Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36816151›Full record

ReviewBJUI compass2023

Oncological and functional outcomes of organ-preserving cystectomy versus standard radical cystectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Reece Clay, Raghav Shaunak, Siddarth Raj, Alexander Light, Sachin Malde, Ramesh Thurairaja, Oussama El-Hage, Prokar Dasgupta, Muhammed Shamim Khan, Rajesh Nair

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BJUI compass, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Reece ClayGKT School of Medical Education King's College London London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4034-1868
Raghav ShaunakGKT School of Medical Education King's College London London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9919-0649
Siddarth RajGKT School of Medical Education King's College London London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6341-6615
Alexander LightImperial College London London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7246-3651
Sachin MaldeThe Urology Centre, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust Guy's Hospital London UK.
Ramesh ThurairajaThe Urology Centre, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust Guy's Hospital London UK.
Oussama El-HageThe Urology Centre, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust Guy's Hospital London UK.
Prokar DasguptaThe Urology Centre, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust Guy's Hospital London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8690-0445
Muhammed Shamim KhanThe Urology Centre, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust Guy's Hospital London UK.
Rajesh NairThe Urology Centre, Guy's and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust Guy's Hospital London UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1760-9608
Guy's Hospital · GBKing's College London · GBImperial College Healthcare NHS Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Radical cystectomy (RC) is historically considered the gold standard treatment for muscle invasive and high-risk non-muscle invasive bladder cancer. However, this technique leaves the majority of patients of both sexes with poor sexual and urinary function. Organ-sparing cystectomy (OSC) techniques are emerging as an alternative to the standard procedure to preserve these functions, without compromising the oncological outcomes. We present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched for eligible studies on 6 April 2021. Primary outcomes studied were both oncological outcomes, specifically overall recurrence, and functional outcomes, specifically sexual function, and daytime and nighttime continence. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated. The PROSPERO registration reference number was CRD42018118897. Results: From 13 894 identified abstracts, 19 studies (1886 male and 305 female patients) were eligible for inclusion in this review. These studies included patients who underwent either whole prostate, prostate capsule, seminal vesicle, nerve, uterus, ovary, vagina and fallopian tube sparing techniques. Four studies included only female patients.Thirteen studies reported oncological outcomes, and overall recurrence rate was similar between the two groups (five studies; OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.38-1.40, Conclusion: In carefully selected patients, OSC allows the potential to provide better sexual and urinary function without compromising oncological outcomes. There remains, however, a paucity of OSC studies in females. Further studies are required to make recommendations based on robust clinical evidence.

Indexed as

continencecystectomyfunctionaloncologicalorgan sparingradicalreviewsexualurology

Identifiers

PMID36816151
PMCPMC9931545
OpenAlexW4300962078

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.