ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2023
Open vs. robot-assisted radical cystectomy with extracorporeal or intracorporeal urinary diversion for bladder cancer A pairwise meta-analysis of outcomes and a network meta-analysis of complications.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Etymology of the neobladder].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Improving safety in the performance of robotic urinary diversions: a narrative review.Therapeutic advances in urologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThere are no meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing open radical cystectomy (OR C) with robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC), inclusive of both intracorporeal (iRARC) and extracorporeal (hybrid RARC, hRARC) urinary reconstruction.
methodsMEDL INE, Embase, Scopus, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov registries were searched in May 2022. Outcomes of interest included recurrence- or progression-free survival (RFS/PFS), margin status and lymph node yield, mean estimated blood loss (EBL) and operating room time (ORT ), hospital length of stay (LOS ), 90-day complications and readmissions, and quality of life (QoL). Pairwise meta-analyses and network meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models and Bayesian hierarchical random-effects models, respectively.
resultsWe found no significant differences between RARC and OR C for oncological and most perioperative outcomes: RFS/PFS (hazard ratio [HR ] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-1.23); positive surgical margins (odds ratio [OR ] 1.05, 95% CI 0.60-1.85); lymph node yield (mean difference [MD ] -0.63, 95% CI -2.63-1.37); LOS (MD -0.22, 95% CI -1.10-0.65); overall complications (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.61-1.07); major complications (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.30); readmissions (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.60-1.35); and QoL (standardized MD -0.02, 95% CI -0.17-0.14). We found significantly lower EBL for RARC compared to OR C (MD -312.61, 95% CI -447 to -178.22) at the expense of significantly prolonged ORT (MD 82.34 minutes, 95% CI 44.82-119.86). Network meta-analysis did not find significant differences in complications between hRARC and iRARC.
conclusionsThis meta-analysis confirms the equivalence of RARC and OR C with respect to oncological outcomes.
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.