ArticleJAMA network open2022
Association of Open vs Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy With Mortality and Perioperative Outcomes Among Patients With Bladder Cancer in Sweden.
Article in JAMA network open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.
- Intra-corporeal robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy: a meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy with extracorporeal urinary diversion for bladder cancer: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with subgroup analyses by orthotopic neobladder utilisation.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comparison of postoperative and early oncological outcomes of open versus robotic radical cystectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Survival Outcomes of Open Versus Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy: A Large-Scale Multicenter Propensity Score Matched Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Long-term oncologic outcomes of robot-assisted radical cystectomy: Prognostic indicators and complication profiles from a high-volume single-surgeon series.Investigative and clinical urology · 2026Article
- A multi‑criteria decision analysis comparing robot‑assisted, laparoscopic, and open radical cystectomy using large-scale Japanese nationwide databases.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal urinary diversion during robotic radical cystectomy: outcomes from a large single-institutional study.BMC urology · 2025Article
- Robot-Assisted Versus Conventional Laparoscopic Radical Cystectomy in a Multicenter Cohort Study: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal neobladder in robot-assisted radical cystectomy: perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes from a single-institutional experience.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Comparative effectiveness of robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion vs open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer.BJU international · 2025Article
- Comprehensive 90-Day Morbidity Assessment Following Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy With Intracorporeal Diversion.Advances in urology · 2025Article
- Perioperative complications and oncological outcomes of open versus robotic-assisted radical cystectomy: a propensity score-matched study.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Open versus Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy for the Treatment of pT4a Bladder Cancer: Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes.Cancers · 2024Article
- Robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: evaluation of complications, survival, and opioid prescribing patterns.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Evolving the surgical approach for bladder cancer - robotic versus open radical cystectomy.Nature reviews. Urology · 2023Article
- Robot-assisted radical cystectomy: Where we are in 2023.Investigative and clinical urology · 2023Review
- Efficacy and Safety of the "Trisection Method" Training System for Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy at a Single Institution in Japan.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2022Article
- Perioperative and Oncological Outcomes of Robot-assistedIn vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
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 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Mortality rates resulting from bladder cancer have remained unchanged for more than 30 years. The surgical community has put hope in robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) with intracorporeal urinary diversion (ICUD) in an effort to improve surgical outcomes and bladder cancer survival without strong supporting evidence. Objective: To evaluate perioperative, safety, and survival outcome differences between RARC with ICUD and open radical cystectomy (ORC). Design, Setting, and Participants: This nationwide population-based cohort study used data from the Swedish National Register of Urinary Bladder Cancer and population-based Cause of Death Register, which includes clinical information on tumor characteristics, treatment, and survival and covers approximately 97% of patients with urinary bladder cancer in Sweden. All patients who underwent radical cystectomy for bladder cancer in any hospital between January 2011 and December 2018 were included. Follow-up data were collected until December 2019. Data analysis was conducted from June to December 2020. Exposures: RARC or ORC. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were all-cause and cancer-specific mortality between RARC and ORC, compared using propensity score matching. Secondary outcomes were differences in perioperative outcomes after the different surgical approaches. Results: Throughout the observation period, 889 patients underwent RARC and 2280 patients underwent ORC at 24 Swedish hospitals. The median (IQR) age was 71 (66-76) years and 2386 patients (75.3%) were men. After a median (IQR) follow-up of 47 (28-71) months, the 5-year cancer-specific mortality rates were 30.2% (variance, 1.59) for ORC and 27.6% (variance, 3.12) for RARC, and the overall survival rates were 57.7% (variance, 2.46) for ORC and 61.4% (variance, 5.11) for RARC. In the propensity score-matched analysis, RARC was associated with a lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56-0.89; P = .004). Compared with ORC, RARC was associated with a lower estimated blood loss (median [IQR] 150 [100-300] mL vs 700 [400-1300] mL; P < .001), intraoperative transfusion rate (odds ratio [OR], 0.05; 95% CI, 0.03-0.08; P < .001), and shorter length of stay (median [IQR], 9 [6-13] days vs 13 [10-17] days; P < .001), and with a higher lymph node yield (median [IQR], 20 [15-27] lymph nodes vs 14 [8-24] lymph nodes; P < .001) and 90-day rehospitalization rate (OR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.02-1.60; P = .03). The RARC group, compared with the ORC group had lower risk of Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher complications (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43-0.87; P = .009). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that compared with ORC, RARC with ICUD was associated with a lower overall mortality rate, fewer high-grade complications, and more favorable perioperative outcomes.
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.