ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2021
Robotic assisted radical cystectomy versus open radical cystectomy: a review of what we do and don't know.
Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patients´ experiences of an exercise intervention in primary care following robot-assisted radical cystectomy due to bladder cancer: a qualitative study.BMC cancer · 2024Trial
- Biochemical implications of robotic surgery: a new frontier in the operating room.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Review
- Comparative study between the use of double J ureteric stents vs bander ureteric stents during robotic-assisted radical cystectomy with intra corporeal ileal conduit urinary diversion.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- New technology in prostate cancer and financial toxicity.Urologic oncology · 2023Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Radical cystectomy (RC) is the gold standard treatment for muscle-invasive and high-risk, noninvasive bladder cancer. Since 2003, robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) has been gaining popularity. Metanalyses show that the primary advantage of RARC is less blood loss and the primary advantage of open radical cystectomy (ORC) is shorter operative times. There do not appear to be significant differences in complications, cancer-related outcomes or survival between the two approaches. Cost analyses comparing RARC and ORC are complicated by the often-ill-defined distinction between the cost to the hospital versus the cost to payors. However, it is likely that for both hospitals and payors, RARC is cost effective at high-volume centers. It is feasible that in the future, increased experience with RARC will lead to improved outcomes and justify the use of RARC over ORC.
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.