ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Robotic versus open radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: evaluation of complications, survival, and opioid prescribing patterns.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative efficacy and safety of open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled 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
- Comparison of postoperative and early oncological outcomes of open versus robotic radical cystectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Perioperative complications and oncological outcomes of open versus robotic-assisted radical cystectomy: a propensity score-matched study.World journal of urology · 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
14 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We aim to compare complications, readmission, survival, and prescribing patterns of opioids for post-operative pain management for Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical cystectomy (RARC) as compared to open radical cystectomy (ORC). Patients that underwent RARC or ORC for bladder cancer at a tertiary care center from 2005 to 2021 were included. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated with Kaplan-Meier curves and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models. Comparisons of narcotic usage were completed with oral morphine equivalents (OMEQ). Multivariable linear regression was used to assess predictors of OMEQ utilization. A total of 128 RARC and 461 ORC patients were included. There was no difference in rates of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 3 complications between RARC and ORC (36.7 vs 30.1%, p = 0.16). After a mean follow up of 3.4 years, RFS (HR 0.96, 95%CI 0.58-1.56) and OS (HR 0.69, 95%CI 0.46-1.05) were comparable between RARC and ORC. There was no difference in the narcotic usage between patients in the RARC and ORC groups during the last 24 h of hospitalization (median OMEQ: 0 vs 0, p = 0.33) and upon discharge (median OMEQ: 178 vs 210, p = 0.36). Predictors of higher OMEQ discharge prescriptions included younger age [(- )3.46, 95%CI (-)5.5-(-)0.34], no epidural during hospitalization [- 95.85, 95%CI (- )144.95-(- )107.36], and early time-period of surgery [(- )151.04, 95%CI (- )194.72-(- )107.36]. RARC has comparable 90-day complication rates and early survival outcomes to ORC and remains a viable option for bladder cancer. RARC results in comparable levels of opioid utilization for pain management as ORC.
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.