Trial reportJAMA network open2023
Cost-Effectiveness of Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy vs Open Radical Cystectomy for Patients With Bladder Cancer.
Trial report in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03049410 (A Phase III Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial to Compare the Efficacy of Robotically Assisted Radical Cystectomy), which is not on this map. Cited by 13 papers, 4 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.
A Phase III Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial to Compare the Efficacy of Robotically Assisted Radical Cystectomy (RARC) and Intracorporeal Urinary Diversion With Open Radical Cystectomy (ORC) in Patients With Bladder Cancer
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Intra-corporeal robot-assisted versus open radical cystectomy: a meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness analysis of robotic surgery in healthcare for older individuals: a systematic review based on randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Robot-assisted, laparoscopic and open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyPooled it
- Oncological and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a real-world cohort study emulating a target trial.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Intracorporeal urinary diversion during robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a bibliometric and visualization analysis of research evolution, evidence landscape, learning curves, and clinical outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Impact of continuous local anesthetic wound infiltration on postoperative outcomes following open radical cystectomy: a comprehensive evaluation.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Allowable robot-related material cost as a contribution margin threshold for financial sustainability of robot-assisted urologic surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robot-Assisted Extravesical Ureteral Reimplantation (RALUR-EV) in Children: Initial Single-Center Experience at a Public Tertiary-Care Hospital in Ecuador.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Safety of Robot-Assisted Radical Cystectomy for Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer: A Real-World Analysis Using the National Clinical Database in Japan.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Economic Evaluations of Robotic-Assisted Surgery: Methods, Challenges and Opportunities.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Review
- Cost analysis of new robotic competitors: a comparison of direct costs for initial hospital stay between Da Vinci and Hugo RAS for radical prostatectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Safety and efficacy of the MP1000 surgical system in robot-assisted radical cystectomy: A prospective study.Bladder (San Francisco, Calif.) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: The value to payers of robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion (iRARC) when compared with open radical cystectomy (ORC) for patients with bladder cancer is unclear. Objectives: To compare the cost-effectiveness of iRARC with that of ORC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This economic evaluation used individual patient data from a randomized clinical trial at 9 surgical centers in the United Kingdom. Patients with nonmetastatic bladder cancer were recruited from March 20, 2017, to January 29, 2020. The analysis used a health service perspective and a 90-day time horizon, with supplementary analyses exploring patient benefits up to 1 year. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were undertaken. Data were analyzed from January 13, 2022, to March 10, 2023. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive either iRARC (n = 169) or ORC (n = 169). Main Outcomes and Measures: Costs of surgery were calculated using surgery timings and equipment costs, with other hospital data based on counts of activity. Quality-adjusted life-years were calculated from European Quality of Life 5-Dimension 5-Level instrument responses. Prespecified subgroup analyses were undertaken based on patient characteristics and type of diversion. Results: A total of 305 patients with available outcome data were included in the analysis, with a mean (SD) age of 68.3 (8.1) years, and of whom 241 (79.0%) were men. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy was associated with statistically significant reductions in admissions to intensive therapy (6.35% [95% CI, 0.42%-12.28%]), and readmissions to hospital (14.56% [95% CI, 5.00%-24.11%]), but increases in theater time (31.35 [95% CI, 13.67-49.02] minutes). The additional cost of iRARC per patient was £1124 (95% CI, -£576 to £2824 [US $1622 (95% CI, -$831 to $4075)]) with an associated gain in quality-adjusted life-years of 0.01124 (95% CI, 0.00391-0.01857). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was £100 008 (US $144 312) per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Robot-assisted radical cystectomy had a much higher probability of being cost-effective for subgroups defined by age, tumor stage, and performance status. Conclusions and Relevance: In this economic evaluation of surgery for patients with bladder cancer, iRARC reduced short-term morbidity and some associated costs. While the resulting cost-effectiveness ratio was in excess of thresholds used by many publicly funded health systems, patient subgroups were identified for which iRARC had a high probability of being cost-effective. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03049410.
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.