ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Oncological and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a real-world cohort study emulating a target trial.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We tried to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and open radical cystectomy (ORC) using nationwide real-world data within a target trial framework. Nationwide claims were used to identify individuals with bladder cancer who received transurethral resection during 2007-2020. Surgical strategies were defined according to receipt of RARC or ORC during a 1-year grace period. Cloning, censoring, and weighting were used to align treatment strategies from a common time zero and account for treatment-selection and immortal-time biases. The primary outcome was overall survival, with perioperative outcomes and healthcare expenditures examined secondarily. Among 45,595 eligible individuals, surgery within the grace period consisted of ORC in 3,681 and RARC in 358. Weighted analysis showed no evidence of a difference in overall survival (HR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.96-1.45). Postoperative hospitalization was shorter with RARC than with ORC (18.4 vs. 22.5 days; P < 0.001), and transfusion was required in 51.1% and 70.6%, respectively (P < 0.001). RARC was associated with lower covered healthcare expenditure between surgery and discharge (P = 0.030), but cumulative expenditures at 2 and 5 years were comparable between groups. In this nationwide target trial emulation, assignment to RARC did not materially alter overall survival relative to ORC but yielded more favorable perioperative findings. These findings support RARC as a surgical alternative to ORC while highlighting the value of target trial emulation for evaluating real-world surgical outcomes.
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.