ReviewTurkish journal of urology2021
Current evidence for robotic surgery in radical cystectomy.
Review in Turkish journal of urology, 2021. 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- ASO Author Reflections: Is Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy with Intracorporeal Urinary Diversion the Way Forward?Annals of surgical oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) has been gaining momentum as an alternative to its conventional open radical cystectomy (ORC) for the management of invasive bladder cancer. Although RARC, in general, demonstrated less blood loss and shorter hospital stay than ORC, whether there is any significant difference in the overall complication rate still requires further investigation. Thus, both RARC and ORC share a similar oncology outcome, with comparable positive surgical margin rates, disease-free survival, and overall survival. Techniques of intracorporeal urinary diversion (ICUD) have not yet been standardized. ICUD may result in a lower risk of ureteroileal anastomotic stricture than extracorporeal urinary diversion (ECUD). However, ECUD is still a valid and commonly practiced option according to the available data. In general, RARC has been demonstrated to provide promising results. Long-term data and functional outcome after RARC and ICUD are needed to further validate the role of RARC in the management of bladder cancer.
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.