SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2022
Robotic-assisted versus standard laparoscopic radical cystectomy in bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery in hepatobiliary procedures: a scoping review.BMC surgery · 2026Article
- Allowable robot-related material cost as a contribution margin threshold for financial sustainability of robot-assisted urologic surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic versus laparoscopic surgery: a comparative assessment of outcomes, complications, recovery, and cost.Journal of medicine and life · 2025Review
- Robotic uro-oncology applications of the SSI Mantra™ surgical robotic system.Asian journal of urology · 2025Article
- 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) versus laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) in the treatment of bladder cancer. Methods: Two researchers independently searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and CBM using the index words to identify the qualified studies which included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized controlled trials (prospective and retrospective studies), and the investigators scanned references of these articles to prevent missing articles. Differences in clinical outcomes between the two procedures were analyzed by calculating odds risk (OR) and mean difference (MD) with an associated 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Sixteen comparative studies were included in the meta-analysis with 1467 patients in the RARC group and 897 patients in the LRC group. The results indicated that RARC could significantly decrease blood loss ( Conclusions: The meta-analysis demonstrates that RARC is a safe and effective treatment for bladder cancer, like LRC, and patients with RARC benefit from less blood loss and fewer long-term complications related to surgery, and should be considered a viable alternative to LRC. There still need high-quality, larger sample, multi-centric, long-term follow-up RCTs to confirm our conclusion.
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.