Trial reportBMJ open2018
Robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion versus open radical cystectomy (iROC): protocol for a randomised controlled trial with internal feasibility study.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT03049410 (A Phase III Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial to Compare the Efficacy of Robotically Assisted Radical Cystectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 33 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.
A Phase III Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial to Compare the Efficacy of Robotically Assisted Radical Cystectomy (RARC) and Intracorporeal Urinary Diversion With Open Radical Cystectomy (ORC) in Patients With Bladder Cancer
Who cites it
33 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 88 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic Versus Open Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer: Synthesizing the Data from Current Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Pooled 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
- Short-term morbidity and mortality following radical cystectomy: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2021Pooled 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
- Cost-Effectiveness of Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy vs Open Radical Cystectomy for Patients With Bladder Cancer.JAMA network open · 2023Trial
- Trial
- Open Radical Cystectomy versus Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy with Intracorporeal Urinary Diversion: Early Outcomes of a Single-Center Randomized Controlled Trial.The Journal of urology · 2022Trial
- Sexual-Sparing Radical Cystectomy in the Robot-Assisted Era: A Review on Functional and Oncological Outcomes.Cancers · 2025Review
- 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 laparoscopic radical cystectomy with intracorporeal ileal conduit diversion versus open radical cystectomy with ileal conduit for bladder cancer in an ERAS setup (BORARC): protocol for a single-centre, double-blinded, randomised feasibility study.Pilot and feasibility studies · 2023Article
- Impact of outcomes and costs for implementation of robotic radical cystectomy with full intracorporeal urinary diversion.Central European journal of urology · 2023Article
- Radical cystectomy and urinary diversion in women: techniques, outcomes, and challenges-a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2022Review
- Robotic surgery: getting the evidence right.The Medical journal of Australia · 2022Article
- Learning Curve Analysis for Intracorporeal Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy: Results from the EAU Robotic Urology Section Scientific Working Group.European urology open science · 2022Article
- Association of Open vs Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy With Mortality and Perioperative Outcomes Among Patients With Bladder Cancer in Sweden.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Raman spectroscopy biochemical characterisation of bladder cancer cisplatin resistance regulated by FDFT1: a review.Cellular & molecular biology letters · 2022Review
- Benchmarking PASADENA Consensus along the Learning Curve of Robotic Radical Cystectomy with Intracorporeal Neobladder: CUSUM Based Assessment.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Review
- Comparison of long-term outcomes in a 10-year experience of robotic cystectomy vs. open cystectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedCorrection:2019
Authors and funding
15 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBladder cancer (BC) is a common malignancy and one of the most expensive to manage. Radical cystectomy (RC) with pelvic lymphadenectomy is a gold standard treatment for high-risk BC. Reductions in morbidity and mortality from RC may be achieved through robot-assisted RC (RARC). Prospective comparisons between open RC (ORC) and RARC have been limited by sample size, use of extracorporeal reconstruction and use of outcomes important for ORC. Conversely, while RARC is gaining in popularity, there is little evidence to suggest it is superior to ORC. We are undertaking a prospective randomised controlled trial (RCT) to compare RARC with intracorporeal reconstruction (iRARC) and ORC using multimodal outcomes to explore qualitative and quantitative recovery after surgery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: iROC is a multicentre prospective RCT in English National Health Service (NHS) cancer centres. We will randomise 320 patients undergoing RC to either iRARC or ORC. Treatment allocation will occur after trial entry and consent. The primary outcome is days alive and out of hospital within the first 90 days from surgery. Secondary outcomes will measure functional recovery (activity trackers, chair-to-stand tests and health related quality of life (HRQOL) questionnaires), morbidity (complications and readmissions), cost-effectiveness (using EuroQol-5 Domain-5 levels (EQ-5D-5L) and unit costs) and surgeon fatigue. Patients will be analysed according to intention to treat. The primary outcome will be transformed and analysed using regression. All statistical assumptions will be investigated. Secondary outcomes will be analysed using appropriate regression methods. An internal feasibility study of the first 30 patients will evaluate recruitment rates, acceptance of randomised treatment choice, compliance outcome collection and to revise our sample size. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has ethical approval (REC reference 16/NE/0418). Findings will be made available to patients, clinicians, funders and the NHS through peer-reviewed publications, social media and patient support groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: ISRCTN13680280 and NCT03049410.
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.