open Radical Cystectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 5 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy with extracorporeal urinary diversion for bladder cancer: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with subgroup analyses by orthotopic neobladder utilisation.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Health-related quality of life overview after different curative treatment options in muscle-invasive bladder cancer: an umbrella review.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2020Pooled it
- Minimally invasive versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.The Journal of international medical research · 2019Pooled it
- Complications and health-related quality of life after robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of four RCTs.Systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Alvimopan for recovery of bowel function after radical cystectomy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Demonstrating the non-inferiority of robotic radical cystectomy for cT3-cT4 urothelial carcinoma in the era of neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a propensity score-matched analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Single-surgeon outcomes of open radical cystectomy for muscle-invasive bladder cancer: Experience from a tertiary center in Azerbaijan.Surgery in practice and science · 2025Article
- Article
- 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
- Inpatient Outcomes of Patients Undergoing Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer: A National Inpatient Sample Database Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Impact of outcomes and costs for implementation of robotic radical cystectomy with full intracorporeal urinary diversion.Central European journal of urology · 2023Article
- Robotic surgery: getting the evidence right.The Medical journal of Australia · 2022Article
- Defining Factors Associated with High-quality Surgery Following Radical Cystectomy: Analysis of the British Association of Urological Surgeons Cystectomy Audit.European urology open science · 2021Article
- Perioperative and Pathological Outcome of Nerve-Sparing Radical Cystectomy With Ileal Neobladder.Frontiers in surgery · 2021Article
- Review of the evidence for robotic-assisted robotic cystectomy and intra-corporeal urinary diversion in bladder cancer.Translational andrology and urology · 2020Review
- Is experience with extracorporeal urinary diversion following robotic assisted radical cystectomy necessary before transitioning to intracorporeal urinary diversion?Translational andrology and urology · 2018Article
- Robotics in urology.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2018Article
- The Role of Robotics in the Invasive Management of Bladder Cancer.Current urology reports · 2017Review
- 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe number of robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) procedures is increasing despite the lack of Level I evidence showing any advantages over open radical cystectomy (ORC). However, several systematic reviews with meta-analyses including non-randomised studies, suggest an overall benefit for RARC compared to ORC. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the perioperative morbidity and efficacy of RARC compared to ORC in patients with bladder cancer.
methodsLiterature searches of Medline/Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science and clinicaltrials.gov databases up to 10th March 2016 were performed. The inclusion criteria for eligible studies were RCTs which compared perioperative outcomes of ORC and RARC for bladder cancer. Primary objective was perioperative and histopathological outcomes of RARC versus ORC while the secondary objective was quality of life assessment (QoL), oncological outcomes and cost analysis.
resultsFour RCTs (from 5 articles) met the inclusion criteria, with a total of 239 patients all with extracorporeal urinary diversion. Patient demographics and clinical characteristics of RARC and ORC patients were evenly matched. There was no significant difference between groups in perioperative morbidity, length of stay, positive surgical margin, lymph node yield and positive lymph node status. RARC group had significantly lower estimated blood loss (p<0.001) and wound complications (p = 0.03) but required significantly longer operating time (p<0.001). QoL was not measured uniformly across trials and cost analysis was reported in one RCTs. A test for heterogeneity did highlight differences across operating time of trials suggesting that surgeon experience may influence outcomes.
conclusionsThis study does not provide evidence to support a benefit for RARC compared to ORC. These results may not have inference for RARC with intracorporeal urinary diversion. Well-designed trials with appropriate endpoints conducted by equally experienced ORC and RARC surgeons will be needed to address this.
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.