ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2017
A preliminary oncologic outcome and postoperative complications in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical cystectomy: Initial experience.
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- 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
- Postoperative Complications Result in Poor Oncological Outcomes: What Is the Evidence?Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Review
- Feasibility and safety of laparoscopic radical cystectomy for male octogenarians with muscle-invasive bladder cancer.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Revolutionary Advances of Robotic Surgery in Urology Field.Juntendo Iji zasshi = Juntendo medical journal · 2024Review
- Single staff cystectomy in a low-volume center: Oncological outcomes and complications.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2021Article
- Robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery for pediatric tumors: a bicenter experience.Journal of robotic surgery · 2018Article
- Systematic review: The role of bicarbonate therapy after urinary diversion.Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands)Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRobot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) was originally intended to replace open radical cystectomy (ORC) as a minimally invasive surgery for patients with invasive bladder cancer. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the advantages of robotic surgery, comparing perioperative and oncologic outcomes between RARC and ORC. MATERIALS AND
methodsBetween June 2012 and August 2016, 49 bladder cancer patients were given a radical cystectomy, 21 robotically and 28 by open procedure. We compared the clinical variables between the RARC and ORC groups.
resultsIn the RARC group, the median estimated blood loss (EBL) during cystectomy, total EBL, operative time during cystectomy, and total operative time were 0 mL, 457.5 mL, 199 minutes, and 561 minutes, respectively. EBL during cystectomy (p<0.001), total EBL (p<0.001), and operative time during cystectomy (p=0.003) in the RARC group were significantly lower compared with the ORC group. Time to resumption of a regular diet (p<0.001) and length of stay (p=0.017) were also significantly shorter compared with the ORC group. However, total operative time in the RARC group (median, 561 minutes) was significantly longer compared with the ORC group (median, 492.5 minutes; p=0.015).
conclusionsThis Japanese study presented evidence that RARC yields benefits in terms of BL and time to regular diet, while consuming greater total operative time. RARC may be a minimally invasive surgical alternative to ORC with less EBL and shorter length of stay.
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.