ArticleUrology annals
A comparative study of perioperative outcomes in open radical cystectomy, laparoscopic radical cystectomy, and robotic-assisted radical cystectomy.
Article in Urology annals. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- How safe is teaching radical cystectomy? : Results from the prospective Swiss society of urology database.World journal of urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Radical cystectomy (RC) is the standard treatment for muscle-invasive and high-risk nonmuscle-invasive bladder cancer. The impact of minimally invasive surgeries (MIS) such as laparoscopic and robot-assisted RC (RARC) on outcomes and morbidity remains debated, especially in India. This study compares perioperative outcomes and complications of open RC (ORC), laparoscopic RC (LRC), and RARC. Materials and Methods: This prospective cohort study included 186 patients who underwent ORC, LRC, or RARC at our institution between October 2013 and April 2024. Preoperative parameters such as age, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, and chemotherapy status were recorded. Postoperative parameters including operative time, blood loss, return of bowel function, complications, and survival rates were analyzed. Pathological parameters such as stages, lymph node yield, and positive surgical margins were assessed. Results: The study included 120 ORC, 56 RARC, and 10 LRC patients. The median age was highest in the laparoscopic group (67.4 ± 6.33 years) with a higher BMI (26.22 ± 5.24). Operative time was longest for RARC (414 ± 115.7 min) versus 357.96 ± 60.08 for ORC ( Conclusions: Our findings suggest that while RARC provides advantages in blood loss, complication rates, and mean lymph node yield, its longer operative time necessitates further optimization. The study highlights the importance of considering patient-specific factors and regional contexts in surgical approach decisions, with RARC showing promising results.
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.