ArticleTurkish journal of urology2020
Single-center experience of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and extended pelvic lymph node dissection.
Article in Turkish journal of urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
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
objectiveTo report the outcomes of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND) series for bladder cancer. MATERIAL AND
methodsBetween October 2016 and June 2019, overall 57 patients (50 men, 7 women) were included in the study. Patient demographics, operative data, and postoperative pathological outcomes were evaluated. Patients who had a history of pelvic or Professional surgery due to other concurrent malignancy, radiation therapy, or lacked data were excluded from the study.
resultsThe mean age of the patients was 64.72±9.09 years. The mean operation time, intraoperative estimated blood loss, and hospitalization time were 418.58±85.66 minutes, 313.00±79.16mL, and 13.44±5.25 days, respectively. The postoperative pathological stages were reported as pT0 (n=8), pTis (n=4), pT1 (n=4), pT2 (n=22), pT3a (n=11), pT3b (n=2), pT4a (n=4), pT4b (n=1), and other (n=1). The mean lymph node (LN) yield was 23.45±9.43. Positive LNs were found in 16 (28.1%) patients. Surgical margins were positive in 3 (5.26%) patients. The mean follow-up period was 15.42±8.31 months. According to the modified Clavien-Dindo system, minor (Clavien 1-2) and major (Clavien 3-5) complications occurred in 18 (31.58%) and 9 (15.78%) patients during the early (0-30 days) period and in 4 (7.02%) and 5 (8.77%) patients in the late (31-90 days) period.
conclusionRARC and ePLND are complex but safe procedures with acceptable morbidity and excellent surgical and oncologic outcomes in muscle-invasive or high-risk bladder tumors.
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.